GOP committees dump Palin as keynote speaker for big fundraiser?

posted at 7:45 pm on March 31, 2009 by Allahpundit

Remember this? She was in, then she wasn’t in, now she’s out. The official word from the congressional committees is that she had to decline due to “gubernatorial responsibilities in Alaska,” but sources tell Politico that the dithering by her staff forced them to pull the plug as the deadline approached:

Palin’s withdrawal is her latest public stumble since Election Day 2008 and the latest evidence of miscommunication between her Washington-based political action committee and her gubernatorial staff in Alaska. The decision by national Republicans to pull the plug on Palin — a significant draw — also reflects the GOP establishment’s growing unease with the Alaska governor…

Palin was never completely confirmed as a speaker — which was precisely the problem, according to sources familiar with the deliberations about who would speak at the dinner…

Three people close to planning for the dinner said Palin’s aides proceeded to hem and haw about the appearance, both publicly and privately, leading the committees to decide to replace her because they were nearing a deadline to send invitations and other fundraising materials to their donors.

It’s undisputed that the initial scheduling screw-up was on her end (indeed, the NRSC’s statement today emphasizes that her team had confirmed her attendance), in which case what incentive do Politico’s sources have to lie? I could see if they had messed up and were now trying to pin the whole thing on her to cover their own rears, but they didn’t. Maybe she finally told them no definitively and they were so irritated that they decided to claim they dumped her instead? Pretty silly, if so: No sense needlessly alienating a draw as big as her.

Update: Blunt as can be, from NRCC spokesman Ken Spain: “We decided to go in another direction.”

Update: Fox News is hearing the same thing as Politico.

Sources familiar with the Palin snub fumed openly about how the governor handled this.

“She was a disaster,” one Republican source told FOX News. “We had confirmation.”…

Another source familiar with the invitation indicated that the campaign committees were so incensed with Palin that they did not even bother to officially notify her that they rescinded the invitation.

Update 4/1: Conservatives 4 Palin cites this quote from SarahPAC spokesman Meg Stapleton in Palin’s defense:

Stapleton said Palin would not agree to political events until after April 20, when the Alaska legislative session ends. “She is focused on Alaska,” Stapleton said today.

And while Palin’s camp claimed no hard feelings about being replaced by Gingrich, Stapleton said, “She probably would have said yes if they could have waited.”

NBC notes that Palin is still scheduled to attend an Indiana pro-life dinner on April 16th, but C4P argues that that’s not a “political,” i.e. partisan, event and therefore might not have the same ethics laws implications while the legislature’s in session. If that’s so, I’m not sure why Stapleton didn’t make that point to NBC.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


If truth be told the primary reason so many GOP establishment types hate Sarah Palin is that for 4 months she has been minding her own business in Alaska not making any significant attempts to raise money for ‘future travelling’ in the lower 48, and she ends up only after 2 months of fundraising through SarahPAC and its 3-4 employees working out of their home, raising more money that all of Sarah’s potential GOP rivals put together (speculation)and for posing as a serious rival to the GOP party apparatus (RNC)to where those discretionary donations are being funneled to by the base.

technopeasant on April 1, 2009 at 3:34 PM

The GOP is afraid of Palin, very afraid.

mixplix on April 1, 2009 at 6:45 AM

I think this is very true. She came out of nowhere and tapped a thread of intense frustration. And that frustration comes as much from the actions of the GOP as the Donkeys. Palin is a conservative who happens to be a repbulican, not the other way around.

Current GOPer’s owe their power and prosperity to the deals they’ve made and so they have to be “centrists”. But a better word would be ‘dealers’. They have more identification with a party than with ideologies. Without that ideological base, they have no independent vision, and hence they can’t provide leadership. They end up spinning around, looking for consensus, for balance, for popularity, and leave public frustrated because they sound like conservatives, but act just like the donkeycrats.

Fighton03 on April 1, 2009 at 3:47 PM

Just got a call from the RNC on my cell. I just said “Sorry, I’ve given all my money to SarahPAC”, and hung up.

Norwegian on April 1, 2009 at 3:55 PM

in which case what incentive do Politico’s sources have to lie?

LOL!!! Far be it from Politico to have their own prejudiced bias on any topic, but particularly on Palin. Lest you pretend to forget, Politico fabricated whole cloth on the Fred Thompson campaign. And YOUR defense then was the same; “why question Carl Cameron?”

Whether or not Palin talks or doesn’t at this dinner, AP, is not the point of my criticism. It’s feigning that Politico would NEVER fabricate information in order to sell their own bias that I scoff.

maverick muse on April 1, 2009 at 4:00 PM

Just on the basis of the history between the GOP RINO leadership and Palin, there is no way I’m going to accept either side’s version for the time being. But I definitely side with Palin in that the GOP RINOs too flagrantly enjoy manipulating her image poorly, reflecting poorly on the RNC and GOP leaders more so than hurting Palin.

There may well be some things not being admitted. There always are. But the ones who’ve already proven they play dirty are the RINOs “leading” the GOP.

Not for long. That’s bringing out all their angst to pull the plug on Palin, such an easy target for asshats.

maverick muse on April 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

Politico basically prints what people feed them in the pipeline. If those people for the most part hate Sarah Palin or have an agenda to take Sarah down, politico stories will reflect that sentiment or at least show Sarah in an unfavorable light.

Yes, there is reporter bias as well, but if reps of Sarah Palin started to consistently feed Politico reporters info, I would submit that on balance there would be fewer negative stories on Sarah, but even so Sarah would still be reported in an overall negative light.

technopeasant on April 1, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Disinviting Sarah Palin is like leaving Tiger Woods off the Ryder Cup team because he won’t commit to performing now because of injury and then taking offense and willy-nilly choosing a journeyman to replace him well before the deadline is reached where you have to make a move.

technopeasant on April 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Poptech, it’s hard to take people like you seriously, because you supported Barak “I have done absolutely nothing substantive with my life” Obama for president.

TTheoLogan on April 1, 2009 at 9:54 AM

No I haven’t – I don’t support Socialists. I voted Libertarian because McCain and Palin are economic illiterates.

MODERATOR: “…do you support capping carbon emissions?”
PALIN: “I do. I do.”

Poptech on April 1, 2009 at 7:45 PM

She and her husband have run a commercial fishing business for longer.

PastorJon on April 1, 2009 at 12:10 PM

The perpetual myth.

Sarah the CEO? (

“Both returns name Todd Palin as proprietor and the couple’s Wasilla home as a main office. On her public financial disclosure form, Palin describes the business as a sole proprietorship owned by her husband,”

Her husband has a business – she does not.

Poptech on April 1, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Yes…I’m sure your mommy pays you quite well to come up from her basement and defrag her computer.

Fighton03 on April 1, 2009 at 3:29 PM

I did set my mothers computer up some time ago and it auto-defrags using Diskeeper.

Now excuse me while I make money typing this (not what you think, my business is automated) .

Poptech on April 1, 2009 at 7:54 PM


You let some brainless troll suck you into a ‘private sector experience’ trap?

Sarah Palin wasn’t running for VP based on her ‘private sector experience’. She didn’t get elected Governor of the state of Alaska based on her private sector experience.

Here’s her VERY RELEVANT PUBLIC sector experience:

Sarah Louise Palin (née Heath; pronounced /ˈpeɪlɨn/; born February 11, 1964) is the Governor of the American state of Alaska. Palin was a member of the Wasilla, Alaska, city council from 1992 to 1996 and the city’s mayor from 1996 to 2002. After an unsuccessful campaign for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska in 2002, she chaired the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from 2003 to 2004. She was elected Governor of Alaska in November 2006. Palin is the first female governor of Alaska and the youngest person elected governor of that state.


That did indeed give her more executive experience than the assclown that currently resides in the White House. You know, the guy that brings a teleprompter to a press conference and reads the answers to questions he knows are coming because he hand-picked all the reporters he was going to call on anyway. The egomaniac who just gave the English Queen an iPod with two of his own speeches loaded on it.


THAT assclown.

manofaiki on April 1, 2009 at 8:31 PM

manofaiki on April 1, 2009 at 8:31 PM

Palintologists have brains? ROFLMAO!!

Sarah Palin

Political Experience:
– Former Council Member, Wasilla City Council, Alaska, 1992-1996
– Former Mayor, Wasilla City, Alaska, 1996-2002 (pop: 7,028) (Votes: 909)
Failed Candidate, Lieutenant Governor, Alaska, 2002
Resigned, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2003-2004
– Governor, Alaska, 2006-present (2 years) (pop: 670,053) (0.002% of the U.S. population)

Yep she is an Alaskan Politician with no private sector experience. We do not need an economic illiterate running the country.

Poptech on April 1, 2009 at 8:47 PM

What do you think about the illiterate running it right now?

manofaiki on April 1, 2009 at 9:29 PM

Thus the GOP loses as more money will be availiable for SarahPac.

Poptech on April 1, 2009 at 8:47 PM

The Governor paid for her own college education. She had more economic smarts tham most of Washington insiders at a very early age. Can the dolt you supported say the same? Can you?

DannoJyd on April 1, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Her staff at the governor’s office isn’t allowed to communicate with the PAC. That puts a lot of limitations on her, particularly on logistics. If they had confirmation and then she bowed out, I can see why they would be upset but when I hear things like “why would they lie” I tend to brush it off. I don’t absorb speculations. Just the facts, please.

Sarah Palin 2012!!!!!

gocatholic on April 1, 2009 at 11:48 PM

What do you think about the illiterate running it right now?

manofaiki on April 1, 2009 at 9:29 PM

Obama? Absolutely clueless.

. Can the dolt you supported say the same? Can you?

DannoJyd on April 1, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Yes Bob Barr has more economic smarts than Palin and is better educated.

Poptech on April 2, 2009 at 12:26 AM

So let’s take a close look at Bob Barr, the economist …

Repeal the 16th amendment & eliminate the income tax. (Apr 2008)
Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox. (May 1999)

Oh yeah. That would work. With democrats not paying their taxes that would work like an Obamanomics disaster.

Government reform …

Voted YES on banning soft money donations to national political parties. (Jul 2001)
Voted NO on banning soft money and issue ads. (Sep 1999)

Let’s rig the elections in Bobs favor.

On civil rights issues …

Criticizes efforts to restrict rights of homosexuals. (Jun 2008)

OIC! NOW we know why you love the guy so much.

On economics, there really isn’t much linked to Bobby. He seems more interested in the social issues. Let’s call him what he is. Another populist without a clue.

Palin wins hands down against the guy. She has 10 times his experience, and her base exists. Maybe Barr as her v.p.?

DannoJyd on April 2, 2009 at 8:14 AM