Browse By

Sarah Palin: Tweet?

Are Americans really just chomping at the bit for Sarah Palin to run for President in 2012? Not if you go by our short-form writing forum Twitter. Searches for tweets featuring the phrase “Palin for President” bring up just 14 results during the past seven days… and only 6 of those are actually positive comments on the prospect.

Pro-“Palin for President” tweets over the past seven days:

“sarah palin for president’s time for a change!!” — LoLornaMarie

“sarah palin for president’s time for a change!!” — wmiar

“sarah palin for president’s time for a change!!” — Timothy Golding


“GOP is too much centered now, the GOP needs to move back to the right and get rid of their moderates. PALIN FOR PRESIDENT” — Exit38

“Added a link to: Palin for president as a featured lens” — Patricia Sanders, Reiki Master

Anti-“Palin for President” tweets over the past seven days:

“The day that “w.e” means “weekend” is the day that I support Palin for President, and Hitler as V.P.” — Sam Symons

“I think the Republicans should nominate Sarah Palin for President in2012 and for her Vice President Michelle Bachman. lol They are alike.” — Blondmama

“Bristol Palin’s an ambassador for the teen pregnancy campaign?! What’s next? Sarah Palin for president? Wait there’s already talk of that!!” — anukher

“Stop Sarah Palin for President in 2012 » Romney Cracks” — Coaching Machine

“Stop Sarah Palin for President in 2012 » Mike Ragogna …” — Richer_Life

“Stop Sarah Palin for President in 2012 » Lobbyists …: Lobbyists Prosper During Recession. Poste.. You must be authenticated to access shorten” — Edi Carlisle of the Atlantean Vortex


“in lieu of flowers please send donations to the Sarah Palin for President 2012 foundation. *klunk*” — AgingGothMom

Run, Sarah Palin, Run! The people are callllling you.

‘Course, Sarah Palin’s got it better than Mitt Romney. You have to go back 13 days to find a tweet featuring the phrase “Romney for President,” and it ain’t pretty:

“Imagine if Gavin Newsome runs against Mitt Romney for President one day. Slick hair and teeth Battle Royal.” — Jim Zappa

12 thoughts on “Sarah Palin: Tweet?”

  1. qs says:

    I don’t like Palin.

    Montana nullifies all Federal guns laws!, and Tom Woods explains how they did.

    The principles of 98 established the concept of State nullification. It’s just like jury nullification where the jury can throw out laws at its discretion since it’s well known that almost all U.S. laws are bogus and make no sense.

    Jim do you think more states could use these to get rid of all the Federal laws?

  2. Tom says:

    qs: “since it’s well known that almost all U.S. laws are bogus and make no sense.”

    Are you out of your mind? Have you actually read ALL the laws on the volumes and volumes of books? Why don’t you think a little before making blanket statements like this.
    The trouble over the past 8 years has been the non-enforcement of the laws we have (especially where it applies to corporations and the environment). There are a few laws left, like spitting on the sidewalk or not cleaning up after your horse, still on the books, but they’re old and were designed for health purposes (stopping the spread of disease) and have become passe.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Tom- I favor NO TAXES. simple

    Why should I bother reading the 100,000 pages of code the IRS now has. There isn’t one piece of our Federal Government worth keeping anyway.

    1. Jim says:

      Then stop using the Internet. I mean, it’s not “worth keeping anyway,” right? The federal government was instrumental in its creation.

      1. qs says:

        I think we need an internet. We could have the States run it.

        1. Jim says:

          You would have had each of the states build up their own DARPANET and BITNET?

      2. qs says:

        Jim, do you see any legal reason why we can’t use that Montana precedent to nullify more Federal laws? I’m not so sure they could get away with overthrowing interstate commerce laws, but couldn’t this be used for all sorts of others thing?

        Also commerce laws ideally would be more narrowly defined so that leaves most everything else on the table.

        1. Jim says:

          I have no idea. The effort by Montana hasn’t gone through full judicial review, so it’s certainly not an established avenue.

          1. qs says:

            We’re like a corned animal with no escape.

            GOP= a failed party?

            Desperado: New Theme for the Conservative Movement
            U.S. Government power expanded under Reagan and Bush, and Bush even doubled the debt (Reagan did a good job at that too.) The conservative movement proved futile against FDR’s warfare State and his new welfare state programs and LBJ’s Great Society and even Carter and Clinton for that matter.

          2. qs says:

            Ya but the Kentucky and Virginia vetos are precedent. I agree though that the government may try another legal ruse like in Wickard v. Filburn and use commerce laws to stop the Montana veto of gun laws.

            In Wicker, a farmer in Illinois was growing wheat on his own land, and he wasn’t selling it just using it to feed his family and himself so he argued that FDR’s commerce regulations couldn’t apply to him, but the governments courts came down on him and said he couldn’t grow that much wheat because there was the chance that he might do so in the future.

    2. Truman says:

      Who needs the National Weather Service either, right? Or the Coast Guard? Who needs to know the weather forecast, protection from tornadoes, or rescue on the high seas? That Federal Government!

      1. qs says:

        Yes, I would get rid of all those organizations especially the Coast Guard since that’s part of the U.S. military.

        States would have to make alternate ones.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!