When I first heard that Politico was making a fuss about a comment Rick Santorum made about Palin, I thought this was more manufactured Palin controversies from Politco. Then I read and saw what Santorum said and in the words of Palin I had a WTF moment.
Politico: “I have a feeling that she has some demands on her time, and a lot of them have financial benefit attached to them,” Santorum told conservative commentator S.E. Cupp, who hosts an online radio show on Glenn Beck’s website.
Santorum added that Palin has “other business opportunities” — implying her paid speeches were the former Alaska governor’s priority.
The former Alaska governor has become a money-making machine since 2008, with her annual income estimated as high as $30 million.
Santorum — the father of seven children — also said that Palin has “other responsibilities,” such as raising her children, that he doesn’t.
“I don’t live in Alaska and I’m not the mother to all these kids and I don’t have other responsibilities that she has,” he said.
What is the point of talking about "financial benefit" unless you want to make an issue of it. If Santorum wanted to say Palin is busy, then there is just no need to add all that stuff about "financial benefit".
Santorum's quip about Palin being busy and raising kids pretty much outs his remarks as an attack. The man has seven kids himself so why on earth should Palin's five be an issue?
Some people are saying if you watch the video, Santorum's words are much kinder. OK, lets watch.
Nope, those remarks are still pretty funky. Santorum is obviously trying to elevate his chances by stepping on Sarah's toes. And you know what that is fine. Politics is a rough and tumble business. The general election is going to be exceptionally rough and tumble. So whomever the GOP candidate is had better have cojones of steel.
Santorum fails the cojones test, because once the mess hits the fan, Santorum back peddles on his words with this tweet.
Politico: “This article is garbage,” Santorum tweeted this morning, linking to the POLITICO story. “All I said was- she is VERY busy, PERIOD. Reporter trying to create something out of nothing.
Come on Rick, man up. You said a whole lot more than she was "very busy". If you want to go toe to toe with Obama in 2012, you had better be man enough to stand up to Palin. Otherwise, Palin will walk all over you like you like a bear skin rug. Tonight on Hannity, Palin did exactly that:
The Right Scoop: “I think the reports were much worse than what he really said. I think some things were really taken out of context. So I will not call him the knuckle dragging Neanderthal that perhaps others would want to call him. I’ll let his wife call him that instead.” [See video here]
Anyone want to bet that Palin doesn't tweet an apology either?
I really hope Palin runs, just so that I can watch her beat down some of these effete Republican males.
Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico
Via: Politico
Via: The Right Scoop
Posts
8 comments:
I am not a big fan of either of these people. I don't see it the way you see it.
Palin backed out of the keynote spot with just over a week to go after "discussions". If Feb is so busy for her why was she considering it at all? Hmm, could it be they couldn't/wouldn't pay her full fee? Hardly an unwarrented assumption.
She was asked to come and speak at an upstart conservative woman's conference and wouldn't do it because of money. Malkin keynoted the year before when it was even less well known and had fewer dollars. She did it to help the cause, and took almost nothing for doing it. Palin wouldn't do it because they couldn't pay the high fee. And no I am not comparing the fees that these two woman get, obviously Palin's is higher. But Malkin doesn't do it for free normally.
Again, I am not a fan of Santorum so I have no dog in this fight. If she was busy she would have known that much earlier than she did. There is more to it than that, and people have the right to question what it is. This is the third year in a row that she has backed out at the last minute. One week before is rude. Just plain rude.
Look she wants to go out and make money for her family, go ahead. But, don't act surprised or hurt when someone calls you on it. She needs to stop answering every critism in the same interviews she is talking about Obama being thin skinned. Kettle met black.
JACG:
We do see it differently. I don't have a problem with Palin backing out of CPAC even if it is because of the fee. $100k is nothing to sneeze at or forfeit here and there.
Palin has fought very hard for conservatives over the last two years and has gotten complete hell for it. So I just don't see where she owes conservatives all these free appearances.
Furthermore, if she runs and gets the nomination it has been made quite clear that she will get no help from the establishment. Therefore she will need big $$$ of her own just like Romney has, Hillary had, McCain had, just like Obama had and like everyone else who runs for president today. Since Palin was not wealthy to begin with, she has to get the money somehow.
I also think she should answer criticism. George Bush did not bother to answer all the intense criticism that was thrown at him and we all know how well that worked out.
Cliff:
It is the timing that annoys me. If it is about the fee then don't go on tv and say your really busy this time of year. Because if that is what it was then it would not have happened with 8 days to go. Why would would she have entered into talks if she knew she couldn't go? It makes her look like she isn't telling the truth. Maybe she is, I don't know. But, I doubt it because of the timing.
does she need CPAC for her brand? No, of course not. But, she doesn't make friends with people like me who wonder about where her committment is, the paycheck or the cause. If she is trying to make a boatload of money, go ahead; more power to ya. But, be honest about it.
If she gets the nomination the party will back her 100% and you know that. They want the white house. They may not back her in the primaries, but at this point the grassroots has proven that we don't need the party backing. The party didn't back West until he became a tea party darling. The party will fall in line when the time comes.
I agree that Bush should have done more, but I think Palin has taken too far in the other direction. She answers virtually every critism. Enough, she has more than enough people to do that for her. How many blogs are dedicated just to her? She has Hannity, he is a complete and utter Palinista. He defends anything and everything from her. Rush isn't far behind.
I guess at the end of the day what bothers me is that she backs out with a week to go and says it because she is too busy in Feb to travel to DC. That doesn't make sense. Instead of people being allowed to question or critique it they are attacked. She can do no wrong in some people's eyes and sometimes she is wrong. This is one of those of times. No one is right or wrong 100% of the time.
This is the largest gathering of conservative activists of the year. It is the premiere event. Yes, there is some controversy this year, but it doesn't change what this weekend means. She flat out says she doesn't understand why this is a big deal. Some people save all year to be able to afford to come here. Unless you live locally like me, this weekend is at least a grand. That is a lot of money in this economy. I live here and I will still spend about $500 for tickets, food and parking. That is why it is a big deal. I am sure you would love to come this weekend, but chances are you don't have the money or can take the time away from your business, so you don't lose income. It is a big deal and saying so doesn't mean your attacking. You are being honest.
JACG:
I still am in disagreement here. I cannot see how you are unclear about whether Palin is in it for the money or the cause. If Palin was only in it for the money she could close down Facebook and just go out collecting fees. She had the ability to do just that since 2009. There is no need for her to keep taking flack from the left, yet she does. That to me means she is dedicated to the cause.
The Party will not back her. They will pretend they do, but they certainly won't. Why? Because she is an outsider. If Palin wins the nomination, she would have done so without party help and would be under no obligation to give the current party leaders squat. Should she win the White House, she would be free to bring in all new faces to the top levels of government and the current power players could find themselves permanently without access to power. Under those circumstances you had better believe the party is willing to accept Obama's second term. Then they could maintain their cozy power arrangements until 2016 and then try again. This is true for any outsider winning the White House.
Again, I think Palin needs to aggressively answer the criticism. Most of the misinformation about her is a direct result of the McCain's campaign's refusal to set the record straight. You know the saying: A lie repeated often enough become the truth. Yes, there are Palin blogs and a few Palin booster like Hannity and Rush, but is that anything compared to the entire MSM, lefty blogs and the administration itself?
I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on CPAC. This isn't the first time CPAC claimed to have Palin when they did not. For all we know, she may have backed out because she wanted to give the keynote on a different day and CPAC wouldn't budge. We don't really know so I am not faulting her. This is not to say I think Palin is infallible. I think her response to the blood libel was a little to late. I think she should have already gotten herself some surrogates to attack her enemies.
CPAC is a big event, one I wish I could attend someday but I simply cannot right now. For Palin, the truth is CPAC is not a big deal. Palin can draw her own crowds, she can get her own message out (and to a wider audience than CPAC) almost any day she wants. She does not need to augment or show off her conservative credentials they are pretty well known. in the end, the sad truth is CPAC offers Palin very little to justify the 4,000 mile trip.
From the SarahPAC letter of yesterday:
"She’s willing to fight the War on Terror – not surrender it to enemies abroad and Islamic radicals right here on our own soil who hate us."
According to Pamela Geller of 'Atlas Shrugs' the only panel discussion on the war on terror at CPAC was:
"You've Been Lied To: Why Real Conservatives are Against the War on Terror"
According to Geller the message of this panel was the war on terror is a creation of the "Israeli Lobby".
Perhaps 'scheduling issues' was a polite way for SP to decline the invitation of an organization that clearly does not share her values. The past history aside (including charges of selling CPAC's support and threats to punch a Palin supporter in the nose) perhaps the negotiations were about more than money?
Santorum screwed up. And he knows it. Snide little jibes at Sarah because she's a mom or she earns money will get no candidate anywhere. Fast.
If Sarah runs in 2012, the GOP people who primary with her better pay attention. It's one thing to challenge her on the issues, quite another to sneer about her or talk about her as we are so used to hearing from the lunatic fringe. That sort of thing will cost them the nomination. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
ref jacg: sorry, abc seems to have a more savvy take on this situation...
thought that rs is regarded generally as one of the "principled" conservatives(?) this kind of snarky slight is unworthy not to mention stupid - what, my 7 kids allows me to enter the political fray while your 5 doesn't? just a shallow opinion, but rs always seemed too "suave" for me to count on him as a power player for conservatives...
thinking that sp is in it only for the money strikes me as somewhat too cynical; e.g., the cpac fiasco - she doesn't need their money (for sure); but, do imagine a political/presentation power play among the parties...
Well, Cliff I know someone who helped put this event together this year. It wasn't about the fee and it wasn't about her not having the time. There is more too it than that.
I can't tell you because this person will never tell me another thing ever again if I do, and she gives me really juicy gossip.
It isn't about her having the time, and they would have paid the fee.
Post a Comment