Political Parties Must Stand For Something: Sarah Palin Endorses Doug Hoffman

Sarah PalinIn the 23rd New York Congressional District special election, Sarah Palin has tonight endorsed the pro-life Doug Hoffman, running on the Conservative Party ticket, against Dede Scozzafava, the pro-abort leftist Republican, a race that I posted about here earlier in the week.  Sarah Palin’s statement is as follows:

The people of the 23rd Congressional District of New York are ready to shake things up, and Doug Hoffman is coming on strong as Election Day approaches! He needs our help now.

The votes of every member of Congress affect every American, so it’s important for all of us to pay attention to this important Congressional campaign in upstate New York. I am very pleased to announce my support for Doug Hoffman in his fight to be the next Representative from New York’s 23rd Congressional district. It’s my honor to endorse Doug and to do what I can to help him win, including having my political action committee, SarahPAC, donate to his campaign the maximum contribution allowed by law.

Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a “time for choosing.”

The federal government borrows, spends, and prints too much money, while our national debt hits a record high. Government is growing while the private sector is shrinking, and unemployment is on the rise. Doug Hoffman is committed to ending the reckless spending in Washington, D.C. and the massive increase in the size and scope of the federal government. He is also fully committed to supporting our men and women in uniform as they seek to honorably complete their missions overseas.

And best of all, Doug Hoffman has not been anointed by any political machine.

Doug Hoffman stands for the principles that all Republicans should share: smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, and a commitment to individual liberty.

Political parties must stand for something. When Republicans were in the wilderness in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan knew that the doctrine of “blurring the lines” between parties was not an appropriate way to win elections. Unfortunately, the Republican Party today has decided to choose a candidate that more than blurs the lines, and there is no real difference between the Democrat and the Republican in this race. This is why Doug Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party’s ticket.

Republicans and conservatives around the country are sending an important message to the Republican establishment in their outstanding grassroots support for Doug Hoffman: no more politics as usual.

You can help Doug by visiting his official website below and joining me in supporting his campaign:
http://www.doughoffmanforcongress.com/donate3.html

Many politicians treat being a politician as just a job, and their sole goal is to be a success at it.  Other politicians are motivated mainly by conviction that the political beliefs they embrace are more important than party loyalty or momentary electoral advantage.  I have never doubted in which category I would place Palin, as she demonstrates again tonight by standing in opposition to a GOP candidate, and in support of conservative principles.

Update:  Ed Morrissey at Hot Air notes here that after the Palin endorsement Hoffman raised $116,000 in one day.  Previously he had raise $210,000 in one week.

26 Responses to Political Parties Must Stand For Something: Sarah Palin Endorses Doug Hoffman

  • American Knight says:

    Sarah’s appeal has been her genuineness from the beginning. Notice that it wasn’t until the psudo-Republican McCaine machine got hold of her that she started making mistakes.

    I doubt she’ll fall for that again.

    The current climate does not favor the over-reaching Demoncrats but the Republican’ts need to be wary because America doesn’t trust them either.

    Conservatives can take the party back and this move by Sarah may be the first national salvo in the fight.

    I just wish she’d come back to the Church of her baptism.

  • e. says:

    Palin is nothing but a pretty face on a hot body; that’s all.

    To capitalize on her political capital (when there is none, actually) is, quite simply, to play the fool.

  • Donald R. McClarey says:

    “Palin is nothing but a pretty face on a hot body; that’s all.”

    You completely misread her e. Palin is a phenomenon in politics, the likes of which I have not seen since Ronald Reagan flew off into the sunset. The fact that a defeated vice presidential candidate and former governor has a national political network , constant media attention and the power from a facebook page to have a vast impact on our politics indicates that she is something new and different on the political scene. She is not a conventional politician, and she is about to blaze a new path to the White House. Sit back and prepare to be amazed.

  • American Knight says:

    Donald I think you are 100% correct. Of course, we don’t know what will happen, but her impact cannot be ignored.

    Americans are overwhelmingly fed up with business as usual, which is why someone with no experience, no accomplishments and a horrible ideology can win the White House based on unspecified change.

    People don’t want more of the same and Americans want someone who is a ‘regular’ person with a beleif in our common values: God, country, personal responsibility, community, small government, free enterprise.

    A candidate who is, well, candid and committed to authentic conservative principles will appeal to hard core conservatives, traditionalists, libertarians (most of them anyhow), anti-Communists and even traditional-minded liberals. Only the small lefty loonie minority in the White House now will show disdain.

    This is what propelled a former actor, union leader, ex-New Dealer and supporter of AuH20 to the White House and invented the Reagan Democrats. It will happen again. Is it Palin? Perhaps. If not, it will be someone else. But it is coming.

    I think McClarey is right, sit back and prepare to be amazed.

  • Hey Piasano says:

    To e. says, yes Sarah Paln is a pretty face, for 45 years old she has a hot body, but what you choose to ignore is that she has a political mind that will prove to be the brightest in our lifetime.

    First she has only been involved in politics for less than twelve years yeat she has gone up the ladder in record time, City Council, Mayor, Governor, VP candidate.

    She uses Facebook to bypass the Drive By Media and has more impact than any other political figure

    Her first Paid Speech garners $300,000 and is complimented by Wall Street Journal and even the New York Times as thoughtful, insightful and that the current administration could take a page in dealing with China

    She writes a 437 Book in less time that many authors could even come up with an outlineand it becomes # 1 within hours of a Title and date release. Unthinkable in the Publishing world.

    She endorses an unknown candidate in NY 23 and he garners $116,000 within one day and now hasan actual chance of winning the election.

    She challenges the GOP elities that politics as usual will not be tolerated in this election cycle, for the grassroots have spoken and they better head the message.

    All of this without campaign strategists, no poltical machine but just a belief that to serve is serve the people and therewishes. Palin has a motto ” Get out of the way I will do it”

    Enjoy the next three years for we will see a campaigne that will be in the record books for years to come and we will have a President that we will all be proud of.

  • Hey Piasano says:

    For the comment that Sarah needs to come back to the church of her baptism, I pose the question should the church come back to its people?

    As a life long Catholic I have become dissappointed in how the Church has handled the Pedophile priest and now how there are dealing with illegal immigration? They encourage breaking the law for the ” Better Good” Are they any different than what the heads either political party do to there constituents on a daily basis?

    This is a case where separation of church and state is very appropriate1

  • “Palin is a phenomenon in politics, the likes of which I have not seen since Ronald Reagan flew off into the sunset. The fact that a defeated vice presidential candidate and former governor has a national political network , constant media attention and the power from a facebook page to have a vast impact on our politics indicates that she is something new and different on the political scene. She is not a conventional politician, and she is about to blaze a new path to the White House. Sit back and prepare to be amazed.”

    In polls, she loses to just about everyone. Her unfavorable rating even among Republicans is very high. Palin is popular like Rush Limbaugh is popular, i.e., not popular enough to be elected.

  • Donald R. McClarey says:

    Another similarity with Reagan restrained radical. Prior to his victory in 1980 Reagan polled poorly in Presidential horse race polls. Even in 80, most of the polls showed the race dead even until the weekend before Reagan crushed Carter. Like Palin however, he had extremely dedicated supporters among the conservative base of the party, and a dedicated enthusiastic minority can often sway the outcome of an election. Like Reagan, Palin is always underestimated and that is almost always to a politician’s advantage.

  • Shawn says:

    it is amusing that so many of Palin’s supporters believe that she is poised for great things and that Democrats and liberals greatly fear her (which is why they attack her). Truth is, Palin is just another Joe the Plumber, one more bumper sticker populist for the under-informed and under-educated. A palin candidacy would be the greatest gift for the Democrats…the Democrats do not fear her, not one bit, she would hand them the most lopsided win in history. There are actually intelligent and knowledgable republicans out there – pick one.

  • Donald R. McClarey says:

    Precisely what they said about Reagan, Shawn. “A washed up hack B actor.” “He is senile.” “We’ll beat him easily.” Clark Clifford, a fixture of the Democrat establishment in Washington for half a century, summed up this attitude when he referred to Reagan as “an amiable dunce”. Many Liberals rarely understand Conservatives in this country, and I thank God for their blindness and condescension.

  • American Knight says:

    Donald,

    It seems that many Republicans don’t get conservatives either.

    I expect to never be amazed by political pragmatists, although, it is particularly unnerving when it comes from people of faith.

    Why should we seek the pragmatic candidate rather than someone with conviction of principles?

    I am hearing many alleged pro-lifers stating that she is splitting the race in NY, etc. Why does Sarah get the blame? Why not correctly blame the supporter of child murder?

    Dismissing her is odd for anyone with true conservative values and it is particulary sickening by alleged pro-lifers and Christians, especially Catholics. She is taking a very pro-life stance and for that she should be applauded not derrided.

  • Paul Zummo says:

    Funny for someone the Democrats supposedly don’t fear, they sure seem to go out of their way to express how much they don’t fear Palin every time her name is brought up. Me thinks they doth protest too much.

  • Tito Edwards says:

    Excellent points Paul.

    I am not a registered Republican, but I’m all for a national Conservative Party. Though we may not get majorities in either House, we could certainly work with non-RINO-Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats to get legislation passed.

  • Eric Brown says:

    I don’t wish to digress too much from the focus of the actual topic of this column. But I am rather interested in the “RINO” and “DINO” labels.

    By all counts to a Democrat who agrees entirely with the platform, I’m a Democrat-In-Name-Only. But why should we have such rigid political orthodoxy?

    I’m not saying that a party should not have agreement on a fundamental vision and philosophy, or principles, which is necessary for unity. But if there is not room for disagreement on means to the same end, there is very little room for intellectual freedom and creativity that actually allows for constructive criticism from within the party and viable and practical solutions to problems we face as a society.

    If anything, we benefit from Democratic Senators like Ben Nelson who is opposed to the public option, who is opposed to the “opt out” compromise, and who most certainly will not vote for a health care reform bill with abortion in it. He is being attacked as a “fake” Democrat. I can’t see how such dissent is a bad thing — maybe because I’m pro-life?

    Perhaps, I am misunderstanding one’s definition of a “RINO” or “DINO.” Is it someone who is so antithetical to the whole platform that they belong in the other party? Can someone be pro-choice and completely conservative on everything else and not be a “RINO”?

    Sorry to divert to a tangent, but it is something I have always been confused about and quite obviously it relates to me since my political views cut across the political spectrum, unevenly at that.

  • Paul Zummo says:

    Actually Eric, I don’t normally like the term RINO. Yes, moderate and left-leaning Republicans annoy me, but a political party is different from an ideological movement, therefore the term itself is problematic. The Republican party, while generally the home to conservatives, is not an ideological entity per se. There are of course party platforms, so political parties should have some kind of general outlook. But we don’t have to enforce complete orthodoxy on all issues.

    That being said, Dede Scozzafava isn’t even remotely Republican leaning in any meaningful sense of the term. At least Senators Collins and Snowe occasionally display backbones and ally themselves with conservatives on important issues. Scozzafava, however, is pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro stimulus, pro ACORN, etc. It is almost impossible to figure out how she is even remotely related to the Republican party. So she’s one of the unique cases where the RINO label is very apt.

  • American Knight says:

    Pro-gun? Really. Who in their right mind is pro-gun. A gun is a tool, saying you are pro-gun is as stupid as saying your are pro-mop (unless its a Marxist mop:)). Big Tex is right that’s horrible – the Marxist mop, not the guns.

    She is pro gun-ownership rights, which is just a sadly needed reactionary defense of natural property rights.

    And of all of her positions that is a really lame one to point out. Anyone who is pro private property and is sane and rational will be pro gun-ownership, whether or not they shoot moose, or is that meese :)

  • I wasn’t going to reply but I just read this quote from a Hoffman volunteer in today’s Economist:

    Ms Johnson describes Ms Scozzafava as “practically a Democrat”, but does “give her credit for being pro-guns”.

    http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14753792

    American Knight, I suggest you call up the Hoffman office, ask for Ms. Johnson, and educated her on why she’s not in her “right mind” and that what she said was “stupid.”

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .