Gay Patriot Header Image

Sarah Palin’s Next Book: A Suggestion

With Sarah Palin’s memoir, Going Rogue:  An American Life going gangbusters on amazon, currently their #1 seller (it was released only today, yet has spent 50 days in the online bookseller’s top 100), it’s clear that this accomplished former Governor can both infuriate liberals and sell books.

It seems alas that the media, just as they did in the campaign, are focusing not on this reformer’s record, but her personal life.  After watching Palin on Oprah Winfrey’s show yesterday, Ann Althouse observed that there was no discussion of policy:

For the most part, Oprah pursued the traditional women’s topics: pregnancy, children, marriage. Palin looked vividly alive and spoke quickly and without stumbles or hesitations. I don’t think there was a single word about any serious policy question. It was mostly about how it felt to be Sarah Palin.

Newsweek runs a cover story calling her a problem and focusing on her physique.  As if on cue, CBS Touts yet another “exclusive” interview with the former Alaska Governor’s ex-son-in-law to be.  Do you think they’d pay him Levi Johnston heed if he only had good things to say about his son’s maternal grandmother?

Since publishers know Sarah Palin can sell books, many will jump at the chance to publish just about anything she writes.  So, she needs take a page from the man who won the White House last fall by promising to govern the nation as she governed Alaska.  After writing a memoir, she should followup with a book on policy.  After the holidays, she can start reading classics of political theory and conservative thought while meeting with public policy experts who have crafted conservative an libertarian policies to address contemporary problems.

When this book is released, say maybe next fall, just as the 2010 elections are heating up, various talk show hosts would be tripping over themselves to book Palin, knowing how that appearance would boost ratings.  And with a wonkish book out, some would have to ask her at least a few questions about policy.

(Though they would much rather talk trash with her.)

Still, such a book would given her a chance to promote conservative ideas and burnish her own image, demonstrating her ability to discuss the nation’s problems and her familiarity with solutions which do not bust the federal budget or diminish our freedoms.

Her novels may not sell well, but when it comes to job creation in the Golden State, Ma’am Boxer has a knack for fiction

Last week, our state’s junior Senator, Ma’am Barbara Boxer, traveled with great fanfare to San Diego to boast about how many jobs the “stimulus” created only to have a news organization debunk her claim.  They found that the $787-billion bill she so energetically supported had created a grand total of one new job in the state’s second largest city.  Well, now other news organizations are examining the Administration claims of jobs created by the Democrats’ budget-busting bill and finding that, well, just like Ma’am, they’ve been inflating their numbers.

They haven’t even done the most rudimentary of fact checks, with their site claiming job creation in non-existent congressional districts.  Can you imagine the media outcry had the Bush Administration talked about its efforts in non-existent jurisdictions?  It would be another sign of W’s stupidity.  The latest figures show 110,185 jobs created in the Golden State (that’s 226,215 fewer jobs created (or saved) that the total number of jobs lost since Ma’am voted for the “stimulus”).

But, let’s look a little more closely at that 110,185 number.  David Freddoso and Mark Hemingway found 75,343 bogus jobs in that listing, including as least (but probably more than) 22,000 in the Golden Setate.

Administration officials claim that federal stimulus dollars let California State University (CSU) “retain about 26,000 full-time-equivalent positions . . . more than half of CSU’s work force“, but in reality according to CSU spokeswoman Claudia Keith said Friday, “The jobs were retained, not saved,” with the CSU using stimulus money paying “for the jobs for a time, but that many of the jobs wouldn’t have otherwise disappeared.” No wonder the Democrats are using the expression created or saved, it makes it easier to fudge their numbers.

So, let’s say that of those 26,000, 12.2% (current unemployment rate in Golden State) really were saved (’cause they sure weren’t created).  That’s 3,172.  We’ll deduct that number from 26,000 to get 22,828 jobs that don’t belong in the number created by the “stimulus.”

In San Joaquin, “The Regional Rail Commission double-counted 125 jobs it had created with a stimulus grant.”   So, let’s add 125 to the 22,828 above.  That’s 22,953 which we subtract from 110,185, so we get 87,232 jobs created (or saved) in the Golden State.  And we still haven’t examined all the supposedly new (or saved) jobs the Administration claims. (more…)

Sarah Palin Sends Another Feminist to the Grassy Knoll

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:24 pm - November 17, 2009.
Filed under: PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome)

Those who observed me doing cardio at the gym last night must have thought I was watching something on Comedy Central.  Instead, I was watching a performance by a feminist on Larry King Live that had it been cut and pasted into a Saturday Night Live sketch, it would not have seemed out of place.

Naomi Wolf was going on about some conspiracy theory linking Sarah Palin to Dick Cheney to Karl Rove to D.B. Cooper and the George H.W. Bush aide who wrecked the wedding of Ross Perot’s daughter while Mary Matalin (visible on a split screen) was doing her utmost to contain her amusement.  Her lipstick likely covered up the bites on her lips.

Responding to Larry King’s request that she comment to this statement, “somebody said today that they don’t remember a vice presidential concession speech,” the feminist rambled on:

Yes, I personally have no idea whether it’s traditional or not. I don’t think tradition should matter that much. I think what’s more important is what I keep hearing — the refrain I keep hearing from people is, you know, oh, we should have rolled her out more narrowly, she’s genuine, I like her, she’s got all these kids, she speaks from the heart.

You know, all of those are lovely in a neighbor or in a co- worker. But what people have to remember is do we really want to hand our country over to consultants like — like my colleagues on other side of the aisle on this panel, with all due respect, who seem to want to roll her out like a product.

And let’s look at what she was fronting for. She wasn’t just doing what the McCain team wanted. She was carrying water for policies of Rove and Cheney and Bush, including policies on torture.


Bear with me.

And it — history has seen plenty of examples of a cabal — a group of people who get into power. And then she is a telegenic, charming, Evita-type front person to kind of lure the masses. . . . while the same old guys remain in power with some very dark and negative policies. . . that our country is still recovering from.

Wow, just wow.  Her words read even stranger than they sounded last night.  She’s fronting for Rove, Cheney and Bush with her (cue sinister music) with her dark and negative policies.  Huh?  Has Wolf read any of Palin’s campaign speeches or even studied her record?

Sarah Palin does seem to bring out the worst in her critics. (more…)

Why Sarah Palin Matters

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 4:46 am - November 17, 2009.
Filed under: Conservative Ideas,Real Reform,Sarah Palin

And it’s not just that the mere mention of her name can whip liberals into a frenzy.

It’s that she is a natural politician who can, as few leaders have in recent years, command a stage and capture the popular imagination.  She has a natural charisma and public presence similar to that of the incumbent President of the United States.  But, unlike him, she actually has a record of accomplishment, even of transcending political labels and working in a bipartisan manner to effect real reform.

In short, Sarah Palin is what Barack Obama claimed to be.  Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric, putting himself forward as a post-partisan reformer, may have described his aspirations at the time, but it also described her record.  She keeps her promises.

In her short time on the national stage, Sarah Palin has shown that she can communicate a conservative message to a broad national audience.  More people might have warmed to that message had the media showed more clips from her speeches and provided fewer details about her family (and offered less speculation about her background).

She matters because of her presence and her record, a record with which most of her critics are both oblivious and in which many are entirely disinterested.  We Republicans need more people like Ronald Reagan, pragmatic legislators and gifted communicators.  She has that in common with the Gipper.  That said, she needs to do something the he did before his rise to power, take a good deal of time to study the ideas undergirding modern conservatism and relate those ideas to the contemporary political situation and to current economic and social issues.

In short, Sarah Palin needs a better education in the freedom agenda.

Not just that, like the Gipper, she needs to learn to rise “above the fray“.  She has his gifts, but needs to develop his substance.  While the latter can be learned, the former cannot be achieved (even with great effort).  Either you got it or you ain’t.  And, boys, she’s got it . . . in spades.  And that’s why she matters.  It’s the learning she has yet to do.  But, she’s already begun the process and is, as many have reported, a “quick study.”

Because she has those gifts, she will continue to get attention.  The time may yet come when she commands the national political stage as did Barack Obama in 2008.  But, I doubt it will be in 2012.

“Stimulus” Creates One Job in California’s 2nd Largest City

Had President Obama not promised the “stimulus” which passed at the start of his term would keep the unemployment rate down below 8%, with multitudinous new jobs created driving that percentage down even further, he–and his party–would not own the increasing unemployment rate as they now do.

Nationwide, nearly three  million jobs lost nationwide since the “stimulus” passed.  In the Golden State alone, 336,400 more people have lost their jobs since our Senators voted for that $787 billion piece of legislation with our junior Senator promising the bill would put Californians to work.  One in eight Californians are out of work, with the unemployment rate hitting a post-World War II high.

With that junior Senator, Ma’am Barbara Boxer making what we believe to be her first visit to San Diego in over two years to tout the success of that “stimulus,” a local TV station there found it created a grand total of one new job. That’s right, one job created in the largest state’s second largest city.

As the unemployment rate continues to climb, don’t expect the Democrats’ rating here to remain as high as it has been.

Let us hope to see more media outlets report of our hapless junior Senator whose “dishonest representation of NIH grant money for research as ‘stimulus’ funds” KUSI exposed.  To be sure, a Republican has an uphill climb in this Democratic state, but when people start seeing how poor they unemployment situation has been in California under Mrs. Boxer’s watch, they’ll wonder about her effectiveness in Washington.

Recall the unemployment rate has increased by 33% since Mrs. Boxer was first elected to the Senate in 1992 (during a recession, I might add).

Mrs. Boxer and the President can go on all they want about how many jobs the “stimulus” has created or saved, but their claims don’t change the fact that the “stimulus” created a total of one job in the state’s second largest city while nearly 350,000 fewer people in the Golden State have jobs than did when Mrs. Boxer voted to spnd nearly one trillion dollars of our money (and that of our descendants), claiming it would put people back to work.

On the Entertainment Value of Palin Derangement Sydrome

You know, even if I didn’t appreciate Sarah Palin’s accomplishments in the years leading up to her election as Alaska Governor and in her short time in office nor recognize her gifts to move an audience (more on this anon), I would have the same kind of respect for her as I have for Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and sometimes even Glenn Beck.  The mere mention of her name can work some liberals up into a lather.  Like her, they deserve some credit for getting under left-wingers’ skin.

One of her critics reveals his own obsession in a comment to this blog, “maybe, just maybe, her ability to make news is a function of her own obsessive attempts to thrust herself into the limelight“.  Those of us who live in a town with a few too many self-promoters know all too well that obsessive attempts to thrust oneself into the limelight don’t necessarily mean the light shines upon them.  I mean, how many people outside this town have ever heard of Dennis Woodruff or Angelyne, two people who have made self-promotion their stock-in-trade?

Like them, she can promote herself all she wants.  It’s that people insist on paying attention to Mrs. Palin as they don’t to Mr. Woodruff or Miss Angelyne, save to scoff when his car drives by or to shake their heads when they catch sight of one of her billboards.  And these lefties insist on telling us just how much they hate that Republican woman.

On Larry King Live last night, the Nation’s Katrina vanden Heuvel pitched a fit about Sarah Palin interjecting herself into the health care.  Um, Katrina, she’s a citizen of this great country, that’s what citizens do.  But lots of citizens speak up, just like lots of folks in Hollywood demand attention without anyone paying them any heed.  Why do you let her upset you so?  Did you get upset when Angelyine interjected herself into the California gubernatorial recall election in 2003?

No one forced Newsweek to run a cover story on Palin or compelled a major daily newspaper to run an article about her appearance on Oprah.  No one threatened to incarcerate left-wing bloggers if they didn’t live blog that appearance.  No one requires some of my acquaintances to pitch a fit any time her name is mentioned.  Or to bring up her for the sole purpose of making an adverse comparison.  Or derogatory remark. (more…)