Imploring Mitt Romney to Release His Records

Last week, Governor Palin urged Mitt Romney to be release his tax records and back up his "job creation" claims.

Via BigGovernment:

“Governor Romney has claimed to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain, and people are wanting to know: is there proof?” Palin told Sean Hannity on Fox News.

Rick Tyler, former Gingrich aide and head of Newt Gingrich’s Super PAC, has already accused Romney of having created those 100,000 jobs in Asia and Mexico. Earlier this week, Big Government pointed out that Romney’s claim to have created 100,000 jobs contrasts with claims he made during his 1994 U.S. Senate campaign, when he claimed to have created 10,000 jobs at Bain. Romney retired from Bain Capital in 1999.

Palin said that Romney needed to come clean about his record, given the likelihood that Democrats would probe the tax issue and Romney’s tenure at Bain if he were to become the Republican nominee.

While being interviewed again last Saturday, Governor Palin restated why she believes Mitt Romney needs to be more transparent about his record:

"Let's talk about job creation claims by a candidate and get to the bottom of it. And the candidate who is being accused of maybe not creating all of the jobs that they have claimed, well he can capitalize on it and he can explain what his record is."

Governor Palin is absolutely correct. Mitt Romney can use the opportunity of people calling on him to release his records to make his case. By releasing his tax records, the data he used to come up with the number of jobs he "created" at Bain Capital, and even the names of his bundlers, he can "inoculate" himself for what is sure to come.

As the front-runner in this GOP primary cycle, the left is presently storing up ammunition to use against Mitt Romney come general election season. They are fully aware that Romney has yet to release these very important documents. Without them, the left is free to assume any reason they want as to why he hasn't.

As Eleanor Clift did over the weekend, via Newsbusters:

ELEANOR CLIFT, NEWSWEEK: Romney’s refusal so far to release his income tax returns will be linked to probable investments in the Cayman Islands and the likelihood that he paid a very small percentage of his income in taxes.

I'm not here to debate the use of offshore accounts. I personally feel that taxes should remain low on principle, but it is a line of attack that Democrats will use to vilify Romney in the general. Another line of attack will be Romney's refusal to release information pertaining to his bundlers. This can been seen in a Washington Post editorial titled "Why won’t Romney release his tax returns?" from January 11th:

Tax returns offer information not available on the financial disclosure forms that are legally required of candidates, including their charitable deductions and use of tax shelters. Tax information could be especially revealing in the case of Mr. Romney and his extensive investment income, which may be why he has been reluctant to release it. During his 1994 Senate race, Mr. Romney called on Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D) to release his tax returns and show he had “nothing to hide.”Neither candidate released his tax information. Such secrecy will not stand for a presidential nominee.

The identity of a candidate’s bundlers is similarly important. Campaign finance laws limit individual contributions to a candidate to $2,500 per election ($5,000 if you include the primary and general election campaigns), but bundlers haul in tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars by tapping extensive donor networks. Knowing to whom and for how much candidates are indebted is essential information, of which candidates and their advisers are exquisitely aware. Yet under current law the only bundlers whose identities candidates must disclose are registered lobbyists. That information is useful but insufficient: A CEO who bundles $500,000 for a candidate can have as much influence as the company’s Washington lobbyist. Why should this knowledge be kept from voters?

The New York Times agrees:

It is not too much to ask someone seeking the nation’s highest office to sacrifice some personal privacy to reassure voters that they have no hidden entanglements.

And this is not the only place where secrecy has been a problem. Unlike Mr. Obama or John McCain, or George W. Bush in earlier contests, this year’s presidential hopefuls have refused to identify the “bundlers” who reel in many hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions for their campaigns, disclosing only those bundlers who are registered lobbyists, as the law requires.

Only Mitt Romney's campaign can save itself (and possibly the GOP as a whole) a lot of future headaches by releasing the information in question. If they continue to stone-wall, the left and their friends in the media can imply anything they want the general public to believe, as to why Romney is being so secretive.

I implore Mitt Romney's campaign to release Romney's tax records, his jobs numbers claim, and the information about his bundlers, in a day in age when crony capitalism and insider trading rules Washington DC at the expense of the nation.

You can do the same by emailing the Romney campaign at: info@mittromney.com

Via snail mail at:

Mitt Romney for President
P.O. Box 149756
Boston, MA 02114-9756

Or by phone at: 857-288-3500

Sarah Palin is Right to Call Out the Lamestream Media

Chris Cillizza published an article on Tuesday titled "Why Michele Bachmann is no Sarah Palin, part 2" (part 1 indicates that Bachmann's use of DC-based, GOP insiders for her campaign as a plus, I kid you not). While I agree with the title of the piece, I certainly disagree with Cillizza as to why Bachmann is no Palin, a topic I have written about before. He starts off:

The controversy over a photo of Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann that appears on the cover of Newsweek magazine this week has drawn comment from people all over the political world.

Except for one: Bachmann herself...

That (relative) silence affirms a simple but important truth of this campaign: Michele Bachmann is no Sarah Palin...

Palin, the former governor of Alaska, has spent the last several years pursuing an aggressive strategy aimed at villainizing the lamestream, er, mainstream media — insisting that they regularly print inaccuracies about her and her family

Her no-grievance-left-unanswered approach has won her kudos among her supporters but has left voters outside of the base confused as to what issues she truly cares about besides the alleged bias of the media.

Here he suggests that Governor Palin responds to ALL instances of media bias. That simply isn't true! If Governor Palin responded to every garbage-filled, biased article from the press, she literally would have no time for anything else in her life. And that includes eating and sleeping.

Then Cillizza writes that Palin's "approach... has left voters outside of the base confused as to what issues she truly cares about besides the alleged bias of the media." Honestly, only self-absorbed members of the media are "confused" on that matter. Americans in the know understand that Governor Palin cares deeply for this country's state of affairs. They have read her insight on issues such as the nation's downgraded credit rating, raising the debt ceiling, the deficit, the Obama administration's distribution of missile defense secrets, the war in Afghanistan, borrowing money from foreign lenders, respecting our allies, health care, energy development, fiscal prudence, the list goes on and on. For Cillizza to not acknowledge any of that, is in itself, another example of media bias. But then again, his whole article is.

He continues:

Bachmann’s refusal to engage in an extended back and forth over the Newsweek cover coupled with her approach to stories raising questions about her ability to cope with migraine headaches suggests she is taking a very different tack.

During the migraine episode and now with the Newsweek flap, Bachmann is hewing rigidly to her economic/jobs message — knowing that the vast majority of people who will vote for her in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina have the economy and not much else on their minds right now.

That's why, as I just wrote (complete with links) that Governor Palin has focused most of her recent statements on the economy. Everybody is concerned about our economic conditions, because everybody feels the effects of the reckless fiscal policies of the current administration.

That said... didn't Bachmann's staff get in a little trouble for pushing around Brian Ross from ABC for asking a question about those migraine headaches? Seems they were taking a "no-grievance-left-unanswered approach" if you ask me.

Cillizza ends by writing:

What Bachmann grasps that Palin either didn’t/doesn’t (or chose not to) is that by commenting on these questions of media bias only leads to more and more stories. It’s like pouring a can of lighter fluid on a small fire...

The broader strategic calculation Bachmann appears to have made is that she needs to expand beyond her political base rather than simply deepen her supporters’ connection to her in order to be something more than a sideshow in the nomination fight.

It’s the right one.

Is it? I don't think so...

He writes that "by commenting on these questions of media bias only leads to more and more stories. It’s like pouring a can of lighter fluid on a small fire." But in the beginning of his piece he wrote that the Newsweek cover of Bachmann had "drawn comment from people all over the political world." So, no, ignoring constant attacks, hit-pieces, etc. does nothing to make them go away. Bachmann has ignored the "Queen of Rage" Newsweek article, yet it was still talked about on every news channel, and on every political news site. Are there "inaccuracies" in the Newsweek article? Probably, but really I don't know because I never heard Bachmann's take. It should also be noted that the women's group "NOW" spoke out against the Newsweek cover photo

Something Governor Palin wrote to the freshman members of Congress came to mind as I was reading Cilizza's piece. She wrote:

When the Left in the media pat you on the back, quickly reassess where you are and readjust, for the liberals’ praise is a warning bell you must heed.

This applies to 3rd term congressional members as well. You see, the liberal press will praise any conservative who permits their attacks. When they are not in the process of attacking them of course, and only when they are using their lack of response to attack another conservative.

I have worked in a media environment for well over a decade. I watched all eight years as the press annihilated George W. Bush's reputation and he never fought back. In all honesty, I lost a certain amount of respect for Bush for not standing up to the corrupt media. He allowed them to define him and the issues his administration were coping with. Which, whether Bachmann knows it or not, she is allowing them to define her as well. The Bachmann camp may think it makes her look "presidential" or some such nonsense, but the damage is already being done.

Now is not the time for pushovers. Now is also not the time to sit back and act like we have an objective media in this country. Americans have a right to know when the media is lying, being lazy, or just plain left-wing ideologues. There is nothing wrong with Governor Palin defending herself, she should! After all, as you may recall from the beginning of this piece, she doesn't have all those respect-worthy GOP insiders going to bat for her. Governor Palin does just fine without them.

WaPo's Facts Perform a Disappearing Act

Rachel Weiner, a writer for the Washington Post's The Fix, posted a very disingenuous piece on Wednesday claiming that Governor Palin had somehow 'disappeared' from the debt debate. To suggest such a thing indicates that Weiner hasn't been paying much attention to what the governor has had (on many occasions) to say bout the matter. Which in the WaPo's writer's case, might benefit her in more ways than one.

Weiner writes:

During Washington’s long-running debt debate, one name you didn’t hear very often was that of Sarah Palin.

Googling the words "Palin Debt Ceiling" gives you a pretty good indication how out-of touch with reality that first sentence is. The search yields many results, all which could have aided Weiner's research efforts had she chose to engage in such a task. She goes on:

But then, just as the debate lurched to a final close on the day the country threatened to default, the 2008 vice presidential candidate suddenly reemerged on the political scene.

On Tuesday’s Fox News’ “Hannity,” Palin seemed to take it very personally when Democrats compared tea-party House Republicans to “terrorists” in referring to their tactics in the debt fight.

“I'm not just going to roll over with a sticker plastered on my forehead that says, hit me baby one more time, call me a terrorist again, call me a racist,” she told Hannity.

“And I'm going stand up for those fiscally conservative patriotic independent Americans who want the best for this country.”

Palin also criticized former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, a potential rival in the 2012 presidential race, saying he “waited until it was a done deal that we would increase the debt ceiling” before coming out against the compromise.

Those kind of headline-grabbing comments raise questions about Palin’s future plans. But the former Alaska governor has a tendency to insert herself into debates with a splash and retreat just as quickly as she appeared, going dark for weeks at a time. Given recent history, it won’t be long before Palin disappears again.

Don't they wish...

And yes, Weiner is suggesting that Governor Palin hadn't weighed in on the debt debate until Tuesday's interview with Sean Hannity... Somehow Rachel missed that whole episode when some in the establishment wing of the Republican party got somewhat wee wee'd up over a certain statement she posted on Facebook. Maybe she also missed these interviews the governor gave to Greta Van Sustren here and here, and this one on Fox Business here.

She continues:

As other 2012 presidential candidates ramp up their campaigns heading into next week’s Ames straw poll and this fall’s debates, Palin is barely a presence in Iowa or any other primary state. She has shot down reports that the high-profile bus tour that took her to New Hampshire in June is over, but two months later it has yet to restart.

The end of that tour was her last major media blitz. On June 2nd, wrapping up her trip, Palin criticized Romney in New Hampshire. She appeared on “Hannity” on June 3rd and on “Fox News Sunday” on June 5th. A few days later she was on the cover of Newsweek saying she could beat President Obama.

Wait a minute, she wrote that the governor did interviews on June 3rd & 5th and that a "few days later she was on the cover of Newsweek saying she could beat President Obama." A few days? The Newsweek article that Weiner links to was posted on July 10th, which is nowhere near a "few days" after June 5th. That's more than month! That is some horrible reporting.

Here's more:

Then Palin disappeared — even as archives of her emails from her time as Alaska governor were released and pored over by the media. On June 28th, she went to Pella, Iowa, for the premiere of “The Undefeated,” a movie about her governorship, but said little. At no point did she get back into the political debate.

Oh really? Not only did Weiner not read the date of that Newsweek article, she didn't read any of the content either. From the Newsweek article:

"I believe that I can win a national election," Sarah Palin declared one recent evening, sitting in the private dining room of a hotel in rural Iowa. The occasion for her visit to quintessential small-town America was a gathering of the faithful that would have instantaneously erupted into a fervent campaign rally had she but given the word. Instead, it had been another day on the non–campaign trail, this one capped by a sweet victory: she had just attended the premiere of a glowingly positive documentary about her titled The Undefeated.

Talk of winning a national election would certainly indicate being part of "the political debate."

It continues:

On Twitter, Palin promoted her daughter Bristol’s book and little else. Her other comments on the debt ceiling were via a couple vague Facebook notes.

Did she or did she not read the Facebook notes? Those were Governor Palin's statements regarding the debt ceiling, which indicates that she is engaged in the current debate. Weiner tries to downplay them but there was nothing "vague" about what Governor Palin was saying. Just ask Laura Ingraham.

Then Weiner implies that the governor didn't weigh in on the debate via Twitter by writing "Palin promoted her daughter Bristol’s book and little else." In reality, Governor Palin had tweeted the following:

@BarackObama wants us to contact Congress. Great idea! Tell them to rein in our dangerously unsustainable debt to protect our credit rating.

@BarackObama wants us to support a "balanced deficit solution." Great idea! How about a balanced budget amendment?

@BarackObama you're wrong, threatening to throw seniors under the bus because you refuse to prioritize govt spending.Time to #womanup & lead

After stating at the beginning of her article that Governor Palin had "reemerged" on August 2nd to talk with Sean Hannity, Weiner curiously writes this paragraph towards the end of her piece:

Then, Palin reemerged. On July 26th, she was on Greta van Susteren’s show. Two days later, she posted a Facebook comment that included a threat to House Republicans at the end: “P.S. Everyone I talk to still believes in contested primaries.”

So she did see at least one of the interviews with Greta, and she indicates that she's read the Facebook note that caused some in the establishment wing of the GOP to get upset. But her whole article is centered around the notion that Governor Palin had been entirely absent from the debate. So which is it?

This maddening article continues:

Yes, Palin explicitly positioned herself as an observer of the debt debate, saying that “out here in proverbial politico flyover country, we little folk are watching the debt ceiling debate with great interest and concern.”

Hey Rachel, Governor Palin stated she was watching the debate WHILE she was weighing in on it. Your whole point moot.

Weiner ends the article by writing:

“Doggone it, I want these candidates who are in there,” Palin said of Romney yesterday. “I want them to not be sitting back.” Her sporadic involvement in the political debate suggest that she won’t be one of those candidates. If she does, it would still shake up the race in a major way — but she would be forced to follow her own advice.

She has been following her own advice, despite Rachel Weiner's messy attempt to make Governor Palin look like a hypocrite. Unlike Romney, Governor Palin has been giving her opinion about the debt debate since it became an issue in the realm of politics. Well before the debate had wall-to-wall coverage on the 24-hour news cycles, she spoke about the matter. She's also remained consistent throughout the debate in her position. Something else Romney would have a hard time doing, on any issue.

From start to finish, the whole piece is designed to create a perception that the meat of the article doesn't back up. Weiner gives the impression that she's following some sort of time-line in her reporting, leading her to make this conclusion. But that time-line doesn't match reality and it doesn't even match her own story. Pay attention to detail when reading anything the Washington Post publishes considering their "facts" are nothing more than empty props.

Washington Post Reviews "The Undefeated"

It certainly says something about the upcoming documentary, The Undefeated, based on Governor Palin's life and record, that a media organization as hostile as the Washington Post is to her, could write a review this fair. In an article published at WaPo today, they wrote:

Produced and directed by conservative filmmaker Steve Bannon, “The Undefeated” was not paid for by Palin, nor did she influence its content in any way, Bannon said at a screening of the film for reporters Thursday morning in the offices of small video production company in Arlington.

You wouldn’t know it from the deeply sympathetic movie, which portrays Palin as a devoted wife and mother — and a hugely successful political leader whose quintessentially Alaskan spirit propelled her to stand up to corporate interests and the political establishment both as mayor of Wasilla and governor of Alaska.

[...]

The movie begins with the story of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, a disaster that Palin’s husband, Todd, described as “heartbreaking” — and that Palin cites in her autobiography, “Going Rogue,” as one of the defining events that propelled her to seek public office.

“I was a young mother-to-be with a blue-collar husband heading up to the slope,” Palin said. “If I ever had a chance to serve my fellow citizens, I would do so, and I’d work for the ordinary hardworking people.”

“The Undefeated” explores Palin’s rise to mayor of Wasilla and credits her with bringing a fiscally conservative philosophy to the job and for opening up the region as a booming bedroom community to Anchorage. It also explores her term as governor, characterizing her as standing up to oil companies over drilling rights, successfully advocating to build a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope and facing down cronyish state lawmakers in the pocket of the energy industry.

The movie includes no direct interviews with Palin, but it does feature the former governor reading short excerpts from “Going Rogue.” Bannon said he met with Palin a few weeks ago in Phoenix, where she told him the movie “blew her away.”

[..]

t also reminds viewers how popular Palin was as an elected leader in Alaska: She won reelection to mayor of Wasilla with more than 70 percent of the vote, and she resoundingly defeated then-governor Frank Murkowski in the Republican primary for governor in 2006. Before she became Sen. John McCain’s running mate in 2008, her approval rating among Alaskans soared above 80 percent.

The movie is clearly structured to push back against the widely held view that Palin lacks the leadership experience or skills to be president. Bannon, the director, even compared Palin’s term as governor to that of former President George W. Bush, concluding: “What she accomplished in Alaska is demonstrably much more impressive than what he accomplished as governor of Texas.” He added: “I wouldn’t have made this film if I didn’t think we needed a leader like her, and I hope she runs for president.”

You can read the article in it's entirety here.

Governor Palin's India Today Conclave Speech Media Roundup

By most accounts, Governor Palin's speech to the 2011 India Today Conclave was a resounding success. Her message was clear, and dealt with many of the important issues facing our nation, and indeed the world at this time. Although Politico couldn't muster up the will to report fairly on the event, other members of the media employed a more professional standard. Here's a roundup of the event:

Time:

In her speech titled "My Vision of America," the former Governor of Alaska, who was on her first trip to India, did simply articulate her vision of America but touched on a range of topics from the rise of China, energy independence, Indian-American ties, and, in a rather timely fashion, the use of force in the Arab world.

Palin dismissed the notion of declining American influence. "I completely reject that," she said. "It represents wrongheaded thinking by our friends and wishful thinking by some enemies." Speaking to a crowd of political and business leaders, hosted by India Today magazine, Palin stressed that while America is not in decline, India is rising to meet it. Deepening economic, military and diplomatic ties between the two countries are vital, she said. "The relationship is the key to the future, the security, the prosperity of our world," she said. "I see it strengthening. Whoever's President, it better strengthen. We're going to need each other especially as these other regions rise, if we want a peaceful world, India and the United States have to be linked."

Palin's personal appeal was apparent to those who attended the event. "She said the right things," said Kiran Aurora a retiree from New Delhi. "I don't know if she's Presidential material, but she's charismatic. There is a charm about her." "She came across as a very honorable person, who's still maturing as a politician," said Sandip Ganguli, a hotel executive in India. "What she appeared to lack in global knowledge and experience was made up by her belief in America and that the American people have what it takes to come back."

The New York Times:

Ms. Palin’s speech at a conference organized by the media group India Today touched on many subjects, including her sympathy with the people of Japan and their “humble cooperative spirit,” the dangers of a green-energy policy and her children texting her news of a moose in the yard of her Alaska home. Ms. Palin made numerous references to America’s entrepreneurial and pioneering spirit, and India’s unlocking of the same to become a vibrant global giant.

Together, she said, the two countries will lead the world in the 21st century. “There is no natural limit for United States and India relations,” she said. India is the second-fastest growing major economy in the world after China, but is still hobbled by extreme poverty, inefficient infrastructure and political corruption.

After her speech, Ms. Palin answered specific questions about foreign and economic policy. Asked how she might have the handled the financial crisis that led the United States government to fund billions in bank bailouts, Ms. Palin said she “didn’t think it was such a tough situation that had to lead to all those bailouts.” Instead, she said, the government could have allowed “the free market to decide who the winners and losers should be.”

Quizzed on outsourcing, a hot-button issue in India, Ms. Palin evoked free trade several times, affirmatively, to a smattering of applause from the audience.

India Today:

Sarah Palin, 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee and 2012 presidential hopeful, could not have been more politically correct on her first visit to India. Speaking on 'My Vision of America' at the Tenth India Today Conclave 2011, Palin said it was marked by healthy competition and partnership with India.

Talking about the widespread interest in Palin's appearance at the Conclave, Purie [India Today Group's chairman and editor-in-chief] said: "Frankly, in the past 10 years of the Conclave, I have not seen such media interest in one of our speakers. There has been a flood of articles, blogs and tweets about her India visit." To a round of applause, he added: "This is only her third visit overseas.

We are honoured that she chose to come to India." Palin was the first Republican politician to address the Conclave.

Democrat Al Gore did it twice; Bill and Hillary Clinton have done it once each in the past. "As the first Republican speaker at the Conclave, I am sure you're up to correcting that imbalance," Purie said, as he gave the floor to her.

CNN:

The potential presidential candidate addressed the importance of energy and the influence of India's relationship with the United States in prepared remarks titled "My Vision of America." But when she sat down for the question-and-answer session with the editor-in-chief of India Today, Aroon Purie, her attention turned to topics of a presidential nature.

And of financial assistance given to banks she said that she'd rather "free markets decide who the winners and who the losers would be" instead of politicians.

"I don't think it was such a tough situation that it had to lead to the bailouts that our U.S. government engaged in," she stated. "What it led to is more debt."

Calling the Tea Party "a grassroots movement from the ground up" that is a "beautiful movement" that will grow and be more influential, Palin asserted that the Tea Party movement will "hold our politicians accountable."

Palin remarked that her approach is different than that of her GOP peers. "Too often Republicans have the fighting instinct of sheep and you know they're just going to sit back and take it…I don't have that within me…I will put my foot down and I will state the truth so that people have correct information and they can make decisions for themselves," she declared.

Palin also described herself as "independent" saying that "some Republican players within the Republican hierarchy don't really like that." And she revealed that "Todd Palin is not even registered with the Republican Party [in Alaska] because he's such an independent."

The Washington Post:

On her first trip to India, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin said she is still thinking about running for president, voiced concerns about China’s military rise, criticized green investment and vowed to see the Taj Mahal during her next trip.

Palin’s two-day trip to India came about five months after President Obama’s state visit. While Obama and his wife, Michelle, danced and charmed their way into Indian hearts, Palin impressed her audience with strong views on energy security, terrorism, free trade, bailouts and the India-U.S. partnership.

“Sarah Palin held her own very well,” said Sachin Pilot, India’s deputy minister for communications and information technology. “She came out as an independent thinker. She answered all complicated questions reasonably well,”“Anybody who is looking to perform a major role in American politics today does need to engage with India.”

Palin got the most applause when she spoke of her relationship with the mainstream American media.

“You can’t necessarily trust the mainstream media to accurately report. You can’t rely anymore on mainstream media to set the record straight, not in the U.S.,” she said to loud cheers.

“Women who choose to enter public life unfairly often become target of the media. She has been a victim too,” said Ranjana Kumari, who trains women for political leadership in India. “The way Sarah Palin spelled out her position on crucial issues today, I feel she will throw her hat in the ring.”

The Huffington Post:

Palin told a well-heeled audience of Indian business leaders, professionals and socialites that U.S.-Indian relations were "key to the future of our world."

"We're going to need each other, especially as these other regions rise," she said, in an apparent reference to China, during a Q&A that followed a keynote speech titled "My Vision of America."

Obama visited India in November during a wider Asian tour, affirming the country's growing importance on the global scene.

Palin said the Republican Party's apparatus was at times frustrating to deal with, but said presidents Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln were role models and reasons for why she joined the party.

UK Guardian:

In her speech, she described how India was following America's "rags to riches story" thanks to a pioneering spirit, free markets and the universal dream of individual liberty.

In a speech carefully worked to appeal to a local audience as well as public opinion at home, Palin told her audience that the US and India shared many things, including religious tolerance, democratic traditions, a common struggle for freedom from the British empire, a commitment to "see terrorism defeated" and a concern over the rise of China.

However, Palin's repeated attacks on the "central planning" of economies, the "top-down way of making decisions" and her insistence on the importance of empowering individuals and entrepreneurs will strike a chord in an India still suffering from an inefficient and often corrupt bureaucracy.

"She was very good. She's very American but a lot of what she says makes sense here too," said one major industrialist at the conference.

Wall Street Journal:

She came—she didn’t wink—but she conquered.

On Saturday evening, Sarah Palin, 2008 Republic vice-presidential candidate and former governor of Alaska, got an extremely warm welcome when she delivered the closing keynote address at a conference in New Delhi.

The Daily Beast:

India welcomed Sarah Palin with open arms this weekend, giving her top billing at an annual international conference previously attended by Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Colin Powell, and other political heavyweights. Palin touched on many topics during her speech on Saturday—including her disapproval of green energy—but mainly focused on alliances between India and the United States, saying the two countries will lead the world together in the 21st century.

Jennifer Rubin is Confused

Jennifer Rubin, the new "conservative" columnist for the Washington Post, has taken the time to write another condescending piece about Governor Palin. This would be Rubin's second anti-Palin article in her first eight days since joining that publication. This time she dedicated her space to ranting about a tweet Governor Palin sent on Wednesday. Actually, it was two tweets but that's of no consequence. Rubin writes:

The problem with conducting a public policy debate on Twitter is that issues don't have 140-character solutions. Moreover, by relying on Twitter to pronounce on major issues, one runs the risk of being misunderstood or not understood at all.

Sarah Palin tweets:

Obviously Obama is so very, very wrong on the economy & spins GOP tax cut goals;so fiscal conservatives: we expect you to fight for us &......America's solvency

What is she talking about? It is obvious that an extension of the Bush tax cuts is wrong? Or is it obvious that Obama is adopting ideas that were once Republican positions? If the latter, it should be a good thing, one would think. This is Palin at her worst -- reflexively anti-deal making, grandstanding, imprecise and unreasoned. If she has a specific policy argument -- e.g. the payroll tax "costs" too much for too little job growth -- then you'd think she, who has been accused of being light on policy knowledge, would want to spell . . er . . . tweet that out.

Let me first start off by saying that Governor Palin was not conducting a full public policy debate on her Twitter account. Nobody does. It's Twitter. Those 140 characters provided for each tweet pretty much ensure that you get only a portion of any debate recorded at once. It's simply a way to state a shortened opinion and maybe provide a link with more detailed information to your followers.

She says, "by relying on Twitter to pronounce on major issues, one runs the risk of being misunderstood or not understood at all." Speak for yourself, Jennifer Rubin. How is it that I understood at the time what Governor Palin meant, and you did not? Perhaps that's because I read all of Governor Palin's tweets. You see, as with any person's Twitter timeline, context can be found within a strand of tweets.

Which would have answered the next set of questions she asked, had she looked. She writes, "what is she talking about? It is obvious that an extension of the Bush tax cuts is wrong? Or is it obvious that Obama is adopting ideas that were once Republican positions?" Uh, no and no.

On Governor Palin's Twitter timeline, just below the tweet about Sue Aikens, the governor "retweeted" Jedediah Bila who posted:

Thank you, @JimDeMint - DeMint comes out against tax deal, says GOP must do ‘better than this’ - dailycaller.com/2010/12/08/dem…

And below that, she retweeted Amanda Carpenter who wrote:

Full transcript of DeMint's interview with Hewitt is available here: http://bit.ly/gdBLuy

If Jennifer Rubin would have viewed these tweets and clicked on the links, there should have been no question what the Governor Palin meant. Since there was confusion on Rubin's part, I'll go ahead and help her out by dissecting the governor's words for her.

Governor Palin starts by saying:

"Obviously Obama is so very, very wrong on the economy"

Do I really need to dissect that part? Fine... I'll do it with two words - Keynesian Economics.

Next, the governor writes:

"spins GOP tax cut goals"

This very important part is the key to what left Ms. Rubin so confused.

A permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts, for every tax bracket is what was originally sought by republicans. However, after meeting with the president, the republican leadership in Congress gave in on many counts. They allowed for another deadline to be imposed on the tax rates, which will only allow the uncertainty investors have to continue. They also accepted an extension of jobless benefits for the 9.8% (so far) of unemployed workers. This creates all kinds of problems for our nation's economic health in both the short and long term. I think Michael Ramirez did a good job illustrating this issue in his latest cartoon for Investors Business Daily.

The last part of Governor Palin's tweet(s) said:

"so fiscal conservatives: we expect you to fight for us &......America's solvency"

She was simply asking "fiscal conservatives" in Congress to stand strong and fight for their ideals. To not give in to demands that may cost the nation dearly, for the sake of 'going along to get along.' To not take part in the dangerous Washington habit of back-scratching and cocktail drinking, in the name of "bipartisanship" that only leads to the detriment of the country through big government "solutions." Which are never really solutions and always bring about more problems that need more of their "solutions." That is the nature of government largess.

Jim Demint, who was cited both by Jedediah Bila and Amanda Carpenter above, went into further detail about the problems with the tax deal and standing strong on principle, during his interview with Hugh Hewitt:

HH: I’ve got some quick questions for you. The first is if the deal reached between the President and the Republican leadership yesterday makes it to the floor of the Senate in substantially the same form, will you vote for cloture to allow a final vote on it? And would you vote for it on that final vote if it cleared cloture?

JD: No.

HH: On both counts?

JD: On both counts. I’m glad the President recognizes that tax increases hurt the economy. I mean, I guess that’s progress. But frankly, Hugh, most of us who ran this election said we were not going to vote for anything that increased the deficit. This does. It raises taxes, it raises the death tax. I don’t think we needed to negotiate that aspect of this thing away. I don’t think we need to extend unemployment any further without paying for it, and without making some modifications such as turning it into a loan at some point. It then encourages people to go back to work. So there’s a lot of problems with it. I mean, and frankly, the biggest problem I have, Hugh, is we don’t need a temporary economy, which means we don’t need a temporary tax rate. A permanent extension of our current tax rates would allow businesses to plan five and ten years in advance, and that’s how you build an economy.

If Jennifer Rubin wanted to debate the deal made between republicans and the president on taxes, she had a whole column to do so. Instead, she was reflexively grandstanding, in that familiar condescending tone we hear and read so often from the Washington establishment. She may be correct that you cannot have a full public policy debate in 140 characters. Nonetheless, it is recommended that if you are confused by a particular tweet, to check the timeline and maybe click on the links provided. They may just answer your questions, and stop you from wasting perfectly good Washington Post column space to voicing your own bewilderment.

Kathleen Parker Misinterprets Sarah Palin's New Book

I ran across this article late last night and it honestly made me a little embarrassed for Kathleen Parker. She seems to have let her preconceived notions about Governor Palin dictate her internal debate about what 'American values' represents. Parker starts off:

We've heard much these past few years about "small-town values," most recently iterated and personified by Sarah Palin.

When politicians speak of small-town values, we know what they mean. Generally, they are invoking family, faith and flag -- coincidentally the subtitle of Palin's next book, "America by Heart." In the politician's world, small towns are where "real Americans" live, as opposed to all those other people -- the vast majority of Americans -- who live in urban areas.

I have a question for Ms. Parker... Where in the description of Governor Palin's new book, "America by Heart : Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag" does it exclude people who live in urban areas? Here is the entire book description from the Governor's publisher, HarperCollins to show just how off-base Parker is with her last column.

In the fall of 2009, with the publication of her #1 national bestselling memoir, Sarah Palin had the privilege of meeting thousands of everyday Americans on her extraordinary 35-city book tour. Inspired by these encounters, her new book, America By Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag, celebrates the enduring strengths and virtues that have made this country great.

Framed by her strong belief in the importance of family, faith, and patriotism, the book ranges widely over American history, culture, and current affairs, and reflects on the key values—both national and spiritual-that have been such a profound part of Governor Palin’s life and continue to inform her vision of America’s future. Written in her own refreshingly candid voice, America By Heart will include selections from classic and contemporary readings that have moved her-from the nation’s founding documents to great speeches, sermons, letters, literature and poetry, biography, and even some of her favorite songs and movies. Here, too, are portraits of some of the extraordinary men and women she admires and who embody her deep love of country, her strong rootedness in faith, and her profound love and appreciation of family. She will also draw from personal experience to amplify these timely (and timeless) themes—themes that are sure to inspire her numerous fans and readers all across the country.

I reread it several times and nowhere does it state that this book has only to do with "small towns." You can undoubtedly attribute such things to a small town, however this does not mean it automatically excludes urban areas by default.

The meat of the column is a long detailed description of Parker's old 'hood,' if you will. She doesn't understand why the values shared by her and her neighbors aren't considered "small town values." Ah, nobody said they weren't Kathleen, but if you want to talk about the fact the so-called, ruling "elite" in this country are out of step with most "real Americans," we can have that discussion.

She ends her piece this way (emphasis mine):

So goes life in the city. But if those aren't small-town values, I don't know what we're talking about. All the inferences one has drawn from reading the foregoing are meant to be taken to heart. Families come in many configurations. And small-town values have nothing to do with small towns.

No ma'am, they don't. Living in an urban environment myself, complete with concrete, loud buses, and homeless people, I can attest to the fact that the area in which one lives has only so much to do with their values. We have all walks of life in my neighborhood. The good, the bad, the poor, the better-off than the poor... The hard-working, the religious, the public servants, the warriors, the athletes, the moochers, the artists, the patriots, etc... This is a working-class neighborhood whose residents have a pretty good understanding of "Family, Faith, and Flag." Somehow it never occurred to me that Governor Palin was excluding this neighborhood when she talks about "America." Perhaps that's because she was not.

The notion that Kathleen Parker devoted an entire column to a misinterpretation of the definition of "Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag," is laughable. Here we have a Pulitzer Prize winning writer using her space to tell readers what she thinks Sarah Palin will mean in talking about these things, in a book nobody has read yet. In fact, I have no clue how much of it is actually written at this point. Yet, here's Parker already denouncing Palin's anti-city mentality, as if that were the case at all.

Kathleen Parker continues her decline into obscurity with such strange analysis, and the Washington Post continues it's hard turn to the left. The Journolist scandal, with it's founder and many known members as writers working for the Post, along with people like Parker representing the "conservative voice," proves they are not in the business of unbiased reporting.

I just hope Kathleen Parker doesn't ponder too many aspects of Governor Palin's book before she reads it. We may have to endure column after column of her own internal debates about the meaning of something nobody ever said in the first place.