Palin: Tea Partiers Must "Pick a Party"; No Third Party

February 18, 2010 | Filed under: Dominionists | Posted by:

Sarah Palin reiterates her support for the status quo, stating that the Tea Party movement can’t be a third party, and must merge with the Republican Party.

On Tuesday, Palin addressed a crowd at the half-empty, 18,000-seat Verizon Arena in North Little Rock, Arkansas. As part of a Republican fundraiser, Palin provided a 45-minute speech and Q&A session. Asked whether the Tea Party could or should promote candidates, she replied:

. . . the smart thing will be for independents who are such a part of this Tea Party movement to, I guess, kind of start picking a party. Which party reflects how that smaller, smarter government steps to be taken? Which party will best fit you? And then because the Tea Party movement is not a party, and we have a two-party system, they’re going to have to pick a party and run one or the other: ‘R’ or ‘D’.

That’s right. We have a two-party system, and it is simply not possible to change that. Judson Phillips likely agrees; this way, he can keep Tea Party Nation as a for-profit enterprise.

Wonder if she thinks it’s required in the Constitution?

Print Friendly

Related articles:

  1. Glenn Beck’s Tea Party Personality: A Lot More Ron Paul Than Sarah Palin
  2. Huckabee Pummels Romney, Palin as Conservative Presidential Pick
  3. Tea Party Terrorists Lash Out; Window War Goes Bipartisan
  4. Poll: Tea Partiers aren’t libertarian but Religious Right
  5. Tea Partiers Show True Colors
avatar is webmistress and co-editor of Secular News Daily. Jenny is an outspoken secularist who believes firmly in the separation of church and state. She demands evidence to support arguments, and holds herself to the same standard. She doesn't write about herself in the third person . . . but there's a first time for everything.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry.

2 Responses to Palin: Tea Partiers Must "Pick a Party"; No Third Party

  1. avatar Baconsbud February 18, 2010 - 11:55 pm

    It is odd that she claims to be a maverick but then turns around and says we have to stay with what we have. I would actually like to see an effective third party get into the fray but am afraid it would be hijacked just like all attempts have been.

    Reply
    • avatar JennyD February 19, 2010 - 1:19 am

      She's as much a "maverick" as McSame . . .

      Reply

Leave a Reply

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

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>