Hmmm: Palin sends out fundraising letter … for the RNC

posted at 7:36 pm on August 6, 2010 by Allahpundit

Remember four months ago when she was demanding that they remove her name from an RNC fundraising invitation to donors? Some pol-watchers at the time took that as a sign that she was trying to distance herself from the Republican brand. (“Who wouldn’t want to be sort of seen as more of an outsider and that’s how she’s positioned herself.”) Fast-forward to today and suddenly she’s signing letters on their behalf. What gives? Two theories. One: She’s turned out to be such a good soldier and is so favorably disposed to Michael Steele that she’s willing to do a fundraising favor for an organization that desperately needs one right now to prepare for the midterms. Two: She really is eyeing a presidential run and wants to build a line of political credit with establishment types who aren’t big fans of hers at the moment.

The two aren’t mutually exclusive, of course.

In a surprising move given her reputation as a political outsider, Sarah Palin is helping the Republican National Committee raise money ahead of November’s elections…

“Millions of Americans are expressing their frustration with the state of our government. I join them and seek to return our country to greatness,” reads the letter, obtained by CNN Friday.

“To accomplish this, working within our two party system, I join the RNC – the political home for “Commonsense Conservatives” who want to re-take governance – and I ask you to join me,” the former Republican vice presidential nominee’s letter continues. “Let’s bring our new brand of Reagan conservatism to our party and the country!”

Translation: I know tea partiers and grassroots conservatives aren’t thrilled with Beltway Republicans, but it’s time to be smart and dig deep. How deep? Dude:

The Republican National Committee is entering the fall election season with dire financial problems and, to an unprecedented degree, will be forced to rely upon outside groups to fund activities traditionally paid for by the national party…

With $11 million on hand as of the end of June—and about $2 million in reported debt—the RNC’s paid get-out-the-vote (GOTV) effort will be limited to just targeted House races, POLITICO has learned.

And the committee is only going to be able to spend money on those relatively inexpensive House races thanks to a $10 million line of credit that was approved at the meeting here. Until then, said one incredulous Republican, there was no money available for paid GOTV activities like mailers and automated phone calls.

How bad is it? According to Politico, the RNC’s given $4 million to the NRSC and NRCC thus far, which is as much as it can spare. In 2006, it gave … $57 million. They’re so busted financially that they’re forced to crawl to Palin, the scourge of the “establishment,” and ask her to do what she can to help get the tap turned back on. Given how deeply the disgust runs among grassroots conservatives for Steele’s antics and RNC embarrassments, I’m skeptical that even she can make a dent.

On the other hand, you don’t need much dough if your message is irresistible. “Fire Pelosi!” works for me.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:30 PM

.
.
Damn, that was a well thought out, cogent post.
I believe you’re right.

LincolntheHun on August 6, 2010 at 8:40 PM

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 8:38 PM

Romney has always been establishment. He’s never hidden or flip flopped on that.

If it defeats Democrats, I couldn’t care less. As Gen Marshall said, there’s no limit to what you can do if you don’t care who gets credit.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 8:30 PM

Good point. Fair enough.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 8:40 PM

The eight-part series, produced by reality king Mark Burnett, will feature the former Alaskan governor, her family, and for at least one episode, Kate Gosselin and her children.

unseen on August 6, 2010 at 8:32 PM

Looks like the Kate show didn’t really work out; Kate’s a spoiled city girl who couldn’t take the Great Outdoors for more than 2 hours! (ROFL!):
Sarah Palin and Kate Gosselin’s sucky wilderness adventure

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 8:41 PM

She might as well. She’s been doing Michael Steele’s job for the past 12 months anyway.

Chrisin206 on August 6, 2010 at 8:41 PM

Please.

Romney driving the pickup truck in that $300.00 white linen shirt and Italian tie complete with cuffs has all the authenticity of Julius Streicher showing up as the opening act for Dangerfield in the Catskills.

Who the he!! does the catering for Mittens, anyway?

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:35 PM

LOL! I know. It was so comical to see this. Mitt driving a truck, making a point to be seen driving a truck. I was surprised he didn’t hop out of the truck wearing Carhartt overalls and a hunters cap.

portlandon on August 6, 2010 at 8:42 PM

Like porn, I know it when I see it.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 8:39 PM

Unlike porn…the definition of establishment has not hard to define and has been well known. The definition of establishment has remained the same for a long, long, long time.

Its not one of those I know it when I see it things.

The point is, the establishment apparently needs her, and not the other way around at the moment.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 8:39 PM

That is a fact I can accept.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 8:43 PM

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 8:33 PM

first you are using liberal talking points so you are either a liberal or you sound like one on a blog.

second if association meant being of the establishment then every politican every born is of the establishment. And by your definition there can be no anti-establishment candidate because every politican esp national politicans must work with other politicans.

third establishment means that you consider yourself a member of a certain group (i.e a state of mind)that works for the benefit of that group above and beyond what you do for any other group. Mitt will never sell out his country club buddies to benefit a construction worker or a waiteress. He will propose bills that ensure his click is taken care of and any additional benefit to other groups not of the establishment is secondary. Palin does not know nor has she every considered herself a part of the establishment. her entire governing experience shows she places the people above the establishment. Be it her selling the gov’s jet, firing the cook, cutting spending, taking on the oil industry, taken on the coruuption within the party. Palin has been around the establishment for years yet she always has kept herself apart from it in her mind and it shows in her bills/laws/regulations she shepherded through the state and city as govennor and mayor.

unseen on August 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM

Wow talk about karma!

ProudPalinFan on August 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM

I have two campaigns that I am working with and both of them have been told by the NRCC that they have no money to spend. Two winnable races in Red districts, districts that John McCain and GWB carried handily and they won’t give us any money. One candidate is a State senator whose district covered 80% of the congressional district and the other is a district where one of the most powerful men in the State is running. We are not going to take the house. That is a pipe dream.

Jdripper on August 6, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Got mine. Sorry, Sarah, not the RNC. I can’t trust ‘em.

disa on August 6, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Unlike porn…the definition of establishment has not hard to define and has been well known. The definition of establishment has remained the same for a long, long, long time.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 8:43 PM

It manifests itself in many ways, just like porn.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM

We are not going to take the house. That is a pipe dream.

Jdripper on August 6, 2010 at 8:47 PM

I don’t really think the GOp elites want to take the house. they want to win enough seats to be able to stop Obama but not enough to have to take responsibility for it. Typical elite cowards.

they are still smarting from the clinton move to the middle in 1994 and do not want to repeat that.

unseen on August 6, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Given how deeply the disgust runs among grassroots conservatives for Steele’s antics and RNC embarrassments, I’m skeptical that even she can make a dent.

Eggzackly.

disa on August 6, 2010 at 8:52 PM

I guess I am the orignial Palinista… but I also stand by my own morals. To me, this is wrong.

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 7:56 PM

Ummm….I don’t think so…there are a few people at C4P who would probably beg to differ… just sayin’

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Here’s the deal, the rank and file hate the RNC, but the Establishment doesn’t give a sh*t. They figure that they can foist Mittens on us with tons of negative ads against Palin and Palin won’t have the money to fight back. They figure that Palin won’t have the impact early on that Reagan did.

Rove is clever. He knows that Palin’s base will be so pissed off at Mitten’s negative ads against her that the Reagan/Cuda voters will sit out the 2012 election. They will cost Mittens the election. Rove doesn’t tell Mittens this because Mittens is wrapped up in his vanity and ego. Rove’s actual plan is to get Mitt and Palin out of the way early and clear the way for Jeb and the Family Restoration in 2016.

This is the mountain Palin has to climb. This is why we fight so hard for her. She’s fighting against all the people who ran the party into the ground and the folks whose only aim is to be first in line at the hog trough.

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Fish, the Tea Partiers are the farthest thing from the Borg.

OhioCoastie on August 6, 2010 at 8:11 PM

Umm yeah. Clumsy metaphor on my part. However, the GOP establishment better wake up. The Tea Party is defining the future of conservatism and Sarah Palin is leading the way.

The GOP better start realizing that, stop resisting it and either get on board or get the hell out of the way.

Fishoutofwater on August 6, 2010 at 8:58 PM

victor82 & Chrisin206 have both nailed it.

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 9:00 PM

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Lord, you do have a dark frame of mind. I can’t say that you are wrong, but I do hope that you are!

sharrukin on August 6, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Did I miss something in victor82′s post, Chrisin206?

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 9:07 PM

Try again:Did I miss something in victor82’s post, sharrukin?

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 9:09 PM

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

I didn’t realize Rove’s connections to Bush family were so enduring and intense. Based on Matt Latimer’s recent book on the Bush White House anyway, this didn’t seem the case. Rove came across as a bit of an oddball who’d fallen far out of favor by the end of the second term. I do certainly believe in establishment antipathy to Palin, and that whoever represents the star chamber these days (Rove, et al) will do everything in their power to destroy Palin. Her inherant anti-elitism and “otherness” is bone-chilling to them. But I don’t they’ll catch her or her supporters by surprise.

rrpjr on August 6, 2010 at 9:09 PM

We’ve donated to SarahPac but I don’t care if she showed up on our doorstep and begged the GOP/RNC can go suck eggs.

‘Cause that’s what they do best…..suck!!

PappyD61 on August 6, 2010 at 9:10 PM

This is why we fight so hard for her. She’s fighting against all the people who ran the party into the ground and the folks whose only aim is to be first in line at the hog trough.

Truer words were never spoken. It’s sad but all November is going to do is change the feeders at the trough from D to R.

repvoter on August 6, 2010 at 9:11 PM

She is a Republican. Right?

Wow. Mystery solved.

Dongemaharu on August 6, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Sarah can ask for money for the RNC until she’s blue in the face, but it won’t open my wallet. I don’t trust the RNC and I don’t trust Brother Steele, who’s spent money like a drunken sailor with nothing to show for it. When the RNC gets back to first principles – which means running its own ship like they say they’re going to run the country: lean and mean – we can have a conversation.

CatoRenasci on August 6, 2010 at 9:16 PM

It manifests itself in many ways, just like porn.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM

No it doesn’t.

Words have meaning and are clearly defined. Even with words that have multiple meanings or uses, your of “establishment” definition was cannot be found in any official published or online dictionary.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Truer words were never spoken. It’s sad but all November is going to do is change the feeders at the trough from D to R.

repvoter on August 6, 2010 at 9:11 PM

Really?
So voting’s worthless: is that your considered opinion?

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 9:18 PM

I’ll throw it in the trash unopened, just like I have done to the hundreds that they have sent me in the last two years.

But I’ll send some more checks directly to the few actual conservatives running for office.

Saw Steele on TV a few hours ago trying to sell some red baseball caps or something.
I cringed.

Palin is rapidly becoming another Steele, except with less melanin and more makeup.

LegendHasIt on August 6, 2010 at 9:20 PM

It manifests itself in many ways, just like porn.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM

No it doesn’t.

Words have meaning and are clearly defined. Even with words that have multiple meanings or uses, your of “establishment” definition was cannot be found in any official published or online dictionary.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Do you agree that there’s a GOP Establishment? Yes, you do. Do you realize that your favored candidate, Mitt Romney, is a favorite of that Establishment? Yes, you do. Do you realize that Sarah Palin is NOT the one that that Establishment wants to be its standard-bearer in 2012? Yes, you do. The rest is sophistry.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Try again:Did I miss something in victor82’s post, sharrukin?

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Well, the idea that Karl Rove is planning on throwing the 2012 election so that Romney and Palin are removed as threats to the Bush family.

sharrukin on August 6, 2010 at 9:21 PM

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

That is the most messed up conspiracy theory I’ve ever seen.

And no basis in fact.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:23 PM

She’s focused on regaining control of the House and Senate. That begins in 2010. If Steele has asked the Former Governor to help with fundraising with that goal in mind, why shouldn’t she help?

Gohawgs on August 6, 2010 at 9:26 PM

She’s focused on regaining control of the House and Senate. That begins in 2010. If Steele has asked the Former Governor to help with fundraising with that goal in mind, why shouldn’t she help?

Gohawgs on August 6, 2010 at 9:26 PM

She should. It’s just hilarious that she’s being asked after how many “top GOP strategists” have branded her an embarrassment and impediment to the party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:28 PM

Palin is rapidly becoming another Steele, except with less melanin and more makeup.

LegendHasIt on August 6, 2010 at 9:20 PM

How did you come to this conclusion?
(Pretty nasty comment, BTW, regarding both of them.)

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 9:28 PM

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:20 PM

I agree with you that people see Palin as anti-establishment and Romney as belonging to the Establishment.

All I’m saying is that unseen’s definition of establishment:

Being of the establishment means you expound ideas that enrich your friends at the cost of the little guy without regard for rules, laws, regulations. It means that you think because of your money, position, friends that you are better than others.

unseen on August 6, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Has never, ever, been definition of establishment. Not in any different meanings or usage of the word.

No official dictionary either in print or online as ever listed what unseen has said as part of the definition of establishment.

You’re fighting a grammar, spelling and word Nazi here. :)

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:30 PM

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Sorry, victor, but that theory is just silly!
There will not be another Bush who runs for office, especially Jeb, who has all the wrong positions on amnesty and off-shore drilling.
Nor will people be led by Karl Rove, in spite of the fact that he’s filling in for Rush on Monday.

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 9:31 PM

How did you come to this conclusion?
(Pretty nasty comment, BTW, regarding both of them.)

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 9:28 PM

This is one of the few times I actually agree with Jenfidel.

I agree…where in Hades did does this guy come to this conclusion?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:31 PM

What is a “Commonsense” Conservative? I hope it isn’t the same as a “compassionate” conservative. Is it the same as a “mainstream” conservative as Carly Fiorina calls herself?

RedRobin145 on August 6, 2010 at 9:33 PM

She should. It’s just hilarious that she’s being asked after how many “top GOP strategists” have branded her an embarrassment and impediment to the party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:28 PM

True. But Palin knows how to be a part of a team. The goal is to thwart the dems and their socialist agenda. The 2010 elections are the beginning of that effort and getting R’s elected is key.

Gohawgs on August 6, 2010 at 9:34 PM

I think the RNC is missing the MILLIONS that most of us are now sending directly to the candidates in the primary, the REAL conservatives. No more DEDE, no more Newt on a couch with Pelosi, etc. They have proven they can’t be trusted to be good stewards of our money. Sorry Palin, but I will send some $$ to SarahPAC.

karenhasfreedom on August 6, 2010 at 9:36 PM

Being of the establishment means you expound ideas that enrich your friends at the cost of the little guy without regard for rules, laws, regulations. It means that you think because of your money, position, friends that you are better than others.

unseen on August 6, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Has never, ever, been definition of establishment. Not in any different meanings or usage of the word.

No official dictionary either in print or online as ever listed what unseen has said as part of the definition of establishment.

You’re fighting a grammar, spelling and word Nazi here. :)

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:30 PM

Unseen’s definition does indeed partly describe the GOP Establishment. When you come right down to it, there’s not a lot to distinguish it from the Democrats. The elites of both parties want as few threats to the status quo as possible.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Unseen’s definition does indeed partly describe the GOP Establishment. When you come right down to it, there’s not a lot to distinguish it from the Democrats. The elites of both parties want as few threats to the status quo as possible.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:38 PM

It might or might not be an accurate description establishment but its never been a definition of the word “establishment”.

Its a subtle difference but I think you’re bright enough to see the difference.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:41 PM

Ummm….I don’t think so…there are a few people at C4P who would probably beg to differ… just sayin’

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 8:52 PM

let me tell you a little story. Once there was this kid named JR who was here at HA. There were also a few other commenters, one with the abbreviation of RAM.

Allah thought to do a post on who would be picked for a VP run. I proposed Sarah Palin, in which Allah replied to me, who is that? With that said JR googled her (as she was at the time the Gov for only 6 months in Alaska) and in which the other person with the abbreviation name asked me about her as well. I told them how she was my Gov and how she had credibility and so on. And this also happened around the time Sarah was starting to be more recognized but hadn’t quite had the Alaskan Bloggers come after her.

So around january 2009 I got an email asking to join a couple people for a pro-palin blog. I politely said no. They grew and grew.. and some of those “orignal” supposed people decided to come after the “Alaskans” who didn’t save Sarah. Hmmmm who could those people be?

CCRWM… I know who created c4p, so don’t play coy. I know quite a bit about other things. I also know how some get shafted as well. Do you really want me to go there?

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 9:41 PM

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 8:38 PM
Romney has always been establishment. He’s never hidden or flip flopped on that.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 8:40 PM

So what was your point then…that she’s establishment like Romney? Because frankly the way you said it had a negative connotation.. are you criticizing your own guy too?

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 9:43 PM

I agree with ddrintn and unseen on their take on the GOP establishment. The guys in D.C. seem more intent on getting along and not making waves than being the Party of small govt, fiscal responsibility, individual liberty, etc…

By and large, the GOP establishment has morphed into being bureaucrats…

Gohawgs on August 6, 2010 at 9:45 PM

Rove and the establishment hates Steele as must as they hate Palin. Palin knows this. Rove and Bush are on record bragging about how they have destroyed the conservative party or movement. Rove is probably behind everything going wrong at the RNC

In the first ad she asked them to remove her name nicely at first because it was false advertistment.

This time she agreed to have her name used.

Big difference between the two.

Steele has the organization and the donors list in place. If Gov. Palin can help Steele pull in some funds and help conservatives win with those funds then Steele and what he knows about the RNC organization will be in Palin’s corner.

The name of the game is to take back one house. The name of the game is headcount. We have one election to get this right.

Open your pockets for the People’s Governor.

oldyeller on August 6, 2010 at 9:45 PM

I’m willing to give again. I haven’t contributed since early 2006. I’ve had numerous discussions with RNC callers since, long, blunt and biting. Three times, they’ve put me through to the call manager, and once on to the next level up.

But for Palin to have clout, she needs to show she has it, too. Ten or twenty bucks is a small price to pay giving her that clout. If half her 2M Facebook Fans tossed in $20, the RNC would see $20M, double what they have now. And wherever that money goes, the recipient will know where it came from. $20M would be about $40K for each of the 535 senators and congressmen running. $20M would let them know she can turn the spigot on … or off.

To me it’s a small price to pay, but it’s going with a note explaining why and what my line-in-the-sand expectations are.

I will just have to check on one thing before I send money, and that is, are the primaries over? If they are, then that’s one less screw up I can be sure they won’t make.

Dusty on August 6, 2010 at 9:49 PM

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Every time I see Rove on Fox and Hannity calls him the “Architect” I just think, yeah the architect of the Republican’s ruin…the one who helped usher in Obama… and quitting Bush a year before he left office doesn’t distance him from Bush either…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 9:50 PM

So what was your point then…that she’s establishment like Romney? Because frankly the way you said it had a negative connotation.. are you criticizing your own guy too?

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 9:43 PM

All I’m saying is that people like Palin becuase she’s been anti-establishment. Or she’s perceived to be so.

Yet, Palin was rumored to be considering going third party but all of a sudden she was urging people not to go third party. How do you explain the flip flop?

Maybe the Establishment party sat her down and educated her to her why 3rd party is a bad idea. At any rate, she went along with the establishment and may have been doing so ever since.

I have no problem with Mitt Romney as an establishment guy. I would have no problem if Palin was an establishment gal either.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:52 PM

True. But Palin knows how to be a part of a team. The goal is to thwart the dems and their socialist agenda. The 2010 elections are the beginning of that effort and getting R’s elected is key.

Trudat, throw in the impending redistricting and even the most paleo paleo-cons need to walk the donkey and pitch to the RINO. If Palin wasn’t already on board with this whole concept she never would have agreed to run with the RINO poster-boy in the first place.

Knott Buyinit on August 6, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Every time I see Rove on Fox and Hannity calls him the “Architect” I just think, yeah the architect of the Republican’s ruin…the one who helped usher in Obama… and quitting Bush a year before he left office doesn’t distance him from Bush either…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 9:50 PM

As much as I like Rove, I can’t disagree with your assessment here.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:54 PM

“Remember four months ago when she was demanding that they remove her name from an RNC fundraising invitation to donors? Some pol-watchers at the time took that as a sign that she was trying to distance herself from the Republican brand.”

Wasn’t her name included to imply she was speaking, though she hadn’t agreed to? And wasn’t this blog, and many other sites, busting her chops over being “disorganized?”

Looks like a very different context. Her name is being used, with permission, to raise money for 2010 midterms.

cs89 on August 6, 2010 at 9:56 PM

We’ve donated to SarahPac but I don’t care if she showed up on our doorstep and begged the GOP/RNC can go suck eggs.

‘Cause that’s what they do best…..suck!!

PappyD61 on August 6, 2010 at 9:10 PM

Pappy I don’t think that Palin would do this for the RNC without laying out some strict ground rules…they are the committee we are stuck with for now and I certainly don’t want American Crossroads, which Victor is talking about, manuevering another elitist status quo repub like Jeb Bush on us… so for now I don’t see any other viable group on deck to help Republicans do you?

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 9:56 PM

Hmmm: Palin sends out fundraising letter … for the RNC

How much more proof is needed…
I don’t care what the circumstances are/were…
just understand…

jerrytbg on August 6, 2010 at 9:59 PM

Not everyone is sure of Palin’s stance. Is she establishment or not?

The real question is whether or not Sarah Palin really represents grassroots conservative America or if she is a creature of the “establishment.” On this point, certain questions present themselves. For one, why would a Council on Foreign Relations-run McCain campaign pick Palin to begin with? Surely they understood that she would become a conservative icon regardless of the outcome of the 2009 election. And Alaska does not exactly have many electoral votes to have helped win the election. And why would Palin, if she is anti-establishment, run on McCain’s establishment ticket?

Now, how can Palin support McCain and the Tea Party movement at the same time? They are not just miles apart; they are diametrically opposed, at least at the grassroots of the organization.

Palin is obviously a mainstream Republican. She has become surrounded by people who are very astute. We hope she will not be a pawn for the Establishment to help control their own opposition.

Source.

Good questions to say the least.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:00 PM

Yet, Palin was rumored to be considering going third party but all of a sudden she was urging people not to go third party. How do you explain the flip flop?

[Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:52 PM]

So now it’s a flip-flop when you hear a rumor and it turns out to be exactly wrong? Dude, the bar can’t get that low.

Dusty on August 6, 2010 at 10:00 PM

Palin is rapidly becoming another Steele, except with less melanin and more makeup.

LegendHasIt on August 6, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Seriously! is this the best you can come up with? Do you think that the people who comment on here regularly dont’ realize that a lot of new names have materialized lately and they project (rather badly) that they are Palinistas but are just not going ot support this Palin request???

I would love to know how much Soros pays for the trolls that Axelrod uses to try to create the anti Palin narrative…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:02 PM

All I’m saying is that people like Palin becuase she’s been anti-establishment. Or she’s perceived to be so.

Yet, Palin was rumored to be considering going third party but all of a sudden she was urging people not to go third party. How do you explain the flip flop?

Maybe the Establishment party sat her down and educated her to her why 3rd party is a bad idea. At any rate, she went along with the establishment and may have been doing so ever since.

I have no problem with Mitt Romney as an establishment guy. I would have no problem if Palin was an establishment gal either.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:52 PM

False dichotomy. Being anti-Establishment doesn’t HAVE to be pro-third party. Palin’s never to my knowledge floated the idea of forming some competing new party. She’s held to the idea that grassroots conservatives need to dominate the Republican party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:02 PM

She’s focused on regaining control of the House and Senate. That begins in 2010. If Steele has asked the Former Governor to help with fundraising with that goal in mind, why shouldn’t she help?

Gohawgs on August 6, 2010 at 9:26 PM

She should. It’s just hilarious that she’s being asked after how many “top GOP strategists” have branded her an embarrassment and impediment to the party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 9:28 PM

She KNOWS third party doesn’t work unfortunately.
She has always said she wants to serve and her record shows she gets passionate about an issue and works to solve it.
She knows Obama must be stopped and she is the ONLY ONE speaking up to stop him.
She has 2 MILLION facebook fans!
Her endorsements are pure GOLD in the 70%range at least!
She needs supporters inside if she is to win!
She cares not what people say she does what she thinks is right!
The RNC is desperate for funds and came to Sarah for help!
Its just like campaigning for MCDumba$$, what would you all be saying if she said NO. What would NO I WON”T HELP REPUBLICANS LOOK LIKE WHEN SHE HAS SAID ALL ALONG SHE WANTS TO ELECT CONSERVATIVES?
The lady who put corrupt Republicans in jail, who negotiated with big oil for better deals for her people, who got a pipeline started, who is kickin Obamas butt almost daily told the RNC yes. Think she negotiated nothing for her help?

Well hell, I’m IN!
In for $25 to the RNC and more to candidates nationwide that need help and run a money bomb. I’m in for Angle, Hayworth, Toomey, West, and others who need support!

If Sarah thinks its right then I deferr to the lady with the track record!
Sarah I’m IN!

The GOP naysayers had best get IN or get out of the way. Krauthammer, Rove, Gillispie had better get IN or GET steamrolled cause this lady has more balls than the NBA and more political smarts than the above mentioned!

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:04 PM

Sorry Palin, but I will send some $$ to SarahPAC.

karenhasfreedom on August 6, 2010 at 9:36 PM

This is probably the more viable option for us Palin supporters…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:06 PM

Palin is obviously a mainstream Republican.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:00 PM

What?!?!? That’s not what we’ve been told for the past year and a half, until it became apparent she wasn’t going to fade away (as I think she was supposed to do).

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:10 PM

CCRWM… I know who created c4p, so don’t play coy. I know quite a bit about other things. I also know how some get shafted as well. Do you really want me to go there?

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 9:41 PM

What do you mean about don’t play coy? I know C4Ps history too and I know the work that Joey and Rebecca did to get it going and I respect the people who are running it…they do great work… Upi sometimes when an entity gets going the people with the right temperament for that particular entity are the ones who take it to its next level…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Palin’s never to my knowledge floated the idea of forming some competing new party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:02 PM

She has floated the idea of forming a new third party:

HANNITY: If it’s a strong conservative that gets the Republican nomination and then a tea party member runs as a third party candidate, do you have any worry about that?

PALIN: I do have a little bit of worry about that but at the same time that can be part of a healthy process, though. A third party candidate can really shore-up a Republican candidate in terms of that Republican candidate having to be very strong and sharp and debate aggressively, regarding the positions that they have taken.

A third party candidate, I think, Sean, can actually help in this process. And if nothing else a third party candidate is going to help keep the Republican Party being held accountable, too.

Source.

And then she was against the idea of forming a third party telling her conservatives to either pick R or D.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:17 PM

In the beginning I was a HUGE fan of SP…
Especially when the Alaskan gop would have, given the opportunity, thrown her into the Bering Sea…
Now…she’s cozying up to the rnc…just because they asked…not good enough…
Smells like gmo salmon…

jerrytbg on August 6, 2010 at 10:17 PM

She has floated the idea of forming a new third party:

HANNITY: If it’s a strong conservative that gets the Republican nomination and then a tea party member runs as a third party candidate, do you have any worry about that?

PALIN: I do have a little bit of worry about that but at the same time that can be part of a healthy process, though. A third party candidate can really shore-up a Republican candidate in terms of that Republican candidate having to be very strong and sharp and debate aggressively, regarding the positions that they have taken.

A third party candidate, I think, Sean, can actually help in this process. And if nothing else a third party candidate is going to help keep the Republican Party being held accountable, too.

Source.

And then she was against the idea of forming a third party telling her conservatives to either pick R or D.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:17 PM

That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement of a third party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Yet, Palin was rumored to be considering going third party but all of a sudden she was urging people not to go third party. How do you explain the flip flop?

Maybe the Establishment party sat her down and educated her to her why 3rd party is a bad idea. At any rate, she went along with the establishment and may have been doing so ever since.
Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 9:52 PM

That is a lot of conjecture on your part and you offer your opinion and call her a flip flopper, which Romney actually is, based on a “rumor”…that is totally transparent and unfair…if someone were even to believe you that is…

Will you answer this question: Are you just a Mormon who supports Romney or do you actually work for him? or both?

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:21 PM

That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement of a third party.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:20 PM

To run a third party candidate…you need a third party by definition.

She doesn’t mean she wants another Republican candidate. She supported a third party candidate, which, cannot be done unless its a third party.

She supported the idea of having a third party.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:24 PM

In order to win Sarah has to go through the Republican Party. I wish she could do third party and teach the RINOs a lesson but it will only guarantee failure, only guarantee the people she wants to defeat the Dems win.

She does not intend to lose or to be the reason Dems win!

Rumsfeld said it best, You go to war with the weapons you have not the ones you wish you had!

Sarah is building her Army on TV, in the bookstores,on Facebook, and now in the RNC.

Soon the oppostion will be surrounded and it will be fun to see if they play Baghdad Bob and say Palin, Sarah? she can’t win, shes a quitter, shes’ not smart like those of us who can’t draw 1/2 the crowds or raise 1/2 the money.

Seems in their best Baghdad Bob immitation they have been sayin that and she is still around and still kickin a$$!

I said a long time ago I would VOTE for Romney, Newt, even Huck or Pawlenty hold my nose and vote!

I said long ago I would contribute and work for a fighter like Sarah!
I DIDN’T LIE I”M IN!

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:24 PM

She supported a third party candidate, which, cannot be done unless its a third party.

She supported the idea of having a third party.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:24 PM

Saying that a third party will help strengthen the ideological moorings of the Republican party is NOT the same as encouraging the formation of that party, and you know it.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:26 PM

Will you answer this question: Are you just a Mormon who supports Romney or do you actually work for him? or both?

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:21 PM

I am a Mormon.

But I support Romney even if he wasn’t Mormon. There are lots of non-Mormons who support Mitt.

I worked as a volunteer in Mitt 2008 campaign and briefly worked as a volunteer on Mitt’s No Appology book tour at two book stores.

Never have I worked for him in any paid official capacity.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:28 PM

PALIN: I do have a little bit of worry about that but at the same time that can be part of a healthy process, though. A third party candidate can really shore-up a Republican candidate in terms of that Republican candidate having to be very strong and sharp and debate aggressively, regarding the positions that they have taken.
A third party candidate, I think, Sean, can actually help in this process. And if nothing else a third party candidate is going to help keep the Republican Party being held accountable, too.
Source.
And then she was against the idea of forming a third party telling her conservatives to either pick R or D.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:17 PM

How dumb do you think we are? She is clearly saying that a 3rd Party candidate can serve to light a fire under Republican candidates not that she wants a 3rd party candidate…we can think and reason and see throufgh your attempted obfuscation here…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:29 PM

Well, the idea that Karl Rove is planning on throwing the 2012 election so that Romney and Palin are removed as threats to the Bush family.

sharrukin on August 6, 2010 at 9:21 PM

It’s not like I’ve never been wrong before, but here’s where I stand; I really think of all the former Bush staffers as PROGRESSIVE first, until proven otherwise. Guilty until proven innocent. In this case, I believe there is sufficient evidence to warrant this mental attitude and approach. Cleaning PROGRESSIVISM out of the Republican Party is arguably more important than winning the next election. You don’t have to agree with me on this, but I hope I explained my agreement with victor82 sufficiently so as to be understood.

Sorry for the lateness of this. Just came in from helping a neighbor corral livestock that got loose. As much as a fat man with a bad knee could help, anyway. . .

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 10:29 PM

Saying that a third party will help strengthen the ideological moorings of the Republican party is NOT the same as encouraging the formation of that party, and you know it.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:26 PM

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say she doesn’t encourage the formation of third party yet at the same time say she encourages the formation of at third party to help strengthen the ideological moorings of the Republican party.

Either she encouraged it or she didn’t. Which is it?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:30 PM

She supported the idea of having a third party.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:24 PM

In the Primaries! She was talking in the primaries. Not in the general election!

On another note it will be interesting to see what Rove has to say on Rush’s show Monday.
See if Roves got the Rush or Cuda killer instinct or is all Bush tamed!

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:31 PM

She doesn’t mean she wants another Republican candidate. She supported a third party candidate, which, cannot be done unless its a third party.

She supported the idea of having a third party.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:24 PM

Again we can read, understand and interpret her words for ourselves we aren’t going to fall for you telling us what she means ..c’mon you’ve been posting here long enough to know that the sincere commenters here are smart…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:33 PM

In the Primaries! She was talking in the primaries. Not in the general election!

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:31 PM

At least one Palin supporter is admitting she supported creation of a third party.

There’s no obfuscation here. Either she encouraged it or she didn’t. Which is it?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:33 PM

I am a Mormon.

But I support Romney even if he wasn’t Mormon. There are lots of non-Mormons who support Mitt.

I worked as a volunteer in Mitt 2008 campaign and briefly worked as a volunteer on Mitt’s No Appology book tour at two book stores.

Never have I worked for him in any paid official capacity.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:28 PM

Thank you for answering…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:35 PM

Either she encouraged it or she didn’t. Which is it?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:30 PM

Hannity posed the queston she just responded to his question…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM

I did not say she supported the CREATION of a third Party!
She said she thought it COULD toughen the Republican and I believe she was talking about the primaries!
She knows a third party is poison in the General Election.
WOW you go to putting words in anyones mouth to destroy her credibility. What does that say for your candidate!

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM

Thank you for answering…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:35 PM

You’re welcome. :)

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM

So…now she maybe supported the idea of creating a third party (but only in the primaries) thinking it could toughen the Republican party?

Again…either she supported it or didn’t. Which is it?

Its simple as a yes or no answer. Yes or no?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:41 PM

I do understand the skepticism of Conservative Samizdat and others towards my “Rove the Saboteur” theory, but know this:

American Crossroads was formed to soak up donor money and to keep it out of the hands of those Republicans that Rove and Gillespie (and I presume other people connected with the Bush Family apparat) did not want elected, like Palin. It exists to undermine and then take over the RNC. It also exists to make sure that the Reagan/Goldwater/Palin wing of the Party never again assumes power.

These people want their turn at the trough. The only reason they are upset with Obama is his clients are first in line at the trough. That’s all.

Palin sees this, of that I’m sure. That’s why she trusts very few people in D.C..

One last thing: I don’t think Jeb Bush will ever let Karl Rove near his national campaign, not after the Florida Recount. Karl made Jeb look bad, and that’s not smart. Still, knocking people like Palin out of the way so Jeb has a smooth glide path might help Karl out in the long run.

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 10:43 PM

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say she doesn’t encourage the formation of third party yet at the same time say she encourages the formation of at third party to help strengthen the ideological moorings of the Republican party.

Either she encouraged it or she didn’t. Which is it?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:30 PM

I didn’t say she “encouraged” either. She merely said that the presence of a third party would keep Republicans on their toes. It seems pretty clear from the quote.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:44 PM

PALIN: I do have a little bit of worry about that but at the same time that can be part of a healthy process, though. A third party candidate can really shore-up a Republican candidate in terms of that Republican candidate having to be very strong and sharp and debate aggressively, regarding the positions that they have taken.
A third party candidate, I think, Sean, can actually help in this process. And if nothing else a third party candidate is going to help keep the Republican Party being held accountable, too.

I don’t play yes, no games Shawn Hannity!

She believes in competition! That is what she is saying here. I believe she was talking primaries only when she spoke of the process and SHORING UP THE REPUBLICAN!

She definitely wants to elect Conservatives and is doing so far more effectively than the rest of the pack put together!

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:48 PM

dhunter on August 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM
So…now she maybe supported the idea of creating a third party (but only in the primaries) thinking it could toughen the Republican party?

Again…either she supported it or didn’t. Which is it?

Its simple as a yes or no answer. Yes or no?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:41 PM

You’re kind of pushing this hard…is this a meme Romney is trying out…to see the if it gets traction or what the rebuttals are?

Okay I’ll answer with a simple and firm “no”. I can tell you unequivocably she is not for a third party and could probably link to videos where she says it… including this one with Hannity (the part that you left out).

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:49 PM

Still, knocking people like Palin out of the way so Jeb has a smooth glide path might help Karl out in the long run.

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 10:43 PM

But don’t you think the Bush name evokes an immediate No response..can it be rehabilitated for Jeb? There is a reason Bush lost conservatives in the end… too much spending and too little fighting the Dems…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:52 PM

Hannity posed the queston she just responded to his question…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM

I gave you a straightforward answer when you asked me about me being a Mormon and why I support Mitt and if I have worked for him.

Please give me a straight answer.

She merely said that the presence of a third party would keep Republicans on their toes. It seems pretty clear from the quote.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 10:44 PM

Even if what you’re saying is true, it still doesn’t resolve the ultimate question.

Does she support the presence, creation, formation (or whatever else you want to call it( of a third party or not?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:04 PM

You’re kind of pushing this hard…is this a meme Romney is trying out…to see the if it gets traction or what the rebuttals are?

Okay I’ll answer with a simple and firm “no”. I can tell you unequivocably she is not for a third party and could probably link to videos where she says it… including this one with Hannity (the part that you left out).

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:49 PM

LOL…no this isn’t some new meme.

And thank you for your straightforward response.

I gave you a straightforward answer when you asked me about me being a Mormon and why I support Mitt and if I have worked for him.

Please give me a straight answer.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:04 PM

CCRWM, I was away from dinner and didn’t refresh the page to see if there was any new responses. Please disregard my posted quote above.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:07 PM

Even if what you’re saying is true, it still doesn’t resolve the ultimate question.

Does she support the presence, creation, formation (or whatever else you want to call it( of a third party or not?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:04 PM

I think she’s been pretty clear that she doesn’t support a third party.

But this hammering at this particular theme is a little inconsistent with your assertion that Palin’s always been as establishment as anyone else.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 11:14 PM

But this hammering at this particular theme is a little inconsistent with your assertion that Palin’s always been as establishment as anyone else.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 11:14 PM

I never said she was establishment. All I said was I don’t care if she was establishment. And I also said that there are some signs that she may have been establishment all along. But that is a subject up for debate.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:18 PM

It (American Crossroads) exists to make sure that the Reagan/Goldwater/Palin wing of the Party never again assumes power.

victor82 on August 6, 2010 at 10:43 PM

Bingo.

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 11:19 PM

I’m going out to see a movie with friends. Talk to y’all later.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:19 PM

I never said she was establishment. All I said was I don’t care if she was establishment. And I also said that there are some signs that she may have been establishment all along. But that is a subject up for debate.

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 11:18 PM

Well then the “fact” (as you see it) that she wanted a third party should end that particular debate.

ddrintn on August 6, 2010 at 11:21 PM

I prefer an original...Hint hint…
understand Sarah? It’s like sleeping with the enemy…
Damn…gone…

jerrytbg on August 6, 2010 at 11:25 PM

I, too, am a Palin fan who won’t give to the RNC. Has nothing to do with Steele and everything to do with the failure to hold to their platform when they had the votes in 2000-2006. (The only time they had both houses and the Presidency in my adult lifetime!) We wanted school vouchers, they voted for Bush-Kennedy! We wanted a secure border, they voted for amnesty! Then there was McCain-Feingold! They got us all into this mess by becoming Democrat lites. And they never stood up for the party platform in front of the press. WIMPS! Therefore, they never get any money from me regardless who asks – even Sarahcuda.
However, I have sent money to individual candidates and suggest you all who feel as I do, do the same:
Angle, Bachmann, Hayworth, Haley, Rubio, etc. Don’t send through a third party, just go to their campaign websites. That way your more assured that none of the money goes to the RNC.

Christian Conservative on August 6, 2010 at 11:31 PM

Either she encouraged it or she didn’t. Which is it?

Conservative Samizdat on August 6, 2010 at 10:30 PM

She’s never encouraged it, even though she was pressed to when the Tea Party started gathering real momentum and she was often leading the TP pack.
What is your problem?
That she’s “no better” than Mittens because she’s joined “the establishment?”
Sarah’s always made it clear that she was a proud REPUBLICAN, even when she went up against the GOP good old boys in AK.

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 11:32 PM

My comment has little to do with Palin’s letter and a lot to do with her fans turning everything she does, good or bad, into a brilliant move.
Proud Rino on August 6, 2010 at 7:50 PM

Well she got Politifact to double down on stupid, in a snarky way.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/aug/06/sarah-palin/sarah-palin-said-democrats-have-no-plan-extend-som/

Democrats do not have a plan for extending the Bush tax cuts.

Palin, the former governor of Alaska, made several points in her rebuttal, the primary one being that the Democrats haven’t put forward a plan stating how they intend to address the expiring Bush tax cuts. Palin’s comments on Fox News Sunday gave the impression that Democrats want to see them all expire.

In fact, Democrats have repeatedly stated they only intend to let lower tax rates expire for individuals making more than $200,000 or couples making more than $250,000. And that’s nowhere near the largest tax increase in history, as we noted in our rating.

After explaining why Palin is wrong about the Dems not having a “plan”

Paragraph 17, (17 paragraphs to get to the point)

Palin does make a good point that there is not pending legislation to make some parts of the Bush tax cuts permanent. Certainly, lots of unexpected and surprising things can happen when Congress actually begins to take up legislation.

Note: there is not pending legislation to do anything on the Bush tax cuts, not to extend, not to repeal, nada nothing. Basically Palin is correct.

It’s possible that Congress could become entirely gridlocked. If no legislation passes, the Bush tax cuts will indeed expire for all incomes.

Note: Congress has been in total Dem control since the 06.
Obama has been President for almost 2 years.

There is no plan, no pending legislation, nothing.

I’m beginning to think Politifact doesn’t read what they wrote.
Or they don’t understand what they wrote.

Or they could be blinded by hate.

It did take a real long time for Politifact to realize a “Federal tax on cigarette” was in fact a “Federal tax”.

DSchoen on August 6, 2010 at 11:36 PM

What do you mean about don’t play coy? I know C4Ps history too and I know the work that Joey and Rebecca did to get it going and I respect the people who are running it…they do great work… Upi sometimes when an entity gets going the people with the right temperament for that particular entity are the ones who take it to its next level…

CCRWM on August 6, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Which level do you mean oh CCRWM? I could say so much in that little phrase you just said. There are only two people I respect on that blog in which they rarely blog anymore…. but that temperment you speak of doesn’t “work” there anymore and moved on to “Higher” things. Interesting how that works, huh.

upinak on August 7, 2010 at 12:09 AM

YOU VERY WELL COULD BE RIGHT……Don’t trust Rove and Ed Gillespie or ANY OF THE BUSH FAMILY.They have nearly destroyed the GOP with their Progressivism.

Rove also might be forcing Mitt or whomever to pick JEB as the VP setting up JEB as the 2016 FRONT RUNNER.

These traitors in the GOP are long term thinkers.

PappyD61 on August 7, 2010 at 12:49 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3