This is a diary I've written on Red State in response to a diary written by Shoutbits which was posted on Red State the 27th of June. It was titled “Everyone is wrong on gay marriage” and was written several days after New York became the sixth state to legalize gay marriage last week Friday.
Shoutbits argues that the gay community has not accomplished much with the legalization of gay marriage in New York because what they truly crave is for acceptance from society and this has not and will not cause those who oppose them to have a change of belief. The only thing they’ve gained was to have the same legal benefits the law provides for married couples. On the other hand, conservatives are wrong for wanting the government to ban gay marriage and define marriage, because they should really be fighting to keep the government totally out of marriage.
What bothered me so greatly about his diary which compelled me to do more than comment, but to write a diary in response, is because the debate regarding gay marriage is really not whether it is or isn’t acceptable because if you look past in the history of this world at every country and religion and every moral person believed in traditional marriage as the only definition of marriage and homosexuality has never been accepted. The debate regarding gay marriage is whether the government should recognize homosexuals as a form and definition of marriage.
Shoutbits wrote:
The government should not endorse gay marriage; the government should get out of the marriage business altogether. Most of all, nobody should look to the government for validation of his life or defense of his religion. The governments of the US are corrupt, capricious, and are the biggest threat to the nation’s survival. Why should anyone expect such bodies to arbitrate morals?
When this country was founded as a country by religious people it wasn’t considered as such, not because the government got involved but because the concept of calling homosexuals as married simply didn’t exist.
This is proven because before the last couple of decades when conservatives and liberals took positions on this topic and involved the government, no one in the first over two hundred years requested the government to intervene because it was automatically understood that marriage has only one definition. Doing something immoral doesn’t constitute as marriage, and calling it as such doesn’t make the act a moral thing to do.
Human beings of all times, have always understood and believed that marriage is a sacred bond between one man and woman, thus there had been no request to change the definition of marriage. Morality is something that each of us has been created with, and someone that does or believes in immorality goes against the grain of his/her nature. This is proven with the fact that all animals follow the true definition of marriage, because they too have been created as such. Humans who have been given the power to choose between good and evil, unlike animals which lead their lives based on ingrained instinct, must rise to do that which is correct. Otherwise, such humans are considered worse than animals, which do what’s right without thought.
This world has already experienced a time when society totally crumbled and all moral behavior fall aside, as happened in the days of Noah.
The Big Flood which came because of the erosion of any semblance of morality. The filth and impurity of the people caused the animals to act immorally as well. In order to save the existence of the world which couldn’t handle the collapse of morality, Noah was commanded to build an Ark in which he, his family, and pairs of animals which have not practiced immorality resided while the rest of the world was cleansed of impurity.
There is a right side and wrong side to this debate, as in most issues, and in this case those who have been and are continuing to oppose those that are attempting to change the definition of marriage and are for the legalization of gay marriage definition, are on the right side. For anyone claiming that homosexuals are part of the society and there’s no point in opposing them, it must be pointed out that any state that had given the voters the option to vote on gay marriage including liberal California, has always resulted in the people voting against it. They did so not because of non-acceptance, but for the refusal to allow the values that America has been built on to go down the moral drain.
This country has already faced a moral decision when deciding whether it’s pro-life or pro-choice. The result has been that anyone speaking out against abortion is accused of having no mercy on rape victims and as someone who doesn’t want to provide rape victims with the help they require. A fetus/unborn child has already lost its rights and its value has been reduced to a mass of tissue.
The path of the gay activists and equal rights fighters are leading to the destruction of the value of marriage. Marriage has always been a sacred bond between a male and a female through which future generations were created and raised. Gay marriage has no future besides for destroying the moral values of society.
Opposition against gay marriage has nothing to do with equality or acceptability. People who oppose homosexuals simply take issue with the values those people display. To them it’s strictly a question of morality and whether they take the moral or immoral side of the issue. And moral issues are not something they take lightly or are flexible about in the least bit.
Before I jump into the latest regarding Chicago, home of Al Capone, Rahm Emanuel, and the Daley brothers I’m going to backtrack about a half a year in order to clarify the point of the article.
This past January, after the Tucson shooting, when the nation was enveloped in sadness and grief, Arizona sheriff Clarence Dupnik shamelessly ran around on interviews and blamed the “vitriol” from talk show hosts, tea parties, and Sarah Palin for the terrible shooting. As the sheriff of Pima County, many expected him to set the facts straight. Instead, he stood together with the Paul Krugman’s of society and spread deliberate misinformation and hate across the country, rather than seeking justice against Jared Loughner.
It’s now almost six months later and Dupnik still hasn’t resigned. And why should he? Is blaming and framing innocent people for murder without a shred of proof a reason to resign? The left and the media obviously don’t think so, since there were no editorials in any newspapers demanding his resignation.
Mark Levin aka “The Great One”, finishes his show daily with “we salute our armed forces, police officers, fire fighters, and all emergency personnel.” I agree with him wholeheartedly, for without them this nation would’ve succumbed to chaos. However, there are individuals attempting to politicize these selfless groups and conservatives must come out against them before it’s too late.
Sheriff Dupnik is but one example of a law-enforcer using his position in an attempt to influence others against conservatives. His accusations were far worse and had a greater impact than the media’s, because as a public servant he’s expected and supposed to put his own political beliefs aside in order to promote justice for all.
Here’s another incident that occurred this past April.
Sarah Palin was scheduled to appear at an anti-tax tea party rally in Madison, Wisconsin in support of Governor Walker and the union reforms he fought for. The day before the rally, the WI fire union sent out a memo to all its members that they should come out to protest and disrupt the rally. Although the majority of the fire fighters ignored the memo, there were some members whose loyalty to the union came before their respect for their uniform and job.
This leads to Chicago and their new Al Capone of a mayor Rahm Emanuel who is perhaps best known for the dead fish he has sent in the past to those he disagreed with.
Emanuel appointed Garry McCarthy, former Newark police chief, as Chicago police superintendent. Garry spoke last week in Rev. Michael Pfleger’s church (which is known for their liberal anti-American beliefs) against federal gun laws calling it government-sponsored racism. He then denounced Sarah Palin because she promoted hunting in her TLC show thus blaming her for gun violence in New Jersey!
Below is a partial transcript of his speech with the complete video right here.
"This is sensitive. You know, because everybody’s afraid of race. Have you noticed that? Everybody’s afraid of race," McCarthy, a former New York and Newark police official said. "So here’s what I want to tell you. See, let’s see if we can make a connection here. Slavery. Segregation. Black codes. Jim Crow. What, what did they all have in common? Anybody getting’ scared? Government sponsored racism."
"Now I want you to connect one more dot on that chain of the African American history in this country, and tell me if I’m crazy: Federal gun laws that facilitate the flow of illegal firearms, into our urban centers across this country, that are killing our black and brown children," he said.
"The NRA does not like me, and I’m okay with that. We’ve got to get the gun debate back to center, and it’s got to come with the recognition of who’s paying the price for the gun manufacturers being rich and living in gated communities," McCarthy said, recalling back from the scene of a crime to switch on the television and find "Sarah Palin's Alaska" showing.
"She was caribou hunting, and talking about the right to bear arms," he said. "Why wasn’t she at the crime scene with me?"
Emanuel’s appointment of such a nut and hater as the police chief in Chicago will politicize the police force into an anti- NRA, anti-whites, and anti-conservatives, movement. Chicago is a city with some of the strictest gun laws in the country and had last year just as many fatal shootings as NYC had last year with only a third the size of a population. Harsher gun controls has proven to cause more gun casualties since the criminals that get the guns illegally continue to do so, while the law-abiding citizens aren’t equipped to defend themselves and others.
These incidents may seem unrelated, but in reality they are all one and the same.
Dennis Prager frequently points out an eye-opening fact how the left destroys everything and anything they get a hand on.
The left took over science and turned it into one big joke as evidenced with emailgate which proved global warming to be a hoax.
When Fact magazine announced that 1,189 psychiatrists saw Barry Goldwater as emotionally unstable, grossly psychiatric, and psychologically unfit to serve as president, amongst many other derogatory terms, respect for psychiatrists and psychiatry flew out the window.
When the liberals got involved in education and teachers’ rights, it resulted in the education from U.S. public school children sliding from first spot in the world to the 17th in 2010, no matter how much money has since been poured down the education drain!
The left has not spared anything from their touch including colleges, health care, energy and even marriage. We now have quite a few states that have legalized gay marriage, as NY did this past Friday, thereby destroying the definition of marriage which has existed for thousands of years. Marriage has always been defined as “the formal union between one man and one woman.” Now that is no longer the case.
Liberals have taken immigration and changed it from a symbol and proof of the respect foreigners had for this great democracy and their desire to live in one, to the largest voting bloc which needs to be bribed and won over at any and every cost.
The left won’t be satisfied until every institution and corner of this country is in sync with their distorted views. Their newest target appears to be the men and women providing protection to the public whether from gangs, fire, or terrorists. This is why the left fought so hard to overturn “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in the military. It wasn’t about freedom because gays were always allowed to serve; they were delighted to gain recognition and influence in a predominantly conservative territory.
We conservatives must fight against the left before the entire police and fire departments are totally destroyed and become just like the SEIU. I repeat my respect for police officers and fire fighters and admire their courage for putting themselves in line for the safety of others. The respect the right and I have for these institutions doesn’t exist in the left doesn’t exist in the left as seen in Obama’s naming a police officer’s action “stupid” before knowing any of the details involved.
The left is attempting in politicize these selfless groups through the unions and liberal mayors in order to use them as another tool through which to further advance their liberal agenda as seen in Wisconsin. We must put a stop to this before they succeed, because as experience shows, once the damage is done it is almost impossible to undo.
Romney & Obama are busy with the bumps on the road when the U.S. is no longer on a road; America is at the edge of a cliff.
It’s pretty pathetic to see how this country might have to choose between two cool looking candidates who focus on slogans and rhetoric rather than substance.
Romney released his first campaign ad several weeks ago which was based on Obama’s quote; “There are always going to be bumps on the road to recovery.” It played a dramatic scene of “I’m an American, not a bump in the road.” It’s brilliant and flashy, but after watching it, you don’t come away with a message or plan that Romney has for the future, nor what he’s done in the past. In two words: Empty Rhetoric. In one word: Slogans. Almost like the three words of ’08: Hope and Change, or in his case, Believe in America.
This country is no longer speeding down a dangerous road; it has veered off course and is at the edge of a cliff with its front wheels hanging over the abyss.
Is this truly the level this country has reached after having committed this very mistake last election? With millions of people out of jobs and the economy looking so bleak; with so many countries undergoing government upheavals and the radicals gaining more and more control; do the citizens of the U.S.A. still place their confidence in appearance rather than experience and substance?
Even more astonishing is that many of the Republican Party which has always been the party of thinking voters, not the “what will you give me” attitude, but “what is your record” attitude, is falling for flashiness.
Will the upcoming election be a choice between neon and glitter?
Romney is not running on the issues because he doesn’t want the voters to know his history and true beliefs. His solutions to problems his state had faced were solved in leftist fashions and he has no intention or capability in shrinking the size of our federal government.
Ethanol
Instead of Mitt Romney focusing on the issues such as the economy, he’s pandering to voters in typical liberal fashion, as seen in his support of ethanol subsidies in Iowa – a state he lost in ‘08.
We have enough oil & gas if the federal government will allow
us to drill, so that we don’t have to resort to ethanol. So many farmers are planting corn instead of wheat or other crops in order to be eligible for subsidies from the government. It then results in higher food costs because of the lack of wheat. This is a perfect example of the government involving themselves in the private sector -- farmers and what they plant -- messing up the supply and demand capitalist system that has been in place previously with overwhelmingly negative results.
Only government officials with no clue how capitalism works have been able to create such a system. After all, if ethanol is truly such a great invention, then people will demand the ethanol just as they demand everything else, so why the need for government subsidies? I love how politicians attempt to force their will onto the people, and then say repeatedly how deeply they care for their constituents.
EPA
The EPA has been exposed over the last few years as an agency with the intention to destroy thousands of private businesses all in the name of saving the environment. One has to fool themselves in to thinking that Romney, who has recently said that humans have a hand in global warming, will stop the EPA from passing new regulations. After all, someone that believes that global warming is a man-made disaster can’t shrink or abolish the EPA, because they’re saving the world. Can you see him veto a cap & trade bill?
Obamacare
Romneycare claims he’s against Obamacare and would repeal it because it was done on a federal level, but defends his plan because it was enacted through the state government. He’s also compared his plan, which didn’t cut Medicare, to Obama’s which did. Of course he couldn’t cut Medicare – it wasn’t in his power to do so. And besides, is the cut of Medicare from the ten worst things Obama has done? The rest of Obamacare is all fine and dandy?
Romney has taken away the freedom from the citizens with his mandates on health insurance and has taken away the liberty of insurance companies to reject patients with preexisting conditions. Is this the guy we need to sit in the oval office? Imagine if the majority of the Governors would’ve enacted such a bill; the entire health care system in the United States would’ve been destroyed!
So he has no solutions to the economic issues that plague our country. What about moral issues, does he know where he stands?
He ran in Massachusetts as pro-choice aka pro-abortion and had a sudden change of mind when he launched his first presidential run and became pro-life. However, he refused to sign the Susan B. Anthony List pledge which asked candidates to pledge to appoint pro-life appointees to cabinet positions, end Planned Parenthood funding, and appoint judges who will rule solely based on the constiitution.
America’s problems are not the bumps in the road. America’s problems are politicians like you, Romney, and Obama are candidates who look good on camera and TV but are destructive for the freedom and democracy of this nation.
Ann Coulter is a great conservative who does a terrific job explaining conservatism on interviews and in her columns. In her humorous manner she clearly defines the differences between the left and the right, and is never afraid to tell someone directly into their faces what she thinks of them.
I’ve noticed though that at times her humor and views are not necessarily strictly in line with conservative values. Yes, she’s very pro-life and right on the moral and other issues, but while she may preach certain values in public at the same time she lauds and supports individuals that don’t defend those very same values.
For example, the last several months, Coulter fell in love with a Christie campaign, although many other candidates and potential candidates are way more conservative than him. Coulter is never heard discussing Christie's record, his position on issues, or how long he’s been Governor. Rather, she repeatedly stresses how no one’s as good as him and that he’s the only one who can come out strongly to challenge Obama.
In an interview last week with John Hawkin on Right Wing News, I was stunned to see the following:
Hawkins: You’ve been saying for a while that you think Chris Christie may be the only guy who can stop Mitt Romney. How about Rick Perry, who’s also a big name candidate — and if not, why not?
Coulter: Chris Christie could eat Rick Perry for breakfast — so to speak.
I can take a joke and enjoy her great sense of humor, but has Coulter ever researched who Christie is and what he supports? Coulter mocks man-made global warming and is anti-stronger gun control, so why from such a large field of candidates does she support Christie who’s not even running and believes in global warming and greater gun control amongst many other non-conservative beliefs.
Additionally, is Coulter aware how Christie became the Governor of New Jersey?
Christie was a popular U.S. Attorney whom the media hyped because of his center-left beliefs. True he had successfully battled many corrupted politicians with many landing behind bars; however his conservative credentials besides being a registered Republican amounted to promising to lower taxes. He ran in support of increased gun control, believed in man-made global warming, and wasn’t pro-life. Despite the above and more, he received support in the primary from the entire Republican Party from conservative Steve Forbes to the former popular Mayor Rudy Giuliani of neighboring NYC.
Christie played the role of popular U.S. Attorney with endorsements from all and lots of name recognition. He was ahead in the polls and it was clear to all that he’ll crush the incumbent unpopular Corzine and become the next Governor of the state.
Several months before the primary, Christie, the candidate who received the support of all major newspapers and politicians, faced an unknown challenger for the primary. A true conservative who had served as the mayor of a small town in NJ, Steve Lonegan campaigned on all conservative issues including shrinking the size of government, anti-gun control, anti-illegal immigration, pro- energy independence, anti-environmentalism, pro-life, pro-flat tax etc. Although Lonegan was articulate and passionate in his beliefs, he faced attacks from Giuliani and many others in the Republican Party because of his staunch conservative values.
Lonegan jumped in to the primary just a few short months before the elections and campaigned endlessly to build up his name recognition. The last several weeks before the election had him inching closer and closer to Christie, but time wasn’t on his side. When Election Day arrived he had bridged a tremendous gap without the help of any in the establishment, although Christie still remained ahead of the game.
At the time, it reminded me very much of the primary playing out between Charlie Christ and Marco Rubio, with the difference being that Rubio started his campaign enough in advance to reach out to voters and establish himself, which led to him beating Christ in the polls which caused Christ to run as Independent.
In addition to his popularity, Christie’s pockets were much deeper than his opponent’s and he was thus able to bombard the air waves and TV waves with ads against his opposition, Lonegan. All of the above resulted in Christie emerging as the victor though not with the overwhelming numbers originally predicted before Lonegan entered the race.
He won the primary with a mere 55% of the votes.
In the general election, Christie actually received endorsements not only from the right but from many on the left including the leftist environmentalist Seattle Club who endorsed him over the Democrat candidate John Corzine! How conservative does that make him appear? On top of the many endorsements, he faced a scandalized incumbent who led the state into deeper economic disaster which resulted in the people seeking for change.
When November arrived, Christie won with five percent of the votes.
And now Coulter wants to convince us that Christie can swallow Perry whole when Perry has a greater favorability than Christie, has won three elections, and has served as the Governor of his state for over ten years? All this is not even including the fact that Perry is far more to the right than Christie on most of the issues. Additionally, Christie’s unfavorable numbers are higher than his favorable numbers and he’s not even Governor for two years. I know New Jersey is a blue state, but Alaska’s majority is not Republican either and Palin had an approval rating of 80% before she was picked as McCain’s VP.
On what does Coulter base her claim that Christie, and only Christie, can beat Obama? Christie has not proven to have fought tough elections in the past, is not a true conservative, has only a little over a year of executive experience, and is not even well liked in his own state!
In these tough economic times, Perry can point to his state’s financial success who’s unemployment numbers are lower than the national average and New Jersey’s. Anyone with the retort that Christie can’t possibly be blamed for his state’s terrible economy since it has preceded him and that he hasn’t yet had the ability to enforce changes; that too is exactly my point. How and why could you trust this guy with the presidency of the United States when he hasn’t been Governor any longer than Obama had been senator before he ran for higher office? Are you looking for a repeat of ’08? Christie hasn’t even been Governor yet for the length of time Palin had been.
Coulter opposes Romney while supports Christie when they are on the same side of the table on many issues – and the opposite of conservatism. On the other hand, Perry is a staunch pro- life, anti-gun control, anti-global warming candidate and so are Palin and Bachmann.
Ann Coulter’s response on Sean Hannity when asked what she thinks of a Palin as president left me quite puzzled. You can watch the entire clip here.
Coulter replied; “I don’t think she’s going to (run) I think she should run for senate or something…….I think she’s a great voice for conservatism, ummm why bother running for president?”
Why Palin should bother?
Firstly, If she runs it will be much more than a bother, she will have to fight with every tooth and nail against the hating left; but she won’t do just to prove that she could win.
If she runs, it will be because this country needs a strong conservative to take control of the government and its out-of-control spending and there’s no one else that has the tools to fight the left like she does.
This country needs someone that has already stood up successfully in the past against her opposition, even from her own party, all so that her state would benefit.
In the same interview Coulter said she needs “someone who’s stellar and a cut above.” What makes Christie so outstanding? His only plus is his fight against unions, so then why not choose Walker who does the same and is a conservative to boot? If Coulter is a true conservative, what is it in Christie that she supports?
Palin had beaten a popular incumbent in the primary with no party support whatsoever and then took on and won in the general election against a former popular Democratic Governor. She had also served previously as a Mayor for two terms, thus gaining lots of executive experience.
Listening to Ann Coulter on Hannity, however, it’s obvious she knows only one thing. And that is, that Christie is the best. How about doing some research into his background as well as the history of the other candidates?
I believe that neither Christie nor Perry will run, and that Perry will endorse a Palin presidency, I simply felt compelled to question Ann Coulter and her unintelligible attitude.
Since I haven't yet watched “The Undefeated”, I've been reading the reviews and reactions to those who have already seen it.
The more I've read, the more obvious the tremendous impact this may have. Josh Painter, the editor of Texans for Sarah Palin wrote a great review in which he articulates it in three clear and concise points.
The first of these is the initial "Three Minute Hate" sequence, which has a powerful emotional impact on the viewer. Much has been made of the foul language used by some of the more notorious among the Palin-hater demographic and how it will require director Stephen Bannon to market two versions of his film so PG audiences won't miss out on the opportunity to view it. The angrier extremists of the far left can't seem to communicate without resorting to gutter language, like so many of today's stand up comedians who use filthy epithets as a crutch to get through their acts. Lacking the creativity and talent of great comics such as Bill Cosby, Bob Hope, Jonathan Winters and Bob Newhart, this generation of comics are more than just several cuts below the greatness of the masters of their craft. But I suspect general audiences who see "The Undefeated" will find the intensity of the hate for Sarah Palin to have more shock value than the four-letter words used to express it. Coming at the beginning of the film as it does, the Three Minute Hate overwhelms the viewer with the irrationality and pathology of the attacks made against Gov. Palin. Viewers with a conscience will not be able to avoid the feeling of revulsion and even outrage over the extreme degrees of nastiness pursued in the efforts to destroy the woman. Those left of center, but of good character, will instinctively want to distance themselves from such vileness, which is exactly what the filmmaker wants them to do. Only then can these viewers, the main targets of the documentary, give Sarah Palin an even break and grant her a fresh appraisal.
Moving from the emotional to the intellectual, audiences can't help but be impressed by the accomplishments of the governor they see on the screen, as they witness the fiscal restraint, "servant's heart," and overall competence which rewarded her with impressive approval ratings in office, at least before the 2008 presidential campaign. Energy independence has always been a top issue for me, and as we see in "The Undefeated," it is for Gov. Palin as well. It is this issue which initially pulled me into her political orbit when I first began to pay attention after reading "The Most Popular Governor" by Fred Barnes nearly four years ago. Before I was even made aware of Sarah Palin, I was on board with her on the security and economic necessity of this nation deriving much more of its oil and natural gas from domestic exploration and production, while importing much less of it from potentially unreliable foreign sources. Not only would it be a shot in the arm to our ailing economy, it would help create hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of jobs. This made economic sense even back when the unemployment rate was almost half of what it is now. Today, it is nothing less than mission critical if we want to put America back to work.
Finally, the film impressed me with its great potential to change minds and thus change the game. Even if it does not move them 180 full degrees from the media-created Palin perception, that's not a problem. "The Undefeated" doesn't need to have that much of an impact on everyone who experiences it. The hard left will never give Gov. Palin an even break, but they're only about 20 percent of the population, so they aren't relevant to the mission of the this documentary (aside from the fact that they helped to perpetuate the media-driven lies about Sarah Palin by repeating them over and over again). Very few radical leftists, members of an even smaller subgroup, will even bother to watch the movie anyway. All this film need do is persuade those who sit for it to give her a second look, one not contaminated by media misrepresentation. Given that criteria, I believe that it will be a great success.
As a committed Palin supporter, it's difficult to put myself in the mind of a fence-sitter, and as a Reagan conservative, just as hard to try to image the thinking of a moderate or independent who fell for the anti-Palin media hype and accepted it as Gospel. But I do know a few things about communication and the psychology of marketing, and I'm convinced that if enough people - registered voters in particular - get the chance to see this powerful documentary they cannot help but be moved by it and have it challenge their preconceptions. Again, change enough minds, and you have changed the game. That's the emotional and intellectual power of "The Undefeated."
I just hope that the film will reach enough Americans, especially those not already a part of the Palin camp, so it should have an impact.
It explains so clearly and concisely why we need Palin to join the race and be our next president.
It would be difficult to dispute the fact that “Citizen Sarah” Palin is one of the most effective voices in conservatism today…the evidence speaks for itself.
On issue after issue…from healthcare to national security to quantitative easing, Citizen Sarah has “led from the front”, presenting a stark contrast between herself and media proclaimed frontrunners such as Romney or Pawlenty.
For the midterm elections, Rick Santorum rightly conceded she was THE endorsement candidates craved. And for good reason. Her tireless resolve and fundraising heft resulted in an impressive list of wins on her electoral scorecard.
And she did it all without a title next to her name.
Yes…Citizen Sarah has been a powerful influence, a solid voice, a bold warrior and a centering presence for those of us who yearn for a smaller, smarter government that works for us. Citizen Sarah inspired me (and no doubt countless others…an “army of Davids”) that I didn’t need to hold any kind of office to make a difference. I didn’t need to have a title to work with my local tea party and lobby our representatives effectively. I didn’t need to be anything other than who I was…an American who loves this Republic with everything in her…to effect positive change.
All that said, it is becoming increasingly clear that the time of Citizen Sarah is rapidly drawing to a close.
You see…while Citizen Sarah can make…and has made a difference, Citizen Sarah cannot affect public policy.
Citizen Sarah cannot cut the federal budget and dismantle the outrageous, intrusive regulatory scheme.
Citizen Sarah cannot shut down the offices of the long stream of Czars who work outside the scope of the Constitution.
Citizen Sarah cannot nominate Supreme Court Justices who will honor the original intent of the Constitution as opposed to revisionism and leftist theory.
Citizen Sarah cannot ensure our troops are being sent on missions with clear objectives for the right reasons.
Citizen Sarah cannot demonstrate to the world that we will stand by our friends and allies, nor can she make it clear to our enemies that we will not back down in the face of their intimidation.
Citizen Sarah cannot allay the concerns of freedom loving people around the world that they will find a friend in the United States.
Citizen Sarah cannot cut Obamacare off at the knees.
As we look at the challenges we face as a nation, both domestically and internationally, we can only conclude that Citizen Sarah does not have the ability to do what we need.
And so…I can no longer support Citizen Sarah Palin.
The time has come for a new face to take Citizen Sarah’s place…someone who can do all of the above and more… who will, with a healthy dose of reluctance yet with a fire in her belly, accept the call of leadership with a servant’s heart.
The time has come for President Palin to grace the stage.
Check out their website Tennessee4Palin for many other great articles in support of Palin.
