I’m sorry. If she was “extraordinary politically talented” she would have found someway over the past year to raise her approvals to a level which would give some of us confidence she could beat Obama in November.
My question to Palin supporters is, why hasn’t she been able to do that, and where do you get the confidence going forward that she can do that? The left launched another round of ridicule at her this morning on the Sunday Morning Shows, and she hasn’t shown the ability to fight back.
I’d love to vote for her and be the nominee and be the President. But I don’t see this “magic political genius” that everybody else does where she’s going to start campaigning, and the media is going to melt and stop ripping her to shreds.
Sound like the PAC was right.
Thanks for the great post Brice. I am a Palin supporter to be sure but know little about Gov. Perry. I will use your excellent post and others from well informed Freepers to “vet” the Texas Governor against other candidates. When Governor Palin “officially” enters the race, I’ll need some popcorn and a soft chair to watch the show!
Bookmarked!
This is frankly an assinine argument. Do you know what Rick Perry's net work is? He's 61 years old, and has worked his entire adult life. He currently makes about $150,000 a year as Governor.
His Net Worth? In 2009, estimated to be about $1 million dollars. Yep. He sure profited from his public service. I fully plan to have a net worth of at least that much when I turn 61.
I think conservatives attacking people for having money is silly, for making money is silly, and especially when they have barely made it into the millionaires club.
And I can't believe a Sarah Palin supporter is going to try to make an argument about someone profiting from public service. The argument against Perry (made by his democratic opponent who was worth almost 3 times Perry) was that when Perry entered public service, his net worth was $13,000, and now it's over a million, so he "made all his money" off of public service.
But 27 years to net $1 million is nothing. It's what every american should strive for, in order to secure their own retirement.
Clearly, when Palin entered public service in 1994, the Palins didn't have any real money. But now she is worth 12 to 14 million dollars. That's 12-14 times richer than Rick Perry, who supposedly is the poster-child for making money off of public service.
Now, maybe you would argue that Sarah Palin would be a multi-millionare even if she hadn't been picked for VP by McCain, and turned that into a full-time profession of rallying people to conservative causes -- a profession that is worthy and necessary.
And Palin supporters have repeatedly argued for her resignation as Governor precisely because being governor was costing her money (Because of the frivolous ethics charges, and I agree it was best for her to resign), and so she could go out and make money off her popularity, which she did by writing two books and starring in her own TV series, and also being a political pundit on Fox News, and she even made money doing political speeches (although at least some times she donated that money, so I don't know if she ever really cleared anything there).
The point is that nobody is going to begrudge Sarah Palin her fame and fortune, even though it came from public service. But for people supporting a candidate whose net worth is over 10 million dollars to try to attack another candidate who managed to squeak together a million-dollar nest egg in 27 years of public service (well, more than 27 if we don't ignore that he served admirably in our country's military), is just silly.
Class warfare is a weapon of the left, and White tried it in the 2010 election -- the election where Palin supported Rick Perry, calling him a conservative we needed, and not once mentioning that she thought he was the epitome of "crony capitalism". But for supporters of a newly-minted multi-millionare candidate to attack a barely millionare candidate for "profiting from public service" is simply absurd.
For those of you who misread everything I write, I will again point out that NOTHING in this post is an attack on Sarah Palin. I've faithfully mentioned facts, and I don't think they are disputable. I have not spoken unfavorably of her resignation, which I supported, nor of her wealth, which I applaud, or how she made it, which is by taking advantage of the opportunities provided to her by her popularity and message.
Exceptionally well done, BC, as usual.
THere are other listings for Perry's net worth (most of which is tied up in a blind trust that he has no control over and which doesn't generally disclose it's value).
David Frum, everybody's favorite conservative (sarcasm), making about the exact same argument against Perry as you do here, claims Perry's net worth is now $2.8 million dollars.
Frum of course isn't attacking Perry because he thinks he's too liberal, quite the opposite. But I wanted to disclose that number as an alternative.
However, Frum gives no evidence for that number, and this link says $1 million, as does every other reference I can find; Frum seems to be an outlier in the Perry net worth guessing-game. Rick Perry: Net worth: $1 million
BTW, when he was a state legislator, that was a part-time job which paid about $7200 a year -- so he wasn't really living off the public for all of his 27 years, unless you consider $7200 a living wage.
As I said, I'm guessing this attack, which was launched first by Bill White the democrat in the 2010 election, and has been resurrected in the past week by lefty blogs and David Frum, will go nowhere, simply because making $1 million in 27 years as a 61-year-old is unremarkable.
And when you look at the details, most of the money came from a couple of very fortunate deals, but deals that were out in the public, and not offered to Perry as exclusives. IN other words, this isn't the case where someone privately sold Perry land which later was found valuable. His two big deals he bought on the open market, they were available for ANYBODY to purchase, just he was smart enough or informed enough to purchase them.
In the one case, the investment was a sound one to begin with, but then Dell (of Dell computers) needed the land to get to public sewers so they paid a pretty penny for it.
Interestingly, the argument there was that somehow Perry knew that Dell would need access to the sewers, but that Dell himself did NOT know he'd need it -- hence why Dell didn't buy the land when Perry did, but rather looked at it two years later.
In the other case, it was a long-term investment where everybody who bought land in the area made a killing, not just Perry. So yes, he did profit off good investment, but not exclusively, everybody who thought it would be a good investment and bought the land made money. And there doesn't appear to be any specific government action that MADE the land suddenly worth more.
But with all of that, he's worth $1 million, or if you believe David Frum, $2.8 million. If he was trading his political connections for fortune, he didn't do a very good job.
"He does what is right regardless of whether it is popular. He walks the walk of a true conservative"
So which is it? Is the above sentiment what she really thinks or not? If not, why did she state it?
He has created two funds. One, the Texas Enterprises Fund, gives out grants to companies, many of them established companies such as the ones mentioned in this article, to locate facilities in Texas when they otherwise might locate them somewhere else. The Texas Enterprise Fund does not have as part of its mission statement that applicants must be start-ups. Is there any question that the companies mentioned in this article received funds from the Texas Enterprise Fund?
The other fund is the Texas Emerging Technology Fund which has as its purpose to invest in new technologies that otherwise would not make it into the marketplace. None of the companies mentioned in the article received an investmetn from the Texas Emerging Technology Fund.
So on this point this article is spreading inaccurate information.
Take off and nuke K Street from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
PING!
She gave a great speech yesterday. In spite of the pouring rain it was an enjoyable rally. Even after the three hour drive home, our clothes were still wet.
And she accepted.
So we just forget that and all it implies?
If you think she was taking shots at Gov Perry, you haven't been paying attention.
I'd like to elaborate on your central thesis, based upon my analysis of her speech. I now believe she's running, and will announce after Thanksgiving.
In taking on the establishment, career pols, of BOTH parties, Palin is in effect saying that the supercommittee will FAIL. I believe she's correct in this assumption. And then it will be time for the people to begin to take back their government..and she will be the one to lead the way.
>> The permanent political class can only exist on the oxygen supplied by crony capitalists, who “pay to play” <<
.
They don’t breathe oxygen at all; they’re Anerobic, like Cancer cells always are; they live by fermentation causing political Cachexia in Washington.