Posted on 09/06/2011 10:21:51 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sarah Palin's speech in Iowa was a political work of art. I mean this as a compliment in the sense of pure political analysis. I certainly don't agree with much of what Palin would do if elected. However, her populist attack on crony capitalism is a direct hit for the kind of politics that would work in 2012 against Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, as well as against Barack Obama and both parties in Washington.
I have previously suggested that Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann should launch an attack against Rick Perry's "pay for play" special interest giveways in Texas. I believe Perry is a phony conservative and have compared his style to that of Rod Blagojevich. It is not conservative to take Obama stimulus, then raise campaign money from donors who benefit from receiving government grants and serving on government boards and agencies.
I still believe it is unlikely Palin runs in 2012. But if she does, her Iowa speech on Saturday will be a prelude to attacks she will make against Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, who both embody the crony capitalism that Palin condemns.
Given the choice of Sarah Palin,Romney or Perry who would be your conservative choice. Obama is unelectable so you are choosing a President here.
Hey, it’s “Politico.”
Or, as we call it around my house, “Crappio.”
I know what! Why doesn’t someone just ask her?
Geesh
“You might well think that. I couldn’t possibly comment.”
Jeez, the people who keep saying this are dense.
I disagree with Budowsky’s “analysis.”
The whole problem with the crony capitalism portion of the speech is if moderate voters hear, “let’s end crony capitalism” they’ll all be like , “Yeah, Alright!”. If you say, “Let’s end corporate taxes.” the same people will be saying, “No corporations don’t pay enough!”.
But that the real truth isn't it? The Leftists are not worried about "crony capitalism" they just want the Right to be politically disarmed so their idol Present-ident 0 can keep his job.
If Sarah ever decides to attack Perry directly, she better pack a lunch. She should also remember that Perry is 9-0 in elections, while Sarah is 4-2. Perry knows what it takes to win - he is the only truly "Undefeated" candidate in the race. And while I don't think Perry would attack Sarah first, he has already shown that he is not going to be deterred from responding forcefully to attacks just because she is a woman. (You can ask KBH and Debra Medina about that.) And if Sarah attacks first, she can't fall back on the "poor little woman being attacked by a big, mean man" routine.
We shall see. One of those “defeats” you mentioned was as the running mate of arguably the worst major party presidential candidate since the Republic was founded. VP nominees don’t win elections. But you know that. BTW, how many of the nine wins of Perry’s was a Republican and how many as a Democrat?
>>> ... her populist attack on crony capitalism is a direct hit for ... <<<
The only part of the article I agree. The rest -
Nope!
or
http://dancingczars.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/transcript-sarah-palins-iowa-speech/
I don't see the “attacks” politico is talking about. Not only does she NOT use the names of these candidates, it is completely a matter of “loose” interpretation by the author of the article to assume she was at all addressing these two candidates or that there is a connection at all. Made up news. Controversy sells the story, even if it's lies.
Palin’s advantage is she has truth on her side.
Crony capitalism—corruption in general—is the enemy of our kind of conservatism. A crony capitalist Republican president is, in principle and as time goes on in practice, no different than Obama.
If Perry doesn’t refudiate crony capitalism, he loses more than just the nomination.
6 times as a Republican, 3 times as a conservative Southern Democrat. Trust me, the fact that he was once a "Reagan Democrat" will be a non-factor. Too many people remember that Reagan was a liberal New Deal Democrat until well into his late 30's, and he turned out to be the greatest conservative of the 20th Century.
2DV, I honestly cannot remember anytime in my life when things were as bad as they are now. I suspect most people are so desperate for jobs—for themselves, friends, or loved ones—that they won’t care how they were created. Their focus will be on who they think is most likely to bring back jobs.
This doesn’t mean that crony capitalism is not a problem. It most certainly is. I am just not sure that the electorate will be as concerned about it in 2012 as with getting the unemployed back to work.
Living here in Wylie Texas, I really can't see your “crony capitalism” argument.
Can you give me concrete examples other than these vague emotional statements of where Perry is allegedly a “crony capitalist?”
[I still believe it is unlikely Palin runs in 2012.]
I find that to be a totally bizarre statement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.