Sarah Palin considering running in 2012

Bard · Post by **Bard** » Fri May 20, 2011 7:53 pm

Article

QUOTE (CNN) – Sarah Palin has given few indications in recent weeks she is still actively considering a presidential run, but the former Alaska governor said Thursday she has the “fire in my belly” to mount a bid for the White House.

Appearing on Fox News, where she serves as a contributor, Palin did not rule out the possibility that she could jump into the still-undefined Republican presidential field, though offered few specifics on where she is in her thought process.

"I think my problem is that I do have the fire in my belly," said Palin. "I'm so adamantly supportive of the good traditional things about America and our free enterprise system and I want to make sure that America is put back on the right track and we only do that by defeating Obama in 2012."

The comments come after two once-potential presidential hopefuls – Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee – announced they were forgoing a presidential run because their inner yearning for the job was not strong enough to endure an 18 month campaign.

Not so when it comes to Sarah Palin. Rather, for her, the decision comes down to a series of “practical” concerns.

"It's a matter for me for some practical, pragmatic decisions that have to be made," Palin added, saying she is concerned about public scrutiny of members of her family.

"It's a matter for me for some practical, pragmatic decisions that have to be made," she said. “One is, with a large family, understanding the huge amount of scrutiny and the sacrifices that have to be made on my children’s part in order to see their mama run for president.

"But yeah, the fire in my belly, it’s there. That’s kind of my problem - it’s such a roaring fire to preserve what is good about America," she added.[/quote]

If it's her, Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann, and Pawlenty in the running (Trump dropped out) I'm thinking we have a guaranteed Obama win. :S

Gingrich is a joke (Newt World Order! "Anyone who quotes me is lying"), Michelle Bachmann is nuttier than a fruitcake, Pawlenty is notorious for $#@!ing up everything in sight (former gov of MN) and he has the charisma of a salted snail, the Religious Right is *never* going to vote for a Mormon (Romney), and Palin is a complete airhead that managed to drive some of my hard-core Republican friends to vote Democrat last election out of fear of her as CinC.

Sad times for the Republican Party.

Can we go back to the pre-Reagan era when Republicans were Fiscally Conservative and actually concerned about the world's opinion of the U.S. instead of the Military/Industrial War Complex and Democrat "Tax and Spend"/Republican "Spend and Spend" we have now?

Bard · Post by **Bard** » Fri May 20, 2011 7:56 pm

Oh, and:
Abstinence: The Sarah Palin Chronicles. Part II: The Trackening

Article

Boy, I sure hope that baby isn't allergic to the flowers it's hiding behind in that picture. But doesn't Britta look RADIANT?!?

She's positively GLOWING!!!

djrbk · Post by **djrbk** » Fri May 20, 2011 9:55 pm

Although I am disappointed at Trump not running, there is hope in Palin providing lulz.

Also, Ron Paul is a $#@!ing rockstar.

cashto · Post by **cashto** » Fri May 20, 2011 10:08 pm

Yes, the GOP field this year is an amusing assortment of characters, but who do you think will ultimately be the nominee?

I'm guessing Pawlenty as the least objectionable choice. I can't in all seriousness imagine Palin or Bachmann getting the nomination, though I would laugh my ass off all the way to the polls if they did.

I don't think being Mormon will submarine Romney's chances (after all, Glenn Beck's a Mormon too), but being a blue state Republican will, what with his former pro-choice stand on abortion, Romneycare / individual mandate, etc.

Bard · Post by **Bard** » Fri May 20, 2011 10:31 pm

djrbk wrote:QUOTE (djrbk @ May 20 2011, 04:55 PM) Although I am disappointed at Trump not running

Yeah, Comedians all over the country are holding their breath waiting for the next target.

cashto wrote:QUOTE (cashto @ May 20 2011, 05:08 PM) I don't think being Mormon will submarine Romney's chances

There is a *large* contingent of the Christian Right who truly believe that *all* Mormons are basically members of a Satanic Cult.

Hit amazon.com, search under "Books" and type in "Mormon". The first few dozen responses are truly rabid "exposés" about the "Dangers of the Mormon Cult".
The Christian Fringe has lots of Mormon Hate.

cashto · Post by **cashto** » Sat May 21, 2011 12:03 am

Bard wrote:QUOTE (Bard @ May 20 2011, 02:31 PM) There is a *large* contingent of the Christian Right who truly believe that *all* Mormons are basically members of a Satanic Cult.

You don't have to tell me. I was raised by non-LDS fundamentalist parents in Utah. Saw plenty of that sort of literature growing up.

But I think you underestimate the size of that contingent. Your average fundamentalist sees Mormons as honest but mistaken believers in heterodox doctrine. But although they don't see eye to eye on Jesus, they're considered fellow travellers when it comes to all the issues that really matter: gay marriage, abortion, abstinence etc.

raumvogel · Post by **raumvogel** » Sat May 21, 2011 2:36 am

Bard wrote:QUOTE (Bard @ May 20 2011, 03:53 PM) Sad times for the Republican Party.

Can we go back to the pre-Reagan era when Republicans were Fiscally Conservative and actually concerned about the world's opinion of the U.S. instead of the Military/Industrial War Complex and Democrat "Tax and Spend"/Republican "Spend and Spend" we have now?

The Republican President Eisenhower warned America of that back in the 50's. Now they think that's the way of the future. Scary times.

Bard · Post by **Bard** » Sat May 21, 2011 6:16 am

raumvogel wrote:QUOTE (raumvogel @ May 20 2011, 09:36 PM) The Republican President Eisenhower warned America of that back in the 50's. Now they think that's the way of the future. Scary times.

Yup. You'll notice that the gap between CEO/BoardMember Salary + Bonuses + Stocks and Median Worker Salary + Benefits has only widened since then?

This is the way our Corporate Oligarchs like it and we're just eating up the bull@#(! they feed us when they tell us that loosening regulations on THEM is better for US when in reality the whole reason we had a housing bubble crash in the first place is due to the deregulation put in place to allow them to shuffle paper around like a shell game to create non-existent "money" to line their pockets with.

This is why outsourcing to other COUNTRIES instead of just other states became widespread - because it makes more money for the people at the very top.
This is why the biggest campaign donations come from gigantic mega-corps - because BUYING votes is a great way to ensure a mega-corps bottom line stays nice and favorable.

We no longer have two parties when it comes to any issues that aren't abortion/gay marriage/health care.

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Sat May 21, 2011 2:47 pm

I think romney has the best chance of success against obama if he can get the nomination. The problem is the religious right. Last time around they all voted for huckabee, who is really a clown, because of religion. Maybe this time will be different but I think palin has a good shot at capturing the religious right vote, as she's a crazy religious nut also. But last time around you had McCain to draw all the middle of the road folks. There's no big name like that this time around, so I like romney's chances better.

edit - just took a quick look at this pawlenty character and he actually seems like he might have a decent shot, too. I would say of all the candidates, pawlenty and romney are the only serious ones. The others are just going to end up sucking votes away from one candidate or another. Palin is likely to pull a huckabee - suck up a bunch of votes, and then decide who she wants to back. That could actually end up being the deciding factor, as huckabee basically ended up helping mccain win. And pawlenti belongs to a more traditional protestant denomination, so palin is likely to back him. So my prediction is pawlenty due to palin's nonsense.

Bard · Post by **Bard** » Sat May 21, 2011 6:31 pm

TakingArms wrote:QUOTE (TakingArms @ May 21 2011, 09:47 AM) I think romney has the best chance of success against obama if he can get the nomination. The problem is the religious right. Last time around they all voted for huckabee, who is really a clown, because of religion. Maybe this time will be different but I think palin has a good shot at capturing the religious right vote, as she's a crazy religious nut also. But last time around you had McCain to draw all the middle of the road folks. There's no big name like that this time around, so I like romney's chances better.

edit - just took a quick look at this pawlenty character and he actually seems like he might have a decent shot, too. I would say of all the candidates, pawlenty and romney are the only serious ones. The others are just going to end up sucking votes away from one candidate or another. Palin is likely to pull a huckabee - suck up a bunch of votes, and then decide who she wants to back. That could actually end up being the deciding factor, as huckabee basically ended up helping mccain win. And pawlenti belongs to a more traditional protestant denomination, so palin is likely to back him. So my prediction is pawlenty due to palin's nonsense.

If Pawlenty wins our economy will go down in flames. Small Businesses everywhere will CRUMBLE under the crazy restrictions he's fond of placing on them to benefit megacorporations and big box stores. We can also probably look forward to a national sales tax on top of the state one if he gets in. If he runs under Bush Sr.'s "No New Taxes" like he did for his first term here, instead of touching taxes, he'll raise EVERYTHING ELSE. He killed nearly *all* of our tourist income crippling a whole lot of businesses, nearly ended our public transportation system in the twin cities, and had his budget hauled all the way in front of the Minnesota Supreme Court, where he barely lost, thank goodness. He's a large reason why the gigantic Mall of America now stands mostly empty and that place was a cash cow of world tourism for a good 10 years.

He then went back on his word and raised Minneapolis Sales tax *twice* as governor *and* imposed a few more wacky taxes that hurt everyone but big business. He *proposed* even more that didn't pass. He was actually responsible for a STATEWIDE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN in 2005 because he was trying to enact some stuff that was *so* crazy and bad for the economy that the house and senate essentially went on strike - to the agreement of both parties. He then went ahead and spent 3/4 of a BILLION dollars of taxpayer money in an already heavily deficited budget despite protestations to the contrary. He was also really fond of claiming we had "budget surplus" without counting for inflation.

He patently REFUSED to work with the MN House of Reps and Senate on anything. He has absolutely no grasp of the legislative-judicial-executive process and truly thinks he should be the *only* step when it comes to laws and budgets. No votes, just Kingly Decree. Anything else gets him into fights with senators and representatives.

The cuts he made to the public sectors in an effort to balance the budget are what caused the I-35 Mississippi River Bridge Collapse -- There weren't enough inspectors to cover all of the backlog and do the work properly FOR SEVERAL YEARS RUNNING.

He will *ruin* this country.