Ann Coulter: It’s not likely that Sarah Palin will be the Nominee in 2012

I'll agree with one thing for sure. Whoever is running for the 2012 ticket will need to BETTER PROVE THEMSELVES.

So far...RON PAUL was the MOST CONSERVATIVE candidate in the LAST election and it'll take a VERY conservative person to really OUTDO what that man TRULY stands for.


But hey...what do I know?? I've only been pro-Constitution/anti-Federal Reserve for YEARS now. Bush Sr., Cinton, and Bush Jr. weren't either of these either...not to mention many other presidents throughout the century who have popped in and out with unconstitutional ideas.

Even JFK trying to disarm our entire country by turning our country's military over to the U.N...all the same. Here's some more conspiracy theorist QUESTIONS (not theories cause I hate those) for ya.

Why is it that Kennedy was assasinated just WEEKS after he had proposed to repeal the Federal Reserve Act and go back to having the Treasury be in charge of our currency?

Don't go callin me a "reserver" just because of that. I only ask questions because it helps the brain actually THINK as opposed to just taking media information for face value.

great comment! I agree.

That's because Coulter is a NeoCon. If you won't "PLAY BALL" and be pro-government as long as its large-R-government, and only be anti-government when its large-D-government then they won't want you.

Wait a sec, Han. To say Coulter is "pro-government" is silly. In reading a lot of her matierial, she is very much a pro-liberty conservative. I agree with both Cheney AND Coulter that I'm not sure Palin even wants to run. Coulter DIDN'T say she was unqualified, just that she didn't think she would run. She also said that Palin, no matter what would be highly influencial within the party, which I think is a good thing.

I don't get why people are still behind Palin as much as they are. I'm surprised there hasn't been more talk of other potential candidates. What about Scott Brown?

Obama was a one term Senator before winning the Presidency. Brown should have just as good of a chance in that respect. It'll be interesting to watch what he does in the Senate, but he certainly seems like a better choice than Palin already.

Don't get me wrong though, I'd love for the GOP to give up another election by having Palin on the ticket.

>What about Scott Brown?

RINO.

No thanks...he is another Big-Government Republican like McCaint.

Palin is more qualified than the current president.

Anyway, Qualifications mean much les than innate values. Was Reagan a rocket scientist? No. That's a good thing. He was street wise.

more conservative thought: I was unable to post on another forum, didn't want to set up a stupid account to reply.

The article writer's ideas are in quotes:

"Now Obama is trying to teach these money-hungry conservatives about the concept of sharing."

No, it's called "theft through policy."

"Millions of Americans are struggling everyday just to get by, and Beck is trying his hardest to hold them down."

Every generation has people that struggle, through any economy. Beck is giving every American real HOPE, that solutions for our lives are up to each of us. NOT the government.

"It's common sense, when someone needs help, offer it to them."

NO. Funny story... I needed help. I got none. So I got off my ass and succeeded in life on my own terms, without be indebted to anyone else. Humans become very motivated when they need to be. Instead, poverty is now an ongoing industry in America.

"That's what America is all about, not the right to become disgustingly rich and powerful."

You become a better man when you admire success instead of envying it. We're not all fighting over "one pie". When I win, it doesn't mean someone else loses.

We make our own pies, and share with others based on Free Will.

The size of our pies is based on effort and intelligence of each of us.

I love it when people claim that someone is not qualified.

You have to be a natural born citizen and over the age of 35, according to the Constitution. Folks seem to be adding something to the legal qualifications.

And someone I can think of right now, is a sitting president that has not proven to my satisfaction that he meets the only two legal qualifications.

Other than that, carry on.

Agreed with both of you guys for sure. Qualified and someone just plain being a good leader could TECHINCALLY be DIFFERENT things for sure.

I'm 26, have my own job, my own house, and my own car. Now...these would QUALIFY me to be a husband and provider...but I'm NOT RESPONSIBLE by any means.


Need I go further proving this point and going on to say this is further media distortion of language?

I completely agree that the qualifications for President, Constitutionally speaking. We need to get rid of "technocrats" who seem to find themselves in government. Jimmy Carter and our current President fall into this category. Whenever I hear stupid things like, "I've been working, going line by line over the budget" I wonder whether I want the leader of our country staying up late at night reading a budget. Leaders lead by principle and decision. Technocrats get bogged down in the details and forget they are serving the American people.

One last quick point. I agree with you that the media has done a MAJOR diservice in not covering our current President. It was criminal. With all due respect, the birth certificate thing is a losing battle. Let's say we get undeniable proof that he is not a natural born citizen. What would happen, chaos, riots, nothing good, that's for sure. We must fight on ideas. We must win on ideas! Ultimately, nothing else really matters.