Bristol Palin: Bill Maher is More Than a Comedian

Bristol Palin published a new piece today on her blog titled "Responding to the Viral Sensation, Loving my Brother." She responded to some of the numerous comments people left on her "Mr. President, When Should I Expect Your Call?" post, but she also pointed out how the left is giving Bill Maher a pass by stating that he's merely a "comedian." She wrote:

Bill Maher is much more than a comedian. He’s a big-time political player who hides behind the “comedian” label whenever he gets criticized. His guest list represents a huge chunk of the Washington establishment and sometimes even includes prominent Republicans. And as I said in my original post, he’s put himself straight in the middle of presidential politics by giving $1,000,000 to President Obama’s SuperPAC. Bill Maher isn’t just some guy behind a microphone in a seedy comedy club in the middle of nowhere. He’s a comedian and political commentator like Rush is an entertainer and political commentator. He’s a little bit less popular, but his professional failure compared to Rush doesn’t make him any less accountable for his vile speech.

You can read her entire post here.

Also, John Nolte points out Bristol's piece over at Big Hollywood.

Plus, check out this article over at NRO by David French, who is married to the editor of Patheos. It seems they had a little server melt-down yesterday due to Bristol's blog:

Nancy tweeted it to her few hundred followers (she and I have a rather pathetic contest for twitter followers; right now I’m barely in the lead with a whopping 776), and Bristol facebooked it. Within hours, it had been shared 8,000 times. Already it was taking off.

Then Sarah Palin tweeted.

Patheos’s server promptly melted down. One of the most-trafficked religious sites on the web, its server still spontaneously combusted. A small mushroom cloud was spotted over the server farm. Eleven additional servers had to be brought online to handle the traffic flow, and by the end of the day, 8,000 shares had turned into more than 85,000 (update: 100,000), and the story of Bristol’s challenge to the president had been reported not just in the political and mainstream media but also in the Hollywood media as well. Thousands of tweets, and tens of thousands more Facebook shares from Fox to the Huffington Post to the Hollywood Reporter took the post well beyond the familiar and comfortable enclaves of the conservative blogosphere.

That, in essence, is Palin power. No other name in the conservative movement can instantly break through the wall of separation between conservative punditry and popular culture. Bristol powerfully and concisely told the truth — and reached an audience so large it resides only in most pundits’ wildest dreams.

Does Jim Geraghty Understand Marketing?

Jim Geraghty has penned an article criticizing Governor Palin for a law she signed in 2008 that offers tax breaks to film companies who do business in Alaska. Geraghty states that the production company for "Sarah Palin's Alaska" took part in the program and that it might be "problematic" for the governor "on the campaign trail."

He writes:

It isn’t too hard to imagine this becoming problematic for Sarah Palin on the campaign trail, as noted by the Tax Foundation:

In case you missed it, small government crusader and Tea Party favorite Sarah Palin’s TLC reality show “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” received a $1.2 million subsidy from the state of Alaska. The show spent $3.6 million on production in the state, meaning that Alaskan taxpayers covered a third of the cost of the show. The show will apparently not have a second season.

Everything Palin has done has been perfectly legal, but it looks problematic for a crusader for small government to end up collecting a seven-figure paycheck from an endeavor that received a seven-figure subsidy, all set up by a program she signed into law. Of course, Palin set up the subsidy in 2008, and the TLC series wasn’t filmed until the summer of 2010, after Palin resigned as governor.

Which begs the question.... What's the problem?

If Governor Palin signed a law in 2008, and somebody she had a business agreement with took advantage of that law in 2010 (while she was no longer in office), where is the issue? Governor Palin was not in charge of the show's production. Any decision by her was made well before she even considered doing her own show. The decision to take the tax break from the state, was not made by her, but by the production company.

I think Geraghty realizes that there is nothing to say Governor Palin did anything wrong regarding this, so he quickly changed direction in his piece by adding this update:

Alaska may be unique, in that the revenues from petroleum enable it to enjoy no state sales tax and no individual income tax, the lowest individual tax burden in the country. Oil revenues have meant that the state enjoys better budgetary circumstances and lower unemployment than most other states. So a conservative may argue that in an era of a $1.6 trillion annual federal deficits, federal funding for PBS, NPR, the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities may be unaffordable luxuries, while finding no particular problem with the state of Alaska choosing to pay millions to subsidize television programming that they believe promotes the state’s image and attracts tourism dollars.

Still, should governments be in the business of subsidizing television programs? The precise arguments against PBS and NPR – that in today’s much more diversified media environment, almost all of the programming on government-funded radio and television networks could thrive in the private sector without government subsidy – would apply to the Alaska-based shows, no?

My first issue with Geraghty's argument here is that he blurs federally funded programs with state-run programs. While I do take issue with the federal government funding programs that bring little to no return (fiscally speaking) I have no objections with states creating their own programs that they believe could benefit themselves.

Alaskans understand that tourism is an important arm of their overall economy. The cruise industry alone, brings over $1 billion to Alaska's economy annually. The program that Governor Palin signed into law only allocated $100 million, which it has only spent a fraction of up to this point. In my view, these tax incentives offered to the film industry - in a state as beautiful as Alaska - are akin to marketing expenses any business is familiar with.

An AP article from February states:

The real Alaska has finally joined the A-list.

Long a bit player in the entertainment world, the 49th state increasingly is sought out by TV and film producers for its unmatchable lure of spectacular beauty and peril, of wild adventures and dangerous jobs.

And they're actually shooting in the nation's largest and most remote state instead of locations dolled up to portray Alaska, as multiple projects have done.

Alaska's new film production tax credit program has only ramped up the state's evolving Q quotient, attracting several dozen projects since it was launched in 2008.

"People are curious about Alaska. They're curious about Alaskans. They're curious about Alaska jobs," said Alaska Film Office manager Dave Worrell.

Most of the productions are based in TV reality: "Deadliest Catch," "Ice Road Truckers," "Gold Rush Alaska," Alaska State Troopers," "Flying Wild Alaska" and, of course, the recently concluded special eight-part series, "Sarah Palin's Alaska," to
name a few.

There also has been a noticeable uptick in interest from feature filmmakers - where the big money is.

A major production starring Drew Barrymore, "Everybody Loves Whales," and a supernatural thriller starring Jon Voight filmed in Alaska last year, adding to a trickle of feature films over the years with actual footage in Alaska.

So, essentially the Alaska state-run program will go above and beyond just promoting Alaska as a tourist destination. With larger productions taking interest, the program has opened the doors to an entirely new industry.

I think Jim Geraghty has an issue with the government providing tax incentives to the entertainment industry because it's the entertainment industry. Otherwise, I'm sure he would be penning articles decrying energy subsidies in Texas, and tech subsidies in Tennessee, right?

'Sarah Palin for RNC Chair' Chatter

After news hit that Michael Steele had 'stepped in it,' in regards to comments he made about the war in Afghanistan, many are calling on him to resign his post as the Republican National Committee Chairman.

Personally, I take exception to what Mr. Steele said that has landed him in so much hot water. He tried to write off Afghanistan as another one of Obama's failure's. He said, "has he not understood that, you know, that's the one thing you don't do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan? Everyone who has tried, over 1,000 years of history, has failed."

That war is far from over and it did not start on Obama's watch. I do not think it is productive to try to score political points off the backs of our men and women in the military, the same way the left did under Bush. The goal is to win in Afghanistan, and to win as a nation regardless of who is occupying the White House at the time.

Whether or not Mr. Steele steps down or is asked to do so, is still up in the air. Now the internet is buzzing with speculation and suggestions. One topic I have seen talked about much is the possibility of Governor Palin taking over as the head of the RNC.

Most notably, in this snobbish post over at NRO by Kevin D. Williamson titled, "An Idea for the RNC: Dump Steele, Hire Palin"

Re: Steele and the RNC: Allow me to chime in with my usual observation on this subject: This is a job for Sarah Palin. Palin would be a much better RNC chairman than presidential candidate or freelance kingmaker. She'd raise tons of money and help recruit good candidates, i.e., she'd excel at doing the things Steele should have been doing instead of appointing himself Republican pundit-at-large.

A Chairman Palin would help set the right tone for the Republican party without having to get herself entangled in the minutiae of policy-development, which has not been her forte. Sure, she'd be polarizing, but so is Barack Obama, and these are polarized times. And it's one thing to have a polarizing party chairman, another to have a polarizing candidate.

Anybody disagree?

I do! Not that I disagree that Palin would do a better job as the RNC Chair, but I happen to think she would make a great presidential candidate, and I happen to know for a fact that she is a fine "freelance kingmaker."

Mr. Williamson then goes on to say that while such a job for Governor Palin would be good due to her ability to raise money for them, it would keep her away from the "minutiae of policy-development" which he says "has not been her forte." Are you kidding me? What an utterly ignorant, yet typical response from a GOP establishment type. Perhaps Mr. Williamson is unfamiliar with Governor Palin's many public statements, both written and spoken in regards to all the issues facing this nation today, "minutiae" and all.

In fact, just last week she was praised by many, even within the GOP establishment for the recent speeches she has given. She posted the details of her fantastic appearance in Virginia to her Facebook page, if Mr. Williamson or anyone else from the establishment is interested in educating themselves on Governor Palin's actual positions. Feel free to check them out here, guys.

I have no idea what the future holds for the leadership of the RNC or Michael Steele. I also don't pretend to know what Sarah Palin would do if offered the position. That said, I do know that this has been another instance where GOP insiders have exposed themselves as willing to use Sarah Palin for fund-raising, yet downplaying who she is and what she stands for. The RNC is treading on thin ice right now. After years of selling out to positions supporting bigger government and more spending, the base has still not returned to the party in the numbers they should have. Treating Governor Palin with a lack of respect and an honest assessment of what she brings to the table will not help them any further. At this stage, I don't believe the RNC deserves Governor Palin's leadership, but that is just my opinion.

Update: Kathryn Jean Lopez also weighed in at NRO here