Saturday, November 14, 2009

Newsweek Tries to Be Clever, Fails

Newsweek attempted to be clever in a cover story on Sarah Palin (no link to their drivel). Alas, they failed.

From David Kopel:

The cover of next week’s Newsweek features a picture of Sarah Palin, along with the headline “How do you solve a problem like Sarah?” The cover is one more example of the periodical’s positioning itself as the ideas journal for people who think that the New York Times’ in-house editorials are middle-of-road, but have too many big words. And of the magazine’s cultural disconnect from much of the United States.

To wit: “How do you solve a problem like Maria?” is an early song in The Sound of Music, which won the 1965 Academy Award for Best Picture.


[T]he question “How do you solve a problem like Sarah?’ provides its own answer, at least to people who know the film from which the song comes: Make her the President of the United States.

I’m not arguing for or against Palin for President–just observing that, as is so often the case, the Palin-hating media are less clever than they think, and end up inadvertently making her stronger.

From AoSHQ (strong language warning):

Dear Newsweek,

Maria was the hero of that musical. And she proved the s****** who called her a "problem" way, way wrong.

From Allahpundit at Hot Air:

[W]hat is there to say? The mainstream leftist take on Palin should be familiar to the point of utter banality by now... Andy Levy calls the two articles some of the laziest political writing he’s ever read...

If that’s not enough Newsweek for you, enjoy senior editor Michael Hirsh wringing his hands this morning on CBS over Palin’s “disturbing” vindictiveness. This comes on the same day, mind you, that news is breaking about how Anita Dunn’s fantastically petty attack on Fox News did indeed come from the top, likely ordered by a guy who’s been known to act out the fantasy deaths of his political enemies with a steak knife.

And from NewsBusters:

Mike Allen of Politico previewed the cover in the Nov. 14 edition of his "Playbook." In it, he included these comments from Newsweek editor John Meacham who blamed Palin for Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., struggles with his conservative base in South Carolina. One of those struggles for Graham was his acknowledgment that climate change is a manmade phenomenon in need of a so-called "compromise," And that backlash is somehow former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's fault.

I seem to recall another attempt by Newsweek to be clever: Intentionally shrinking its already plummeting readership. Good luck with that, Newsweek.


HarperCollins Orders Second Run of "Going Rogue"

Mike Allen at Politico reports:

HarperCollins has gone back to press on “Going Rogue,” so the number of shipped books will be well over 1.5. Prepaid orders on Amazon alone are over 80,000.

A second printing before the book has even hit store shelves. Seems quite impressive to me.

Why all this success amid myriad hit pieces? Don Surber says:

Conservatives know why Palin is still standing — and standing taller today than those who tried to bring her down. What does not kill you makes you stronger.


I am trying to determine how incompetent a politician must be if he cannot get elected president with a running mate who, simply upon announcement of the book’s publication, make[s] a book the nation’s No. 1 best-seller.

Read the whole thing.


The National Post: The Second Coming of Sarah Palin

Earlier this week the National Post of Canada contacted me, stated they were doing an article to be published the weekend before Governor Palin's Going Rogue hit bookstores, and asked for an interview. They apparently see this book as her "second coming," the first being her emergence on the national scene during the 2008 election campaign.

Sheldon Alberts asked questions about a variety of topics, including the governor's upcoming book, my initial reaction to her VP nomination, my being in Alaska when she announced her resignation and then transferred power to Sean Parnell, her role in the GOP, and, of course, what I envision for her future.

When asked about 2012, I stated how unconventional, yet politically astute, Governor Palin is:

"If she decides to run in 2012, I think we are going to see something that is going to shock many people," said Adrienne Ross, an English teacher from Hudson, N.Y., and a blogger with

We also spent some time discussing Governor Palin's impact on the special election in the NY 23rd Congressional District with her endorsement of Doug Hoffman over Dede Scozzafava.

Alberts writes:

Her endorsement this month of a rebel Conservative Party candidate over a moderate Republican in an upstate New York congressional race almost single-handedly raised the election to national prominence.


What is encouraging for Palin supporters, and disturbing to her critics, is that she wielded such influence from a distance. Who needs appearances on Washington's Sunday political talk shows when penning a few short sentences on Facebook will get you on the front page?

While he points out the power the governor possesses to influence important races within the nation (which amounted to arousing an influx of support for a 3rd Party candidate and causing the RINO turncoat candidate to quit) he also exposes the fear Governor Palin conjures up within people on both the Left and the Right. We're seeing a lot of that the last few days as people are scrambling like roaches to kill the book before it kills them.

Fear, yes--and jealousy.

All the attention paid to Ms. Palin is starting to grate on other potential 2012 Republican candidates.

"I'm glad she's getting the props -- I know I'm not nearly as attractive," Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, groused recently.

This, of course, was Huckabee whining this week that she gets more attention because she's more attractive.

At least Huck is honest--and pitiful--enough to state he so desperately wants the governor out of his way.

The article also highlights the absolute stupidity of those on the Left who pretend that her sticking around is good for their cause.

David Plouffe, Barack Obama's former campaign manager, recently described Ms. Palin as the "pied piper" of the GOP, leading a shrinking rump of right-wing Republicans.

"I think she'll be most helpful to the Democratic Party with a high profile. I hope her book tour lasts two years," he told the San Francisco Chronicle.

To which Palin supporters say, be careful what you wish for.

"If they didn't view her as a threat, they wouldn't spend so much time on her," Ms. Ross said.

That's no rocket science assessment I made--just common sense.

We really don't know what Governor Palin may be planning for the future, but one thing is for sure, and the National Post knows it: with the publication of Going Rogue and the launch of her book tour, she's got the world's attention--and that's a good thing.

Like other avid supporters who made Ms. Palin's memoir a bestseller before publication, Ms. Ross said she "can't wait" until the book arrives and she'll make the four-hour drive to the Barnes & Noble bookstore in Rochester, N.Y., for a planned Palin appearance on Nov. 21.

"People are excited that we finally get the opportunity to hear her tell her story, without the [media] filter," she said. "There is nothing like getting it from the source."

Read the entire article here.

* NOTE: Actually, Governor Palin is signing books at Borders Books and Music in Rochester, not Barnes and Noble as the article states.


Answering the call

“When great perils threaten the state, one often sees the people fortunately choose the most appropriate citizens to save it. It has been remarked that when a danger presses, man rarely remains at his habitual level; he elevates himself well above or falls below … but it is more common to see, among nations as among men, extraordinary virtue born of the very imminence of danger.” –Alexis de Toqueville, Democracy in America (V. 1, Part 2.5)

For obvious reasons, I repeat: “…one often sees the people fortunately choose the most appropriate citizens to save it…

When Toqueville wrote these words, the Frenchman was 25, reflecting on his recently completed assignment in America circa 1831. His job was to take a survey of the American penal system, and the result was then and remains the most astute and sweeping observation about American life, culture and politics ever quill-and-inked. I’m a lover of stereotypical French culture, yet even the most Freedom-Fried among us owe a debt to France for three things: The Statue of Liberty, French cuisine, and Alexis de Toqueville.

I do not believe that the young Sarah Heath dreamed of being a powerful national political figure as a child, nor I do not believe that, even a decade ago, she could have imagined the beautiful storm she has created and now stage-directs. Her rise has been unthinkable, impossible, and fantastic, and barring an IQ that approaches that of Goethe, there is no defense to be launched off the Battleship Premise that she was the designer of history as we see it.

Nope, I would guess she was like many of the girls I grew up with in Oklahoma in my equally rural, unsophisticated surroundings: she wanted to graduate high school, go to college, find a mate, have children, and build a life. Like most Americans, she wanted to take what her parents gave her and build on said offerings, continuing the strange American notion of doing better than one’s parents, and leaving better for one’s children. Prior to the election of Pres. Obama, this was referred to as “The American Dream.”

I’m struck by Toqueville’s phrasing: “…when danger presses, man rarely remains at his habitual level; he elevates himself well above or falls below…”

What began as a shot at the city council of Wasilla in the go-go Clinton 90s has metastasized into one of America’s most compelling political odysseys. While on the right we can quibble, bicker, extrapolate, debate and pontificate what it means to be a Conservative, yet for a growing number there is a very simple litmus test: what do you think of Sarah Palin?

While other Conservatives wobble over the simplest of questions, Sarah Palin – unlike any contemporary political figure – has elevated herself not because, but in spite of Conservative elite opinion. With virtually no backing and only grassroots support from forums like this, she has taken up the late William Buckley’s call, strode across history’s track and yelled “Stop!” When she threw her support behind Doug Hoffman in NY-23, she turned a parochial political contest into a national debate, and she did so by letting the country know that the Big Dog was off the porch.

Meanwhile, days after the contest is done, Rom and Huck are still focus-grouping it.
One can argue the merits of Sarah Palin just as one can ask why the pissed-off bull is in the China cabinet – the time for debating Gov. Palin’s existence as an influential national figure has come and gone, and now the larger question is simple: where do you stand?

We Palinistas have exiled many, the Noonans, Parkers and Buckleys of the world, and we are wary of even our staunchest kinsmen – with a wary eye we watch Charles Krauthammer, who has slowly evolved into the wisest Ent among Conservatives even as he lashes out repeatedly at Gov. Palin, and as we watch the train-wreck, we want Kristol to grab Krauthammer by the collar and shake him, shouting “Dammit man! Do you not realize how close we are?!?”

We repeat the phrase “they just don’t get it” while wishing they would. If “we” sounds elitist in its own, strange way, so be it: We’ve kicked a helluva lot of fair-weather friends to the curb, and all have impotently bore witness to their influence’s decline. While David Frum is onanistically debating naming rights to his digital Smurf Village, Noonan and Parker are holding self-healing couch-sessions via broadsheet upon realizing The One ain’t even a Deuce.

I don’t particularly care whether the young Sarah Heath wanted to be the President any more than I care whether a woman my age a decade ago, mayor of a small town I’d never heard of in a state I’ve never visited, was hatching a plan to lead the country. What I do care about, quite passionately, is that suddenly, we have a man leading the country who is obviously, patently unqualified to do so, and there is exactly one person with the voice, bearing and media-savvy willing to point this fact out.

Some people are born leaders, and others happen to find themselves in a position to lead. This country needs confidence. Not the shallow kind buttressed by foam pillars and weak exaltations, but a sturdy voice and a steady hand to remind Americans we have nothing to apologize for, that our nation is the greatest driving force for good in human history. Gov. Palin has been tapped by the fates for this calling, and millions of us are optimistic, thankful she answered the call.


Politico and the Art of the One-Sided Story

As we've already noted, the Associated Press illegally obtained a copy of Gov. Palin's book to give themselves and others a chance to misreport it and put a negative spin on it before she could legally reply. Predictably, among the "others" following suit with a hatchet piece is Politico, which saw fit to run a completely one-sided piece by Andy Barr (what, was Jonathan Martin busy?) giving the McCain campaign point of view unchallenged and unbalanced by any countervailing comments, facts, or observations.

Of course, they can't admit to having done so, which leads to perhaps the most galling single line in the story, its final line: "Palin did not respond to a request for comment." Of course she didn't, as she couldn't, as they knew she couldn't when they made the request—she's currently embargoed from commenting on the book because of contracts negotiated for interviews that have not yet run. (One suspects Oprah's not very happy with the AP at this point.) Their request for comment was a pure sham. Had Barr actually been interested in doing anything other than writing an utterly slanted attack piece, he wouldn't have contacted Gov. Palin, he would have contacted Randy Scheunemann, Steve Biegun and other McCain campaign staffers who stayed loyal to Gov. Palin (when Steve Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace decided to try to blame the failure of the campaign on her instead of taking it themselves) and asked them what they remembered. But Barr didn't want to do that—it might have called the credibility of his hit piece into question.

Which is exactly what it deserves. Though the bulk of his quotes come from the self-justifying Mark Salter, Salter doesn't actually contradict what we've seen of Gov. Palin's book—he simply offers a lot of carefully-phrased consultant-speak. For it to sound like Salter is attacking her, Barr needed a rhetorical body blow, which Salter could then seem to be reinforcing. As such, people can take Salter's quotes as meaning more than he actually said, which is disingenuous at best on Barr's part.

More disingenuous is the source of Barr's body blow, which comes a quote from "former McCain strategist John Weaver." In fact, this is worse than merely disingenuous, because Barr lets the uninformed reader assume that Weaver was with the campaign when Palin arrived; he doesn't talk about the fact that Weaver became a former McCain strategist in the summer of 2007—nor does he mention why that was. For that, consider what David Brooks wrote in February 2008:

The staff of the McCain campaign had a rude awakening last Jan. 25th. They opened The Washington Post and found a front-page story linking McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, to the Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska. Who, some wondered, was feeding damaging information about Davis to the press?

Speculation inevitably settled, as it must in McCain World, upon John Weaver. For nearly a decade, stories about the inner workings of the McCain apparatus inevitably involved the Weaver-Davis rivalry. These two McCain advisers share a mutual hatred, one McCainiac told me Thursday, that is total, absolute and blinding.

The tensions, which divided the McCain presidential campaign until Weaver was forced out last summer, exist on many levels. . . .

Weaver is a renegade. He has a darker personality.

The occasion for Brooks' column was the story the New York Times ran in February of '08 in which they implied that John McCain had had an affair with a lobbyist, and that his behavior with her was politically as well as personally inappropriate.

At the core of that article that began on the front page are two anonymous sources. These sources, according to the article, say they confronted McCain in 1999 with their concerns that he was risking his career by interacting with Vicki Iseman. As a columnist, I’m an independent operator, speaking for myself alone. I have no idea who those sources are. But they are bound to come from the inner circle of the McCain universe. The number of people who could credibly claim to have had a meeting like that with McCain in early 1999 is vanishingly small. I count a small handful of associates with that stature, including Davis and Weaver. There is nobody in that tight circle unaffected by the hostilities that emanate from the rift.

Thursday, as McCain was fervently and completely denying the allegations of an affair with Iseman, people in all quarters of the McCain universe were vehemently denying it, too. But even on this embattled day, they broke down into rival camps over the identity of the sources.

Many in the Davis camp argued Thursday that Weaver must be the chief anonymous source, and that he had roped in one other confederate. He’s had a hard life, they said, and is driven by demons.

Their conclusion was reasonable, with one small correction: Weaver wasn't an anonymous source, he was in fact the only source named in the article. Having been forced out, he publicly contributed to, and probably instigated, a hatchet job on his former boss—a hatchet job so poorly supported that the McCain campaign beat the Times bloody over it, resulting in the interesting spectacle of the NYT's executive editor, Bill Keller, blaming the NYT's readers for the fiasco.

In short, Barr used for the core of his attack on Gov. Palin a source who simply is not credible, both because of his personal track record and because he was long gone from the McCain campaign when Gov. Palin came on the scene. Any competent reporter would have known this—but Weaver's willing to play dirty and he's willing to play nasty, and that's what Barr wanted, so he ran the quotes anyway. Shame on him. And shame on Politico for running it.

And for that matter, shame on Salter and the rest of the McCain staffers (though Weaver is probably beyond shame) for their willingness to be used like this, to the detriment of their party and of their former boss—because the only thing this kind of wrangling does for him is to remind people just how badly his campaign was run—if only it will help them convince a few people that the failure of that campaign was everybody's fault but theirs. Clearly, they're looking out for no one but themselves and no cause but their own, and it's truly pathetic. Dan Riehl has their number:

It's hard to not laugh at these nitwits who ran such a dismal campaign, then spent months blaming Palin from the shadows, having suddenly discovered self-righteous anger so they can start to pop off, again. They should give up professional campaigning, buy up some tents and animals, traveling the back roads of America from now on. At least then people wouldn't cringe when they found out Schmidt's circus was coming to town. Their biggest challenge might be getting Nicole Wallace to grow a beard. But she's made herself over so many times, it might be worth a shot.

Meet the losers behind the loser McCain. Funny that so many people associated with the effort who don't cling to the camera for a living believe they were even worse than the book would seem to make out. If some of the old line politicians are the first people who have to get out of Washington because they stayed too long, they need to pack up their hack consultants incapable of dealing with politics, technology and new media today to run a truly effective campaign.

At least Palin has options and a huge following. These idiots can look forward to running races for drunken Ward bosses and county sheriffs if there's any justice in the world. They don't even appear to know when to shut-up. Not a big surprise, the alleged top guys in the campaign always did seem to be competing with the candidate for media face time. I wonder who they were really working for in the end? If it was McCain, the campaign, their many subsequent excuses and the final result tell you all you need to know about that.

When Riehl calls them "McCain's morons," he's not blowing smoke. In the end, their defense comes down to this: "We're the savvy ones, we're the ones who know how to run a campaign, and Palin was the stupid one who doesn't." Well, given how badly that campaign ended, and given how effectively Gov. Palin has been campaigning against the President's agenda with just a fraction of the resources they had at their command, how credible a position is that, anyway? If it's a contest based on who's proven themselves the more politically effective, who are you going to believe—the guys who went down in flames, or the woman who's still going?


Mark Steyn: Rogue's Eleven

Yesterday, we discussed the Pearl Harbor-like sneak attack on Governor Palin by the AP. The AP obtained an illegal copy of Going Rogue and distorted it beyond recognition in a pathetically transparent attempt to help out their fellow traveler, Barack Obama, by trying to frame Governor Palin's narrative before she can do so herself. The AP then went even further and devoted ten reporters to "fact-check" a few of the distorted elements in the book which we addressed in another post yesterday. Today Mark Steyn, in a post for the National Review, pokes fun at the AP's descent from their previous status as a respected news organization to their current status as nothing more than an arm of the Obama White House:

If you wonder why American newspapering is dying, consider this sign-off:

AP writers Matt Apuzzo, Sharon Theimer, Tom Raum, Rita Beamish, Beth Fouhy, H. Josef Hebert, Justin D. Pritchard, Garance Burke, Dan Joling and Lewis Shaine contributed to this report.

Wow. That's ten "AP writers" plus Calvin Woodward, the AP writer whose twinkling pen honed the above contributions into the turgid sludge of the actual report. That's 11 writers for a 695-word report. What on? Obamacare? The Iranian nuke program? The upcoming trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

No, the Associated Press assigned 11 writers to "fact-check" Sarah Palin's new book, and in return the 11 fact-checkers triumphantly unearthed six errors. That's 1.8333333 writers for each error. What earth-shattering misstatements did they uncover for this impressive investment? Stand well back:

PALIN: Says she made frugality a point when traveling on state business as Alaska governor, asking "only" for reasonably priced rooms and not "often" going for the "high-end, robe-and-slippers" hotels.

THE FACTS: Although she usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard)...

That looks like AP paid 1.8333333 fact-checkers to agree with Mrs Palin: She says she didn't "often" go for "high-end" hotels; they say she "usually opted for less-pricey hotels". That's gonna make one must-see edition of "Point/Counterpoint".

Or is AP arguing "four nights" counts as "often"? Is that the point? AP assigned 11 reporters to demonstrate that four is a large number?

Over at Powerline, John Hinderaker and his vast team of researchers (17 Minneapolis-area Somali jihadists, 29 Acorn-accredited child-sex slaves, and 43 unemployed Columbia School of Journalism graduates) fact-check AP's fact-checkers.

Coming next:

PALIN: How many AP fact-checkers does it take to change a lightbulb?

FACT: Palin has gone seriously "rogue" in her facts here. AP fact-checkers are prevented per union regulations from changing lightbulbs

AP writers Matt Apuzzo, Sharon Theimer, Tom Raum, Rita Beamish, Beth Fouhy, H. Josef Hebert, Justin D. Pritchard, Garance Burke, Dan Joling and Lewis Shaine contributed to this joke. We'll be here all week.

(H/T K. Carpenter)


Saturday Open Thread

ESPN: NCAA Football: Week Eleven Schedule

ESPN: NCAA Football: Week Eleven Rankings NFL: Week Ten Schedule

AJC: Greenville HS football coach remains undefeated, even against fierce illness

KHBS: Special Olympics Catches Flag Football Fever


Andrew R. Heinze: What Health Reform Will Do to My Insurance

In an article for The Wall Street Journal, Andrew R. Heinze, a Democrat, notes that the main result of ObamaCare will be to make health care insurance more expensive:

I'm a registered Democrat living in New York City, and I buy my own health insurance. But now, having seen the health-care reform bill that passed the House, I'm preparing for life without health insurance. And unless I'm the only person covered under the Empire Blue Cross/Blue Shield "Tradition Plus" plan, a lot of other people will end up just like me, uninsured.

I will gain one thing, though—an annual fine for losing my insurance. The exact amount of that fine isn't clear yet, but so far it looks like I'll be paying about the same amount—$2,000 a year—for having no insurance as I do now for having it.

Let's get specific. What is the "Tradition Plus" plan that I've purchased each year since moving to New York in 2006? It's a hospitalization plan. If an accident or illness puts me in the hospital, all my hospital expenses are covered. Why is it so affordable? Because it covers only hospital expenses. Any fees from a physician who is not a hospital employee (i.e., who bills the patient privately) I would pay out of pocket.


The House health-care reform bill hinges on what it calls a "qualified" health-care plan. Individuals will be required by law either to buy a plan that meets the criteria of a qualified health-care plan or pay a fine. What are those criteria? They're the basic components of a comprehensive HMO-type plan, which means that Empire's "Tradition Plus" will not qualify because it covers only hospital costs. In other words, if President Obama signs into law the kind of health-care reform bill that is currently on the table, I will have only two choices: buy an expensive qualified plan or pay a fine for being uninsured.

More here. Mr. Heinze pretty much backs up what Governor Palin said in her Facebook Note yesterday: That many people will simply opt out of buying an extremely expensive Obama-approved health care plan and choose to pay the fine instead. I guess that's change we can believe in...


Governor Palin Events Calendar


Friday, November 13, 2009

Really Late Night Open Thread

I thought you guys could use a little late-night breather.

-Matthew Continetti from the Weekly Standard notes that "[w]e'll have to wait until Tuesday to see the actual contents of the book. But, by the AP's own biased reporting, it seems that it will be filled with policy indeed."

-Palin's Book Tour Builds on Effective Web Strategy is the title to the feature/headline article for tomorrow's Wall Street Journal.

-Governor Palin will reportedly "be a keynote speaker at the Sierra-Cascade Logging Conference in Redding on Feb. 8" and will reportedly stop in Redding during her book tour.

-The Oklahoma media is reporting that Governor Palin will also visit Hastings as part of her book tour. What the Oklahoma media is not reporting is that it was beaten to the story by C4P contributor Creede Kurtz.

-Thanks to Jake Tapper for highlighting Governor Palin's most recent Facebook post about 9/11 Defendants.

-According to Rasmussen, Michelle Bachmann is more popular in terms of net approval than either Barack Obama or Tim Pawlenty in the state of Minnesota (not just in her Congressional district). Keep in mind that even Reagan couldn't win Minnesota against either Carter or Mondale.

So Cruela and Lakersfan, who's going to win tonight's feature NBA game? It's a bad sign for the Nuggets if they cannot beat the Lake Show (sans Gasol) on the second end of a back to back.

Update: The Nuggets appear to have this one.

Anyway, ABC has put up the Barbara Walters/Sarah Palin promotion video:

And you can check out some pictures from both the Babara Walters and Oprah Winfrey interviews here.


Who is dumb?

Certainly every person in this country is entitled to their own opinion, including Ann Althouse.

However, if a person chooses to write a blog, their opinions need, at the very least, to make just a little sense. In this case, Ann Althouse does not make sense.

She titled a post on her blog, "Sarah Palin is dumb."

Ms. Althouse, if you wanted to call Governor Palin stupid, perhaps you should have chosen to maybe, umm... not look like such a blithering idiot yourself.

How is it that anyone with common sense can take these two statements written in the same blog post, and come to the same conclusions you did, Ms. Althouse?

Ms. Althouse on Nicolle Wallace (a former McCain campaign senior staffer):

Had to trust? Because of your limited experience? Who else would you trust? Wallace was pushing for her own former employer, CBS! Her recommendation of Couric had an element of self-interest and should have been discounted.

So, according to Ms. Althouse, Palin should not have trusted the staffer assigned to her.

Apparently, they were afraid you were not ready, and they were right, so why didn't you trust them or at least accept that you owed them control over the presidential campaign? You agreed to take the subordinate position, and you had to know that their reasons for picking you had to do with image and style. If you weren't prepared to do it their way, you should not have accepted the part.

Now Ms. Althouse thinks Palin should have trusted the McCain campaign, which, presumably, would include the people who staffed it.

Either Governor Palin was stupid for listening to the McCain campaign or she was stupid for not listening to the McCain campaign. Please, Ms. Althouse, pick a side to argue.

Ace over at AoSHQ has a post addressing this quote from Ms. Althouse:

Why didn't you have a say [about what media you were interviewed by]? There's that "really" hedging: You didn't really have a say. You're pleading passivity and impotence but you want us to think you have what it takes to be President of the United States?

Ace says, in part:

Althouse's analysis seems to easily gloss over the fact that John McCain really was the boss here, and Sarah Palin really was the underling.

Please go read his post in its entirety.

Of course, all of this comes from Ms. Althouse reading two pages of a 400+ page book. It's always a great idea to write about opinions that you formed by reading less than 0.5% of what you're discussing, isn't it?

Since it's clear that Ms. Althouse doesn't know what she's talking about here, what was the purpose of her writing this post? Perhaps she plans to follow in Kathleen Parker’s footsteps. Calling Governor Palin stupid may actually get her on MSNBC. Yippee!

Of course, all of Ms. Althouse’s credibility will be lost when she sets foot on the MSNBC parking lot. Who cares about that, when you get to hang with the dreamy and spiritually uplifting Keith Olbermann, right?

Could you do us a favor, Ms. Althouse?

When you cross paths with Kathleen Parker and Nicolle Wallace at the MSNBC studios, could you tell them that the ordinary barbarians at C4P said “hi” and give them a great big Alaska bear hug for us? Those ladies will need lots of hugs over the next few weeks, it is going to be a bumpy ride.

One more question, Ms. Althouse... Are you still seeing Barack Obama in your dreams? I am just curious.

And please pick a side of the road to drive on, Ms. Althouse.

Update: RSM says:

[Professor Althouse] ask[s], why didn't Sarah Palin "have a say" in her media strategy? The answer is simple and obvious: It wasn't her campaign and it wasn't her staff.

Update II: Ms. Althouse responds here.


You Know You Are Over the Target When You Are Taking Flak

Governor Palin's book is about telling her story and setting the record straight about the 2008 campaign. Do not be surprised as the Palin haters magically appear from the past as the media asks for their valuable two cents on Governor Palin's book.

The Alaska left wing whackos will suddenly be relevant again as the lady with the toy moose (and the dropping visitor numbers to her website) will be asked for her opinion. The slanderous smear artist will once again appear on MSNBC to enlighten the 15 viewers that tune in. CelticDiva might photoshop an image of a baby boy to get some attention. And don't forget dear old Andree McCleod -- surely they can't leave her out of the fun. The possibilities are limitless. Left wing smear sites such as Media Matters will do all in their power to attack Governor Palin. MSNBC might even post fake pictures of the Governor and launch into sexist attacks on her. Oops, they already started that. The full freakazoid cast of Palin haters (or, as Ann Coulter would say, "the cast from the climactic devil worshipping scene from Rosemary's Baby") will soon emerge for another 15 minutes.

The media will go into full attack mode as Governor Palin embarks on her trip to meet with Americans across the nation, and McCain staffers will come out of the woodwork to once again cover their incompetent asses. For more than a year, the media and Palin critics across the nation have been able to tell the story of the 2008 campaign, but now it is Palin's turn.

Think of this as a running joke to call out all of the people who will be spreading more lies and making more fatuous arguments about Governor Palin in the coming weeks during her book tour. Hopefully, it will be bumped each night as new names come in.

1. Charles Krauthammer: On tonight's Special Report, Krauthammer trashed Palin's book without ever having read it. That's right -- he never read the book but feels that he's qualified to discuss its contents. You may remember that Krauthammer told Palin to "leave the room." After he told her to "leave the room" during the health care debate, he proceeded to copy the points she made in her Facebook note.

2. Nina Easton: Easton criticized Palin based on the AP reports. Like Krauthhammer, Easton has not read the book and has no idea what is in it. Easton admits to knowing Nicolle Wallace (and is now acting as her surrogate). Time to circle the wagons. Easton claims that Palin "blames others," but if you watch the clip of Governor Palin's Oprah interview you will see that she takes responsibility for the Couric interview.

3. John Weaver: Weaver claims that Palin is using her book to settle scores and that it is "revisionist history." He must have a problem with the person at the center of the campaign actually telling her own story. They are getting upset that Palin has decided to tell her own version of events instead of "McCain staffers" trashing her in the media. Weaver was fired from the McCain campaign in the summer of 2007. After he left, the McCain campaign began to make progress. Go figure. John Weaver has not read the book.

Weaver says that Palin reminds him of Jimmy Stewart's character in "Harvey." Well, that is not a bad thing as a Hotair commenter, Unclesmrgol, points out:

Not the best simile for someone trying to say “she’s lying”. In “Harvey”, Elwood (Jimmy Stewart) is the only one who can see Harvey, and the pooka is most certainly there. In fact, as becomes quite obvious, the only one who is honest and who knows what’s really going on is Elwood — and the tactics and motives of his relatives are quite disreputable. Getting back to Harvey, the “imaginary” friend is quite capable of physically affecting the world around him if he chooses.

So, if Sarah Palin is to be equivalenced to Elwood P Dowd, all the more power to her.

4. Dick Armey: He gets a post all his own. He's also never read her book.

5. Andrew Sullivan: It's hard to know what there is left to say about this loony tune. He claims that Palin did not want to sue him because of "discovery." Oh, it looks like Sullivan has a "discovery" problem of his own -- being discovered in possession of an illegal drug. It's still hard to believe that The Atlantic actually pays this guy to write. He is truly cuckoo for coco puffs. He might consider putting down the joint from time to time.


Dick Armey Living in the Past, Says Governor Palin Just a Cheerleader; Updated: Sapwolf Weighs in on Dick Armey's Comments

Dick Armey is a man I have respected for years. In my opinion, he was the real intellectual force (not Newt Gingrich) behind the so-called Republican Revolution of 1994. He is a libertarian economist and it's hard to disagree with his limited government philosophy. He is one of the original advocates of the flat tax, a position with which I agree. He rightly stood with Doug Hoffman in NY-23. But today, in an interview with Rick Klein of ABC News, he said some things that, to be blunt, caused me to lose a lot of respect for him.

First, after praising Governor Palin's ability to draw crowds, he implies that she hasn't been doing the hard work that is necessary to be a serious player in the GOP:

So she's kind having to dig herself out of a hole if she wants to regain standing for consideration for a future nomination. And by all accounts, it doesn't appear she's doing a very effective job of digging herself out of that hole.

This claim is not consistent with reality. How does Mr. Armey define "hard work"? What would Mr. Armey have her do? She has almost single-handedly been leading the opposition to Obama and his disastrous policies since July. On July 14, she published an op-ed in the Washington Post taking the Democrats to task on cap and tax and that whole plan has been on life support ever since. One of the House Bill's sponsors, Ed Markey, was so threatened by Governor Palin's op-ed he felt compelled to respond with an article in the Dailey Beast. Next John Kerry and Barbara Boxer responded with their own op-ed in The Washington Post. Despite these efforts by prominent Democrat Party leaders, cap and tax is shelved and very unlikely to pass. Before Governor Palin's involvement, it was almost sure to pass.

Next Governor Palin set her sights on ObamaCare with her famous FaceBook Note in early August that was a true game changer. Her eloquence in that note crystallized the opposition to Obama's government takeover of health care and he has been on the defensive ever since. He even felt compelled to call Governor Palin, a private citizen, a liar in front of a joint session of Congress. Of course she was telling the truth as has been borne out by a truckload of evidence since. When Mr. Armey implies she has not been doing anything, what is he talking about? Is there any other Republican who has done more? In fact, if we combine all other Republicans out there, can there be any doubts that their collective efforts have not matched the singular effort of Governor Palin in standing up to Obama?

Next, Mr. Armey tries to imply, despite all evidence to the contrary, that she can't tap into the energy of the TEA Party movement:

"You don't tap into that energy unless you join it. You've got to be there, you've got to show up. And you can't remain removed and aloof and send in a memorandum or post something on your blog, and have these folks belief that you're really part of the movement," Armey said.

"You have to really go out and walk and work among them. And I've seen very few people who are willing to do that. The fact is, these folks are saying, 'You know, the problem with all you big-shot politicians is you sit on your pedestals and make your pronouncements. Why don't you join us? Get on the street. And go to work for something. Roll up your sleeves and be involved with us.' "

"And they don't have a lot of time for someone who stands removed and says, 'Right on.' They're not looking for a cheerleader; they're looking for a captain of the team," Armey said.

There are so many problems with what Mr. Armey says here. First, Mr. Armey implies that Governor Palin can't tap into the Tea Party energy because she hasn't come to any TEA Parties. This is nonsense. Everything I've read suggests that she is by far the most popular leader to the TEA Party attendees. Alex Knepper of the website is aware of this:

Sarah Palin was without a doubt the unsaid queen of the 9/12 March. Of the many people I interviewed, about a dozen expressed solid support for a Palin candidacy, with all of the others at least open to supporting her.


“All eyes are on Sarah Palin,” a man said. “Without her, McCain would have lost in a landslide.”

“Palin is from outside the Beltway. They hate her down here in D.C., and that’s why we need her,” one woman said to me.

This eye-witness account from the 9/12 March in DC would certainly contradict Armey's claim. He should know better since his FreedomWorks organization has been associated with the TEA Party movement since its beginning. Mr. Armey's position is also hard to justify given the events in NY-23. To be sure, Armey was one of the first to support Doug Hoffman in his third party bid to beat Bill Owens and Dede Scozzafava. But let's be realistic; Hoffman's candidacy was languishing in third place until Governor Palin's big October 22nd endorsement. This was truly the game changer in NY-23. Although Hoffman eventually came up a little short, he never would have even been in the game if Governor Palin hadn't endorsed him. Her endorsement was followed by the endorsements of quite a few Republican fence sitters and unleashed a flood of money and volunteers into Hoffman's campaign. This is the TEA Party energy that Armey claims Governor Palin can't tap into. I suspect that the vast majority of those patriots who put their lives on hold and answered the call to help Doug Hoffman didn't do so because of, for example, Tim Pawlenty's belated endorsement.

Armey really steps in it when he claims Governor Palin is just a "cheerleader". I don't know if he's being misogynistic or merely obtuse, but either way this is beneath the Dick Armey I thought I knew. I'd like to think he's simply having difficulty grasping the possibilities that technology allows in the hands of the right person. Governor Palin has always been a pioneer, both in spirit and in practice. This is who she is and how she has conducted her previous campaigns. She has never done things the conventional way. Perhaps Mr. Armey is unable to grasp the fact that yes, she can and is leading the modern conservative movement in a new and, perhaps, unconventional way. He is living in the past and needs to realize that there are new and better ways of doing things. As someone who has long supported Mr. Armey and his brand of libertarian conservatism for years, I hope this is the reason for his ill-conceived comments today.

Today in a piece for Commentary Magazine, John Podhoretz writes that whatever Governor Palin's is doing to remain an influential player in American polictics is working just fine:

...Sarah Palin is dominating the news once again in advance of the release of her book. Which is to say, front-page stories, the lead stories on the morning shows, all using tiny tidbits of information about the book and a few clips from Monday’s Oprah. Whatever Sarah Palin is, she is also, as all this makes clear, a huge star. With the very prominent exception of Barack Obama, she’s the sensation in American politics this decade. And a person who can make news just by opening her mouth is a person to be reckoned with, a person who is not going away, a person who is going to play a role in American politics for a long time.

It is clear, to say the least, that Mr. Podhoretz has a much better grasp on Governor Palin's influence than Mr. Armey. Dick Armey can either get on board and help, or step aside.

Update by Doug: Intrepid C4P Reader and commenter "Sapwolf" wrote to Dick Armey today to convey his thoughts:

Dick really f’ed up on TV going after Sarah Palin.

Almost every Tea Partier I've encountered thinks very highly of Sarah Palin. She has been working hard since the election and Dick’s dumb*ss comments hurt the movement, not help it. Quit breaking Reagan’s 11th Commandment.

Without her endorsement in NY-23, Hoffman would have finished third in that race and we never would have won the battle to force Dede out of the race, thereby successfully sending a message to the GOP in NY and DC to not push leftist candidates on us.

Get a clue!

You play right into the statist's hands when you insult or ridicule others on OUR SIDE.

I was starting to think FreedomWorks might be an organization to latch onto, but now I find it's simply a vehicle for Dick Armey to push his insider agenda and probably back Pawlenty, or some other moderate to liberal squish, in the GOP primary for 2012.

We have enough problems with Obama and the Dems trying to turn this country into Venezuela and you people decide to declare war on the ONE bright person who honestly and ferociously fights the statists at the national level while ALL of the other possible POTUS candidates disgrace themselves by not standing up for libertarian and conservative values.

Dick, what the hell were you thinking?

Readers may recall that Sapwolf put his money where his mouth is and actually went to NY-23 to help Doug Hoffman in person. That's what's known as credibility.


Governor Palin on Rush on Tuesday

Rush Limbaugh spoke quite highly of Gov. Palin and her book on today's show, and the host who never has guests is, you betcha, having her as a guest on Tuesday on 1 p.m. EST. A must-listen to event! From today's show:

I talked to her yesterday, I've got the book, I have it right over there and I've had a chance, I just got it a couple days ago, three days ago, and I've had a chance to go through it, and I made a prediction to her when I talked to her yesterday. I said, "You've got enough in here that people who get hold of this, like the AP or any of the State-Controlled Media, they're gonna focus on the soap opera aspects of your book, and they're going to ignore what is truly one of the most substantive policy books I've read."

This woman, Governor Palin, clearly is jazzed by policy, particularly environmental policy and energy policy, as well as taxes and so forth. I talked to her about the future of the Republican Party, what she thought about New York-23, how she deals with the character assassination, not just of herself, but of her entire family. It was fascinating, and we'll do it again on Tuesday afternoon at one o'clock eastern time.

Here's the audio:


Associated Press in Full Attack Mode

First they illegally obtained the book. Then they posted distorted takes on excerpts from the book. Now they are "fact checking" the book, and they have devoted ten writers to the project!


PALIN: Says Ronald Reagan faced an even worse recession than the one that appears to be ending now, and "showed us how to get out of one. If you want real job growth, cut capital gains taxes and slay the death tax once and for all."

THE FACTS: The estate tax, which some call the death tax, was not repealed under Reagan and capital gains taxes are lower now than when Reagan was president.

Where in her claim did she say that Reagan lowered the death tax? She is simply offering solutions that would lift us out of this recession. Who cares what the capital gains tax rate was in the 1980s? She is offering a tax cut now! Oh, brother.

PALIN: Says Obama has admitted that the climate change policy he seeks will cause people's electricity bills to "skyrocket."

THE FACTS: She correctly quotes a comment attributed to Obama in January 2008, when he told San Francisco Chronicle editors that under his cap-and-trade climate proposal, "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket" as utilities are forced to retrofit coal burning power plants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Obama has argued since then that climate legislation can blunt the cost to consumers. Democratic legislation now before Congress calls for a variety of measures aimed at mitigating consumer costs. Several studies predict average household costs probably would be $100 to $145 a year.

Show us the several studies. The Heritage Foundation has a detailed explanation of the costs of Obama's climate change policies. (And, by the way, even $145 is a lot of money for some of us.)

PALIN: Describing her resistance to federal stimulus money, Palin describes Alaska as a practical, libertarian haven of independent Americans who don't want "help" from government busybodies.

THE FACTS: Alaska is also one of the states most dependent on federal subsidies, receiving much more assistance from Washington than it pays in federal taxes. A study for the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found that in 2005, the state received $1.84 for every dollar it sent to Washington.

I know the the AP likes to blame Sarah Palin for all of the world's problems, but was she governor in 2005? As Governor, the earmark requests from Alaska decreased. Governor Palin is responsible for all of the money that has historically been earmarked for use in Alaska? She made it a priority for Alaska to become less dependent on Washington D.C. and encouraged Washington to open up land for Alaska's use in order to become less reliant on the federal government. Palin is correct that Alaskans exhibit a libertarian streak. Alaskans do not want the federal government controlling their land and preventing them from drilling!

Who is fact checking the AP?

Did the AP fact check Obama's books?

This is a full blown Pravda attack.

Is there any question that the AP is dangerously biased and at war personally with this woman?

Take a look at this "fact-check":

PALIN: Says she tried to talk about national security and energy independence in her interview with Vogue magazine but the interviewer wanted her to pivot from hydropower to high fashion.

THE FACTS are somewhat in dispute. Vogue contributing editor Rebecca Johnson said Palin did not go on about hydropower. "She just kept talking about drilling for oil."

Um, that was obviously a play on words. "hydropower to high fashion," get it?

And how about this "fact-check":

PALIN: "Was it ambition? I didn't think so. Ambition drives; purpose beckons." Throughout the book, Palin cites altruistic reasons for running for office, and for leaving early as Alaska governor.

THE FACTS: Few politicians own up to wanting high office for the power and prestige of it, and in this respect, Palin fits the conventional mold. But "Going Rogue" has all the characteristics of a pre-campaign manifesto, the requisite autobiography of the future candidate.

See! She wrote a book. Therefore she's ambitious and running for president! I had no idea that writing a memoir meant you were running for president. We have a whole lot of people running in 2012 then.


Sarah Palin: Obama Administration's Atrocious Decision

Via Facebook:

Horrible decision, absolutely horrible. It is devastating for so many of us to hear that the Obama Administration decided that the 9/11 terrorist mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, will be given a criminal trial in New York. This is an atrocious decision.

Mohammed and his terrorist co-conspirators are responsible for the deaths of more than 3,000 Americans. Thousands of American families have suffered through the loss of loved ones because of the disgusting attacks launched against the United States, and now this trial venue adds insult to injury, in addition to compromising our efforts in the War on Terror. Heaven forbid our allies see this decision as a reason to become less likely to support our efforts in the future.

Criminal defense attorneys will now enter into delaying tactics and other methods in the hope of securing some kind of win for their “clients.” The trial will afford Mohammed the opportunity to grandstand and make use of his time in front of the world media to rally his disgusting terrorist cohorts. It will also be an insult to the victims of 9/11, as Mohammed will no doubt use the opportunity to spew his hateful rhetoric in the same neighborhood in which he ruthlessly cut down the lives of so many Americans.

It is crucially important that Americans be made aware that the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks may walk away from this trial without receiving just punishment because of a “hung jury” or from any variety of court room technicalities. If we are stuck with this terrible Obama Administration decision, I like most Americans, hope that Mohammed and his co-conspirators are convicted. Hang ‘em high.

I wholeheartedly support the survivors and the families of the victims in their appeal to the president regarding this matter. You can read more about it here.

- Sarah Palin


We Won't Just Keep Our Powder Dry - We'll Fight!

The Governor just posted this to her Facebook page:

As you probably have heard, the AP snagged a copy of my memoir, Going Rogue, before its Tuesday release. And as is expected, the AP and a number of subsequent media outlets are erroneously reporting the contents of the book. Keep your powder dry, read the book, and enjoy it! Lots of great stories about my family, Alaska, and the incredible honor it was to run alongside Senator John McCain.

We can’t wait to hit the road and meet so many on the book tour! See you in Michigan first...

- Sarah Palin

Basically, the AP just pulled a Pearl Harbor-like sneak attack on the Governor. They bought a copy of her book illegally on the black market. You may recall that the AP hates Sarah Palin. You may also recall that she called them out and called their actions evil when they posted the death photos of a young Marine in Afghanistan. She wrote:

Shame on the AP for purposely adding to the grieving family’s pain. Ignoring the family’s wishes by publishing a sacred image of their loved one proved a despicable and heartless act by the AP. The family said they didn’t want the photo published. AP, you did it anyway, and you know it was an evil thing to do.

She didn’t care about how that might effect the way that the AP covers her in the future. She called it like she saw it because she loves and respects the men and women in uniform.

So, the AP found the perfect way to wreck her book roll out and stick it to her. They can print whatever they want and she can’t respond because of the “embargo” that was negotiated for who gets first dibs on interviews.

I’m sure she never thought that a sneak copy would get into the hands of people who hate her. They’re obviously lying about her book. You’ll notice that AP is careful not to quote anything from the book. Instead they just “frame” the narrative by writing, “the book includes... blah, blah, blah.” And, of course, it “includes” exactly the narrative according to the AP’s view of Governor Palin.

This is golden for them. They are hoping to tell her story before she can tell it herself. They are hoping to define her before she can define herself. They can lie about her, and she can’t call them liars – at least not for a week until she is free of the embargo. And one week is a very, very long time in the new internet media age.

This is like the first week of September 2008 all over again. You remember that week – that was when the geniuses of the McCain campaign rolled out Governor Palin in Dayton, OH, and then hid her away and allowed the media to destroy her for days without any pushback or countering of all the lies being spread.

But there is one difference between September 2008 and now. She has an army of supporters now. We know the truth. We know who she is. If you’re wondering about that vetting bill story from yesterday, ask yourselves this – When has the McCain campaign ever behaved honorably or honestly with regards to Sarah Palin?

So what can we ordinary barbarians do? We can fight back. We can rally around her.

Write letters to every newspaper that carries the AP stories. Remind them that the AP pulled a cowardly Pearl Harbor sneak attack on her. Remind them that Sarah Palin called out the AP when they posted the photos of a fallen Marine after his family begged them not to. Remind them that Sarah Palin has a right to have her memoir read by people without having the AP falsely frame her words.

Don't just keep your powder dry, people, stand up and fight!

Update: The AP admits to illegally obtaining the book:

AP, however, stands by its story. "We've read the book; we've read it carefully — and we stand by our reporting," Paul Colford, AP director of media relations, said Friday.


Dylan Ratigan Launches Sexist Attack Against Gov. Palin; Update: The New Agenda Joins the Fight

Via Newsbusters:

On the Friday edition of Morning Meeting, host Dylan Ratigan featured fake photos of Sarah Palin during a mocking segment on why Americans are fascinated with the former vice presidential candidate. While listing the show’s top ten reasons, Ratigan showed a doctored photo of Palin’s head on the bikini-clad body of a woman holding a weapon.

The host never admitted or addressed the fact that his network was passing off counterfeit pictures to his viewers. Earlier in the segment, Ratigan displayed an image of Palin in a short, black mini-skirt. This photo is also not real. MSNBC should immediately apologize for presenting such false information.


During the segment, Ratigan repeatedly and dismissively referred to Palin’s looks. One reason he mentioned for the Republican’s popularity: "She’s also very hot." Talking to a fellow MSNBC host, he wondered, "Hey, listen. That's big, wouldn't you say, Contessa [Brewer]?"

Ratigan began the piece by acknowledging, "I could not feel more stupid doing what I'm about to do, which is make fun of Sarah Palin."

He should feel stupid, and the whole MSNBC "news" network should feel stupid. In fact, you should help in making them feel stupid by contacting MSNBC and demanding an apology! MSNBC has been launching false and outright sickening attacks on Sarah Palin since she first arrived on the national scene, and it is time to start calling them out on it.

MSNBC's contact form for Ratigan's show.

Here is Ratigan's twitter account.

Here is Ratigan's Facebook.

Email NBC news here.

Write a letter:

NBC News
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10112

Contact General Electric here.

Update: Our friends at the New Agenda joined the fight:

Here we go again… I don’t even know what to say about the video from MSNBC’s Morning Meeting with host Dylan Ratigan. Will the war on Sarah Palin ever end? I’m starting to wonder if they are just trying to wear us all down so we will just stop fighting sexism entirely? Ok! We get it, you hate Sarah Palin! But the war on Palin isn’t really the point is it? It’s the “sexism is okay if we just don’t like you” war on women that is exhausting. Do I even need to list what is offensive in this video? I’m so tired of pointing out what seems like the obvious, I thought I would ask for your help!


Gov. Palin to vist Fort Hood next month

From the Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire:

Grieving soldiers and families at Fort Hood, Texas, will get a visit from Sarah Palin next month as part of her national book tour, her publisher told Washington Wire.

The former vice presidential candidate, whose book “Going Rogue,” will be released on Tuesday, had already agreed to visit the Army base, according to her publicist. She said that after last week’s shooting that left 13 people dead and 30 wounded, an official on the base contacted HarperCollins to say that Palin should keep stick with the planned appearance.

The Dec. 4 event had not been announced publicly or included in a preliminary list of tour stops published on Palin’s Facebook page.


Thoughts on 'The Persecution of Sarah Palin'

Barack Obama and Sarah Palin represent two opposing views to the question, “In which direction should America proceed?” and anyone with any interest in the question should damn-well know plenty about both people.

Learning about Pres. Obama in any source outside himself is an act of existential futility. That, a year after his historic election, not one – no, not one – book has emerged to provide the infill of His Story is alarming if you “hope he fails,” and at the very least should be troubling if you are a sincere supporter. Regardless of pedigree, the fact that no such works have emerged should alarm all but the most O’baptized of fanatics. Meanwhile, learning about Sarah Palin requires wading through hip-deep piles of male bovine fecal matter to even begin determining what is plausibly true.

With that in mind, consider Matthew Continetti’s The Persecution of Sarah Palin. It is, if nothing else, an encyclopedic account of the Liberal bias Gov. Palin endured in the few weeks following John McCain’s announcement that he’d picked a woman most people had never heard of to be his Veep. Continetti goes for a thematic approach, chapter by chapter illustrating the unfairness regarding Palin’s treatment regarding her experience, gender, faith, family and so forth. If you’re a Palin fan, it will foster further vindication of what you already knew: the deck was stacked, and it wasn’t just Liberal Donkeys and the media playing Ricky Jay to the ignorant dupe.

A Palinista myself, I found myself agreeing with most of what Continetti offers. The theme, and Palinistas know it well, is that she was found guilty of being attractive, feminine, Conservative, and – horrors! – Pro-Life. For her sins, she was made to pay.

The treatment Gov. Palin received through “anonymous” leaks from the McCain Campaign and the petty settling of old feuds from various Alaskan GOP and former Donkey allies is galling, as it was a year ago. Particularly unsettling are the leaks from the campaign itself, the trivial ass-covering Gov. Palin’s “handlers” increasingly sent to the media intent on destroying her. Here, Continetti is at his best, and I was happy to see someone finally – finally – point this out. His deconstruction of the elite/populist paradigm is particularly astute.

Many of the paid political staff of the McCain Campaign resorted to full CYA mode after Sen. McCain returned to Washington to deal with the financial crisis, thus effectively killing his own campaign. Continetti, for his part, documents the damage these leaks did to the McCain Campaign in general, and Gov. Palin in particular.

Which leads me to the problem with Persecution: how does one remark on such leaks, unnamed sources, interviews done on background etc., in a book that that a) has no Bibliography and b) uses its own healthy share of unnamed sources? I applaud Continetti for mounting a defense of Gov. Palin by illustrating how terribly she was treated, (she was and I do), and I sympathize with any writer’s position of trying to tell a story when the subject’s sources aren’t sure whether or not she’s lightning in a bottle or the same bottle with a skull and cross-bones as its trademark. As a supporter of Gov. Palin, I think this observation was necessary and it is, to a degree, effective.

With that grumpiness in mind, Continetti's defense of Gov. Palin is passionate, and its final chapter overcomes any quibbles I had with the overall text. In the book’s most salient passage, Continetti observes:

It has taken all that sense of purpose and inner strength to survive the recent trials. In the past couple of years, Sarah Palin has given birth at forty-four years old, to a special needs child; learned that her seventeen-year-old-daughter was pregnant; been placed on the GOP presidential ticket; seen her nineteen-year-old son deployed to Iraq; spent two grueling months on the campaign trail; had her personal email hacked; dealt with harsh and unfair media coverage; lost an election; returned to find that her enemies had made it impossible for her to do her job; and listened as a late-night talk-show host made cruel sexual jokes about her fourteen-year-old daughter.

Rip away all the rest of it, and this is what sums up the appeal of Gov. Palin. I read this and think it the stuff of legend – how can one woman handle so much, yet she does so on the surface effortlessly, yet it obviously takes a Promethean will.

There are opportunities to defend Sarah Palin in manners, shall we say, unorthodox, yet inescapably right. Rhetorically, Gov. Palin has friends in odd places – the feminist icon Camille Paglia is among her most eloquent defenders, as is David Kahane, nom de plume of a Hollywood screenwriter who mounted a defense so visceral of Gov. Palin it went viral, and remains the best piece of political writing of the new century.

Say what you will of Gov. Palin, but there is nothing dispassionate about the support she curries. She inspires in the manner of the true leader, her bite accompanied by the proper amount of bark. Persecution illustrates the cost of that bite, and it’s not cheap. Gov. Palin has already paid, and dearly at that. Happily, she’s not content to sit idly by and endure her persecution, and for that, we’re thankful.


Media Bias in 2009 Election

The standard spin by the mainstream media regarding the November 3rd's election is that Obama didn't hurt Creigh Deeds in Virginia or Jon Corzine in New Jersey despite actively campaigning for both candidates for months. At the same time, the mainstream media claims that Governor Palin's endorsement of 3rd party candidate Doug Hoffman in NY-23, despite the fact her endorsement was instrumental in changing Hoffman's status from spoiler to contender, was the sole reason for his 3 point loss. And of course the media makes this claim with a straight face. Noemie Emery, in an article for the Washington Examiner, discusses this tortured logic further:

Three take-away points from the national media as regards the elections last week:

President Obama endorses Creigh Deeds and Jon Corzine, embraces them, campaigns with and for them, and calls them his partners in politics. He practically moves to the state of New Jersey, lends the campaign his pollster, and, in the final days of the contest, appears with Corzine three times.

Meanwhile, on Facebook, Sarah Palin endorses Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party of New York candidate running for Congress in New York’s 23rd congressional district against the Democrat and the Republican, a woman who turns out to be to the left of the Democrat, and also to be an appalling campaigner, whose idea of what to do when reporters ask questions is to call the police.

Palin is one of six national figures to speak out for Hoffman, doesn’t campaign for or with him, and never sets foot in New York. Hoffman loses by 3 points to the Democrat, Bill Owens, (who was endorsed by the erstwhile Republican “moderate”), while Corzine, running in deep-blue New Jersey with a third-party candidate who works in his favor, loses by five points to Republican Chris Christie, and Deeds is wiped out in Virginia by an 18- point spread.

But these last two are no reflection at all on Obama, whose name, pundits assure us, was not on the ballot, while Hoffman”s loss is a slap aimed directly at Palin, which simply shows up her severe limitations, and how toxic she turned out to be.

Read the rest here. It's truly amazing what lengths the media will go to in their attempt to marginalize Governor Palin. Of course the recent endorsement requests by Mark Kirk in Illinois, Scott Walker in Wisconsin, and Marco Rubio in Florida contradict their meme and illustrate just how foolish and impotent the mainstream media is today. By the way, there have been some interesting developments in NY-23. Nothing to get excited about yet, but interesting nonetheless.


Friday Open Thread

VDH: Who Are ‘They’?

Fox News: Obama's Planned Jobs Summit Faces Harsh Stimulus Reality

Louis Woodhill: More Stimulus Equals More Unemployment

WSJ: White House Aims to Cut Deficit With TARP Cash

Politico: Afghan plan to include exit strategy

Glenn Reynolds: Apparently, dithering is actually strength

WSJ: U.S. Is Targeting Assets Linked to Iran

HillBuzz: Thank you, former President George W. Bush and former First Lady Laura Bush


Far-left Alaska Hack Patty Higgins Seems to Forget that Obama Lost the Elmendorf District by Almost 35 points

President Barack Obama visited Alaska for the first time yesterday, speaking to service members at the Elmendorf Air Force Base on his way to Asia. Governor Sean Parnell did not attend because "he had a speaking engagement today that he committed to two months ago and was not able to make it to base in time before they locked it down" according to his spokesperson Sharon Leighow.

Patti Higgins, a far-left radical and Chair of the Alaska Democrat Party, did not accept Governor Parnell's explanation and issued the following partisan statement:

We are talking about the President of the United States coming to Alaska...Governor Parnell could have met with the President and talked about key Alaska projects like the gas pipeline, but he decided to put partisanship over civility disrespect over diplomacy.

Elmendorf Air Force base is located in the 18th district. Senator McCain and Governor Palin won this district over Obama by a margin of 66.3-31.9%. This data suggests that perhaps it would be a bad idea to tie your party and gubernatorial candidates to Barack Obama. Is Higgins oblivious to the fact that McCain-Palin earned more votes than any other presidential ticket in the state's history, despite the fact that Obama outspent McCain dramatically in Alaska?

I'm pretty sure Parnell isn't too worried.


Thursday, November 12, 2009

AP: Snippets From "Going Rogue"; Update: AP Changes the Number; John Ziegler Says the 'AP’s synopsis is a joke'

From the AP via CBS News:

The rumors are true, according to Sarah Palin: The McCain-Palin campaign was not a happy family.

In Palin's "Going Rogue," Palin confirms reports of tension between her aides and those of the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain. The vice presidential candidate confirms that she had wanted to speak on election night, but was denied the chance and says she was kept "bottled up" from reporters during the campaign.


She writes about the "jaded aura" of professional campaign aides and how McCain's entourage limited her access to the media, leading to allegations - unfounded, she says - that she was avoiding reporters.

And she says that most of her legal bills were generated defending what she called frivolous ethics complaints, but she reveals that about $500,000 was a bill she received to pay for the McCain campaign vetting her for the VP nod.

She said when she asked the McCain campaign if it would help her financially, she was told McCain's camp would have paid all the bills if he'd won; since he lost, the vetting legal bills were her responsibility.


She writes that ABC newsman Charles Gibson, who had an early interview with her, seemed bored by "substantive issues" stemming from her time as governor and that while speaking with her he "peered skeptically" at her over his glasses like a disapproving principal.

She writes at length about Couric. She says that the idea to meet with Couric came from McCain campaign aide Nicolle Wallace, who told Palin that Couric - also a working mother - liked and admired her. It would be a favor to Couric, too, whom Palin notes had the lowest ratings of the network anchors. Wallace said Couric suffered from low self-esteem. And Palin replied that she almost began to "feel sorry" for Couric.

She alleges that Couric and CBS left out her more "substantive" remarks and settled for "gotcha" moments. She writes that Couric had a "partisan agenda" and a condescending manner. Couric was "badgering," biased and far easier on Couric's Democratic counterpart, Joe Biden.

More here.

Related: A sneak peak at the governor's interview with Oprah here.

Update by Mel: In the article quoted above, the Associated Press said:

And [Palin] says that most of her legal bills were generated defending what she called frivolous ethics complaints, but she reveals that about $500,000 was a bill she received to pay for the McCain campaign vetting her for the VP nod. [emphasis added]

The AP has since changed that sentence to read:

And [Palin] says that most of her legal bills were generated defending what she called frivolous ethics complaints, but she reveals that about one-tenth of the $500,000 was a bill she received to pay for the McCain campaign vetting her for the VP nod. [emphasis added]

So, the AP now says that the vetting bill discussed in Going Rogue is $50,000, not $500,000.

An anonymous McCain official (are they ever not anonymous when they're bashing Palin?) says that the campaign did not bill Palin for her vetting fees. And an anonymous "senior McCain campaign official" said to NBC's "First Read" blog:

This senior McCain campaign official says they considered the $500,000 bill from Palin’s lawyer to be exorbitant — plus, even if they wanted to, they couldn’t use their general-election funds to pay for it (remember that McCain accepted some $84 million in federal funds for the general election).

“Everyone thought it was ridiculous,” the senior McCain official tells First Read.

So, the first version the AP story that hit the wires said that Palin says in Going Rogue that the McCain campaign billed her $500,000 for vetting fees. Then, apparently going off that erroneous number, other media outlets picked up the story. "First Read" quoted an anonymous "McCain campaign official" as saying that the campaign felt that $500,000 was exorbitant. But the AP now says the number is $50,000. So, where does that "First Read" story stand now? Amazing how quickly erroneous reporting snowballs isn't it?

Since I don't have a copy of the book (not being able to purchase it on the blackmarket, as the AP evidently did), I'll have to wait until November 17th to get Governor Palin's side as Meg Stapleton refuses to confirm or deny the AP's article. She told CNN that "“The book remains embargoed. The Governor will appear on Oprah first to discuss the book’s contents.”

Update II by Mel: The AP also says:

She alleges that Couric and CBS left out her more "substantive" remarks and settled for "gotcha" moments.

A while back, I took a look at the transcript of the second day of interviews Katie Couric conducted with Governor Palin, and compared the unedited transcript to what aired on CBS News. Here's the pdf of the comparison. Make your own judgment.

Update III by Mel: John Ziegler says:

Even grading on the “Palin Scale” of media bias, the AP’s synopsis is a joke.


In short, the book that the AP supposedly read sounds like it is full of self-serving whining and almost totally lacking in substance. That is not a remotely accurate evaluation of “Going Rogue.”


If you are interested in this most amazing of all modern political stories, I urge you to read the book for yourself and not let those who want Palin destroyed to continue to dictate your perceptions of her. Her book may be the only way for you to know the real Sarah Palin. Don’t let the AP read it for you.

More here.

Update IV by Mel: Allahpundit at Hot Air quotes (via The Atlantic) McCain campaign general counsel, Trevor Potter, as saying:

“I can confirm that she was not billed for any vetting costs by the campaign,” said Trevor Potter, the campaign’s general counsel. “I do not know if she was billed by her own lawyer for his assistance to her in the vetting process, but from the excerpt that has been read to me by the AP, it sounds as if that is what she is describing.”

Some of this was first hinted at back in the summer. Things are no clearer now, as we still only have second-hand accounts of Palin's side. As Allahpundit says:

Without a quote from the book itself, it’s impossible to tell how much of a dispute there really is here.

We should all find out for sure on November 17th.

*Post bumped up.


Matthew Continetti on Hannity; Palin Discussion on Hannity Great American Panel

Matthew Continetti, author of The Persecution of Sarah Palin, was on the Sean Hannity Show tonight:

Also on Hannity, The Great American Panel with Bernard McGuirk, Andrew McCarthy and Caroline Heldman discuss the media bias against Governor Palin and her future:

(H/T Sheya)


Sarah Palin: Thank you, Washington, for Requesting a Demonstrably Good Idea

Via Facebook:

I commend the president for acknowledging today that “there are limits to what government can and should do” to ease our 10.2% unemployment rate – the highest it’s been since 1983. I also applaud his call for suggestions and expression of openness to considering “any demonstrably good idea.” Taking him at his word, I’d like to suggest this one: let’s learn from history and follow the example of the man who occupied the White House in 1983 and was able to transform an even worse recession than the one we’re currently experiencing into the largest peacetime economic expansion in American history.

When you realize the magnitude of President Reagan’s achievements, there is absolutely no reason why anyone would ignore his “demonstrably good” example. If you want real job growth, cut taxes – including capital gains taxes and small business payroll taxes – and slay the death tax once and for all. If you want to stimulate the economy and help poor and middle class families, cut payroll taxes so that more Americans can keep and invest more of what they earn.

If you want lasting economic expansion and prosperity, get the federal government’s budget under control. Instead of more pork-laden stimulus plans, let the free market correct itself. That’s what Reagan did, and history proves it worked.

In his comments today, the president honorably suggested that he welcomes our ideas on how to put America’s economy on the right track. But, there also seemed to be a suggested chastisement of the private sector’s efforts to right some economic wrongs when he said, “...small businesses and large firms...have not yet been willing to take the steps necessary to hire again.”

As business owners seek to expand, or just to keep doors open today, it’s not as if they are refusing to hire out of spite. Given a pro-private sector environment they will be only too happy to hire more people and grow their businesses. Perhaps if leadership in Washington reassured them by, for example, cutting tax burdens and making government more efficient, it would send our businesses a message that it’s safe and smart to expand today.

These are difficult times for so many Americans who are out of work. I implore our leaders to not threaten our economy’s job creators with increased taxes and job-killing schemes like cap-and-tax and the government health care takeover. Government needs to get out of their way and off their backs so that they can grow and hire again.

The lessons of history are clear. We’re blessed to have so many lessons from which to learn, and we’d be smart to emulate successes in America’s past. Our economic recovery decisions should be based on the same free market principles that Reagan employed. They work, history proves it, and I thank our president for asking for this input.

- Sarah Palin


Sneak Peek of Governor Palin on Oprah

Via The Oprah Winfrey Show, two teaser clips (combined into one) from Governor Palin's upcoming appearance on Monday November 16:

More from Politico here.

(H/T Sheya for your great editing)

Update by Mel: Snippets from Going Rogue via the Associated Press here.


Sarah Palin: Pelosi "Health Plan" Should Be DOA

Via Facebook:

We need to be vigilant in investigating the ramifications of the Pelosi Health Care Bill. Some provisions sound so outrageous as to be considered impossible to fathom, but they’re right there in the bill in black and white. For instance, page 297 of the bill explains the punishment for not purchasing government mandated health insurance. If you don’t buy what the government considers “acceptable health care coverage,” you’re going to be hit with a tax of at least 2.5% of your income. And if you don’t pay that new tax, you could be fined as much as $250,000 and sentenced to up to five years in prison.

But here’s the thing: they have to make the penalty for opting out very harsh in order to force us to buy coverage. The only way to keep this government run health care plan afloat is for everyone to buy into it – especially young and healthy people. That means that they will have to penalize citizens if we choose not to buy a plan that will cost a minimum of about $15,000 per family per year.

The bill that came out of the Senate last month – the Baucus Bill – does just the opposite. It calls for a much lighter penalty ($750 maximum) for people who don’t buy government approved health coverage, making it cheaper to pay the fine than to pay for the coverage. (And with a recession on, who can blame families for not wanting to pay $15,000 for a government mandated health care plan?)

But here’s the kicker: the bill also forces insurance companies to cover everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions. Think about what that means. A lot of people – especially young and healthy people – will just pay the penalty instead of purchasing coverage because they’ll figure that it’ll always be there if they get sick, as government has promised. That’s what will happen, and when it does it will totally undermine the very concept of “insurance” – which is basically a group of people pooling their resources over time to cover themselves for a rainy day, paying while they’re healthy so that they’re covered when they’re sick. Those who are healthy now pay for those who are sick. If your insurance pool only contains sick people, it’s a bust. And that’s what this government plan will be. Without all of those young and healthy people paying into the pool and defraying the costs, the government will have to pony up more and more money, and who knows how long the whole crazy plan will last before it goes broke – and our country with it!

That’s where we are with this bureaucratic mess: either the government penalizes people so harshly that they could be hit with huge taxes and even possible jail time, or the government makes the penalty a slap on the wrist and undermines the plan from the get-go. Forcing individuals to buy health insurance seems unconstitutional, yet Congress wants to foist it on us anyway. Proponents of government controlled health care will say, “But we’re made to buy car insurance and home insurance, what’s the difference with health insurance?” It’s apples and oranges. Auto insurance is a state law requirement, and people can always choose not to drive. Banks might require you to have home owner’s insurance, but again, you choose to own a home, just as you choose to drive. You have no choice at all when it comes to this federal government health care insurance mandate.

There are other ways to reform health care without violating our Constitution and our personal liberties. Let’s get back to discussing market-driven, patient-centered, result-driven solutions, like, for example, allowing people to purchase insurance across state lines, tackling existing government waste and fraud, and reforming medical malpractice laws (tort reform) to stop unwarranted lawsuits that force doctors to order unnecessary procedures just to cover themselves.

Please let your Senators know that the Pelosi Bill should be dead on arrival. Once we go down this big government path, it will be virtually impossible to reverse course. Let’s fight for the reform that makes sense for Americans before it’s too late.

- Sarah Palin


  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP