http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55l5cWTPy3o&feature=related
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.
Yeah, most voters know all about President Reagan’s background and leadership of the SAG, his GE theatre work and all that. You mean the same people who can’t name the current vice president or tell you how many inches are in a foot? The ones showcased on “JayWalking” on the Tonight Show?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55l5cWTPy3o&feature=related
When Ms. Palin was asked afterward her speech if she had Mr. Perry in mind, she replied, “I want all of our GOP candidates to take the opportunity to kill corporate capitalism that is leading to this cronyism, which is ruining our economy.”
I'm all for fair criticism when it is warranted, but let's not let street theater substitute for facts, ok?
Sounds to me like Politico is playing a win - win game:
1. Make Republicans/Conservatives tear into one another.
2. Sell a news story because of the controversy.
For Politico there is no downside seeing how they are liberal.
If there is no news, create it!
A five second snippet, without context, unsure if this was solicited... is used against Perry in an attempt to create “guilt by association?” That's ignorance. But I will tell what is for sure. I and many others will not support ANY candidate that violates the 11th commandment, even if it's through surrogates.
This sort of stuff is nonsense.
It's based on perceptions and has zero substance. It's counterproductive to Republican or Conservative interests. The only folks that that benefit are the liberals, the news media, and the “feelings” of some devout supporter of a specific candidate that thinks they have it right and is on their crusade.
That quote isn’t from politico but from the WSJ
It seems Perry has been silent on the problem of crony capitalism, even though it is one of the biggest problems of our time—one that is helping to take our country down.
Maybe I’m wrong, maybe Governor Perry has spoken out about it. But if he hasn’t, I would say his silence is enough evidence to convict him.
Sarah DID NOT *ATTACK* anyone
She made correct political observations that apply to all of Washington in general.
The media WANTS all the candidates to start slinging mud.
You should change your tagline to “childish” based on the posts you’ve made in this thread. I’m personally a Palin supporter, and to me the jury’s still out on Perry on the unlikely chance that Palin doesn’t run.
But posting silly pictures doesn’t help your stated cause any. The fact is that the “BoA incident” above was a piece of street theater agitprop, and serves no purpose in a FACTUAL discussion of the candidates (and likely candidates).
Here's the point, for the liberals having the conservatives tear each other apart is a blessing and the media (mostly liberal) will make a buck of that deal all day long.
You have a few candidate “fill in the blank” supporters on the conservative side falling for the bait and essentially making themselves into useful idiots for the opposition. At the end of the day they are only discrediting their own candidate and cause. On the Freerepublic the attacks on Romney and Perry are predominately because they are the front runners and fan clubs of other candidates feel they have to engage in mud slinging to further their cause.
You still haven’t given me an example, have you?
Perry hasn't spoken out about the Indo-Sino war on 1962 either! Maybe he secretly supports the Chinese.
What are you smoking?
That's because Reagan was honest and had no problem ADMITTING he had been a LIBERAL New Deal Democrat and was WRONG when he supported socialists for office.
Quite a contrast to Rick Perry and his fan club continually insisting Perry was a patriotic "conservative Southern Democrat" and so was Al Gore when they campaigned together in the 80s.
Not to mention Reagan realized the error of his ways over a decade before he ran for office as a Republican. Had he followed Rick Perry's career path, he would have chaired Hubert Humphrey's California campaign a year before joining the GOP, and excused it by claiming "Humphrey was a conservative back in 1960 and California Democrats were THE conservative party at that time, probably more right-wing than the national Republicans"
Had Sarah run for office in Texas instead of Alaska, she would have been 9-0 in elections. Texas is about as safe as it gets for the GOP.
Go to MichelleMalkin.com You’ll find plenty.
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.
