Video of Freedom Fest Speech

Governor Palin today posted the core content of her Freedom Fest speech on Facebook:

Earlier this week, I spoke at the Freedom Fest in Norfolk, Virginia; and, evidently, the media was asked to leave – not by me, that’s for sure. I want my message out, so despite reporters making up a story about “Palin people kicking us out” (uh, the “Palin people” entourage would consist of one person – my 15-year-old daughter, Willow – and I have no doubt she could take on any reporter, but I know for certain she didn’t “kick ‘em out” of the event). Anyway, here are some of the key issues I spoke about.

DEFENSE SPENDING

It takes a lot of resources to maintain the best fighting force in the world – especially at a time when we face financial uncertainty and a mountain of debt that threatens all of our futures.

We have a federal government that is spending trillions, and that has nationalized whole sections of our economy: the auto industry, the insurance industry, health care, student loans, the list goes on – all of it at enormous cost to the tax payer. The cost of Obamacare alone is likely to exceed $2.5 trillion dollars.

As a result of all these trillion dollar spending bills, America’s going bust in a hurry. By 2020 we may reach debt levels of $20 trillion – twice the debt that we have today! It reminds me of that joke I read the other day: “Please don’t tell Obama what comes after a trillion!”

Something has to be done urgently to stop the out of control Obama-Reid-Pelosi spending machine, and no government agency should be immune from budget scrutiny. We must make sure, however, that we do nothing to undermine the effectiveness of our military. If we lose wars, if we lose the ability to deter adversaries, if we lose the ability to provide security for ourselves and for our allies, we risk losing all that makes America great! That is a price we cannot afford to pay.

This may be obvious to you and me, but I am not sure the Obama Administration gets it. There isn’t a single progressive pet cause which they haven’t been willing to throw billions at. But when it comes to defense spending, all of a sudden they start preaching a message of “fiscal restraint.” Our Defense Secretary recently stated the “gusher” of defense spending was over and that it was time for the Department of Defense to tighten its belt. There’s a gusher of spending alright, but it’s not on defense. Did you know the US actually only ranks 25th worldwide on defense spending as a percentage of GDP? We spend three times more on entitlements and debt services than we do on defense.

Now don’t get me wrong: there’s nothing wrong with preaching fiscal conservatism. I want the federal government to balance its budget right now! And not the Washington way – which is raising your taxes to pay for their irresponsible spending habits. I want it done the American way: by cutting spending, reducing the size of government, and letting people keep more of their hard-earned cash.

But the Obama administration doesn’t practice what it preaches. This is an administration that won’t produce a budget for fear that we discover how reckless they’ve been as fiscal managers. At the same time, it threatens to veto a defense bill because of an extra jet engine!

This administration may be willing to cut defense spending, but it’s increasing it everywhere else. I think we should do it the other way round: cut spending in other departments – apart from defense. We should not be cutting corners on our national security.

THE U.S. NAVY

Secretary Gates recently spoke about the future of the US Navy. He said we have to “ask whether the nation can really afford a Navy that relies on $3 to $6 billion destroyers, $7 billion submarines, and $11 billion carriers.” He went on to ask, “Do we really need... more strike groups for another 30 years when no other country has more than one?”

Well, my answer is pretty simple: Yes, we can and, yes, we do because we must. Our Navy has global responsibilities. It patrols sea lanes and safeguards the freedoms of our allies – and ourselves. The Navy right now only has 286 ships, and that number may decrease. That will limit our options, extend tours for Navy personnel, lessen our ability to secure our allies and deter our adversaries. The Obama administration seems strangely unconcerned about this prospect.

OBAMA’S FOREIGN POLICY INHERITANCE

When George W. Bush came into office, he inherited a military that had been cut deeply, an al Qaeda that had been unchallenged, and an approach to terrorism that focused on bringing court cases rather than destroying those who sought to destroy us. We saw the result of some of that on 9/11.

When President Obama came into office, he inherited a military that was winning in Iraq. He inherited loyal allies and strong alliances. And thanks to the lamestream media pawing and purring over him, he had the benefit of unparalleled global popularity. What an advantage! So their basic foreign policy outlines should have been clear. Commit to the War on Terror. Commit to winning – not ending, but winning the war in Afghanistan. Commit to the fight against violent Islamic extremism wherever it finds sanctuary. Work with our allies. Be resolute with our adversaries. Promote liberty, not least because it enhances our security. Unfortunately, these basic principles seem to have been discarded by Washington.

THE WAR ON TERROR

His administration has banned the phrase “war on terror,” preferring instead politically correct nonsense like “overseas contingency operations.” His Homeland Security Secretary calls acts of terrorism “man-caused disasters.” His reckless plan to close Guantanamo (because there’s no place to go after it’s closed) faces bipartisan opposition now.

The Attorney General just announced that a decision about where to try terrorists like 9/11 master mind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would not be announced until after the mid-term elections. Is there something he’s afraid to tell us?

The President’s new National Security Strategy does not even use the word “Islamic” when referring to violent extremism. Does he think the ideology of those who seek to kill Americans is irrelevant? How can we seek to defeat an enemy if we don’t acknowledge what motivates them and what their ultimate goals are? President Obama may think he is being politically correct by dropping the term, but it flies in the face of reality. As Senator Joe Lieberman noted, refusing to use the word Islamic when describing the nature of the threat we face is “Orwellian and counterproductive.”

AFGHANISTAN

In Afghanistan, it is true that President Obama approved deploying additional forces to the conflict – most, but not all the troops requested by commanders on the ground. But it took months of indecision to get to that point, and it came at a very high price – a July 2011 date to begin withdrawal.

This date was arbitrary! It bears no relation to conditions on the ground. It sends all the wrong signals to our friends and to our enemies. We know our commanders on the ground are not comfortable with it.

As that great Navy war hero, Senator John McCain recently put it: “The decision to begin withdrawing our forces from Afghanistan arbitrarily in July 2011 seems to be having exactly the effect that many of us predicted it would: It is convincing the key actors inside and outside of Afghanistan that the United States is more interested in leaving than succeeding in this conflict.”

Does the President really believe the Taliban and al Qaeda won’t be empowered by his naming of a starting date for withdrawal? They now believe they can beat him simply by outlasting us. What sort of effect does he think this will have on the morale of our troops – and of our allies?

ALIENATING OUR ALLIES

It’s not the only area where the Obama administration has failed our allies. They escalated a minor zoning issue in Jerusalem into a major dispute with our most important ally in the Middle East, Israel. They treated the Israeli Prime Minister shabbily in Washington. When a Turkish sponsored flotilla threatened to violate a legal Israeli blockade of Hamas-run Gaza, the Obama Administration was silent. When Israeli commandos were assaulted as they sought to prevent unmonitored cargoes from being delivered to Hams terrorists, the Obama Administration sent signals it might allow a UN investigation into the matter – an investigation that would be sure to condemn our ally Israel and bemoan the plight of Hamas. Loyal NATO allies in central Europe were undermined by the cancellation of a missile defense program with virtually no warning. At the same time, Russia and China are given preferential treatment, while remaining silent on their human rights violations.

CODDLING ADVERSARIES

Meanwhile, the Obama Administration reaches out to some of the world’s worst regimes. They shake hands with dictators like Hugo Chavez, send letters to the Iranian mullahs and envoys to North Korea, ease sanctions on Cuba and talk about doing the same with Burma. That’s when they’re not on one of their worldwide apology tours.

Do we get anything in return for all this bowing and apologizing? No, we don’t. Yes, Russia voted for a weak sanctions resolution on Iran, but it immediately stated it could sell advanced anti-aircraft missile to Iran anyway, and would not end its nuclear cooperation. In response to North Korea’s unprovoked sinking of a South Korean Navy ship, China warned us not to take part in military exercises with our ally.

And while President Obama lets America get pushed around by the likes of Russia and China, our allies are left to wonder about the value of an alliance with the U.S. They have to be wondering if it’s worth it.

AN “ENEMY-CENTRIC” FOREIGN POLICY

It has led one prominent Czech official to call Obama’s foreign policy “enemy-centric.” And this “enemy-centric” approach has real consequences. It not only baffles our allies, it worries them. When coupled with less defense spending, it signals to the world that maybe we can no longer be counted on, and that we have other priorities than being the world leader that keeps the peace and provides security in Europe, in Asia and throughout the world.

Together with this enemy-centric foreign policy, we see a lessening of the long, bipartisan tradition of speaking out for human rights and democracy. The Secretary of State said she would not raise human rights with China because “we pretty much know what they are going to say.” Democracy promotion programs have been cut. Support for the brave Iranians protesting their government was not forthcoming because President Obama would rather try to cut a deal with their oppressors.

When the world’s dictators see the United States unconcerned with human rights and political freedom, they breathe a sigh of relief, because they know they have a free hand to repress their own people.

This goes against the very ideals on which our republic was founded. There is a long bipartisan tradition of speaking out in favor of freedom – from FDR to Ronald Reagan. America loses something very important when its President consigns human rights and freedom to the back burner of its international priorities.

A DIFFERENT VIEW OF AMERICA

We have a President, perhaps for the very first time since the founding of our republic, who doesn’t appear to believe that America is the greatest earthly force for good the world has ever known.

When asked whether he believed in American exceptionalism, President Obama answered, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” Amazing. Amazing.

I think this statement speaks volumes about his world view. He sees nothing unique in the American experience? Really? Our founding, and our founding mothers and fathers? Really? And our history over the past two and half centuries?

Really? He sees nothing unique in an America that fought and won two world wars and in victory sought not one inch of territory or one dollar of plunder? He sees nothing unique in an America that, though exhausted by conflict, still laid the foundation for security in Europe and Asia after World War II? He sees nothing unique in an America that prevailed against an evil ideology in the Cold War? Does he just sees a country that has to be apologized for around the world, especially to dictators?

President Obama actually seems reluctant to even embrace American power. Earlier this year when he was asked about his faltering Middle East peace process, he said “whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower.” Whether we like it or not?! Really? Mr. President, this may come as news to you, but most Americans actually do like it. And so do our allies. They know it was our military might that liberated countless millions from tyranny, slavery, and oppression over the last 234 years. Yes, we do like it. As a dominant superpower, the United States has won wars hot and cold; our military has advanced the cause of freedom and kept authoritarian powers in check.

It is in America’s and the world’s best interests for our country to remain the dominant military superpower, but under President Obama’s leadership that dominance may be slipping away. It’s the result of an agenda that reeks of complacency and defeatism.

(I went on from there to talk about our need to end the negative, defeatist attitudes of those in leadership. I spoke further on American exceptionalism, and Willow and I ended a great evening with some great patriots. Sorry the media chose to report anything other than what actually happened at the event.)

- Sarah Palin

Retrieved from: http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587#!/note.php?note_id=403777543434

This money bomb has not been reviewed or authorized by SarahPAC:

Today, June 30th marks the end of the second quarter for SarahPAC, Governor Palin’s Political Action Committee. It is critical that we contribute to SarahPAC. Governor Palin donates generously to Reagan conservative candidates. She also campaigns with these candidates, and has a solid track record of leading them to victory.

Your money will help ensure that we take back both houses of Congress on November 2, and lay the foundation for the ouster of Obama in 2012.

Please visit the official SarahPAC website and contribute whatever you can as often as you can. Your efforts are more important now than ever. Let’s help take our country back. Clicking the graphic below will also take you to the official SarahPAC website.

As we have noted numerous times, leftist attacks on Governor Palin operate  like a Baskin Robbins ice cream store, following a "flavor-of-the-day" approach. Today's flavor relates to a simple oratorical error that Gov. Palin made during her speech at Stanislaus last week. The "lamestream media" - are abuzz that with the "horrific, earth shattering" news that Gov. Palin said "California's Eureka College" rather than its actual location in Illinois, thus giving birth to a new meme infesting the Internet like a metastasizing cancer: "she doesn't even know where her hero went to school!"

Gov. Palin Knows Exactly Where Eureka Is

On April 17, 2010, Gov. Palin delivered a rousing speech in Five Points, Washington, Illinois, during which she referenced President Reagan's alma mater and correctly stated its location in Eureka, Illinois. If the lamestream media would bother to do some research and fact-checking, they would realize that having properly referenced the location in a prior speech, Gov. Palin clearly knows where her hero's alma mater is. If we review the sentence in which the error was made, we can see that she desired to draw a connection between "Eureka" and the "Golden State," to wit: "This is Reagan country, and perhaps it was destiny that the man who went to California's Eureka College would become so woven within and interlinked to the Golden State."

Governor Palin Knows How Many States we Have in Our Union Too...

Having satisfactorily established that Gov. Palin knows that President Reagan's alma mater is in Eureka, Illinois, and that she shared this knowledge on April 17, 2010, perhaps leftists might approach the current president and query him on how many states we have in our union. When he last discussed it, we gained seven states that we did not know existed - with one still left to go, bringing the total to 58. We are still trying to figure out where these eight new states are. Perhaps, his vice president, who is also renowned for really major gaffes can help us locate them.

Here are the current president's Top 10 gaffes - and they are doozies (H/T: Josh Painter):

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obama-isms.htm

Governor Palin's detractors have a rather strange fixation with the idea that she gets paid well for some of her speaking engagements. Anyone who follows news related to Gov. Palin will invariably encounter a story in which her speaking fee is a major subject of discussion, with the implication that there is something wrong with her earning money to speak, and consult.

People Spend Major Money To See, Hear, Bond With Gov. Palin

People pay big money to see and hear Gov. Palin speak, whether it is a Washington Speakers Bureau paid speech, rally, book signing stop, or other event. VIP privileges at Gov. Palin's command even greater sums often reaching a stratospheric $5,000/person, that money going to benefit the event organizers, not Gov. Palin. Even at her free events, people spend thousands of dollars, travel thousands of miles, and endure waits of over a day just to talk with Gov. Palin for 10 seconds, shake her hand and get an autograph. Several members of the US for Palin staff have done precisely that.

The "Cashing In" Meme

Gov. Palin's detractors bristle and see it as "cashing in." They posit that all she cares about is money and herself. It's not just leftists who carry on with this meme; so-called conservatives who should know better have jumped on that bandwagon.

Common-Sense

Gov. Palin is a sought-after speaker, which is why she is on the Washington Speaker Bureau's roster. The Washington Speakers Bureau is in business to earn a profit. They earn their money by providing high-demand speakers - such as Gov. Palin. The Bureau schedules and coordinates her events - a win-win for the Bureau, the event organizers, the participants, and Gov. Palin herself. Most importantly, there are no misunderstandings, as there were in Gov. Palin's pre-speakers bureau days, when her small staff was overwhelmed with thousands of requests, while operating a Political Action Committee.

Feminism: Celebrating a Woman's Success

Anyone who claims to be a feminist should be proud of what SHE has accomplished in the past 18 months alone. It was not too long ago that Gov. Palin was a VP candidate on a losing ticket who returned to being her state's governor. Her enemies saw the trajectory she was on and drove her out of office with a barrage of frivolous ethics complaints and lawsuits that was threatening to bankrupt her. Today, Gov. Palin is reputed to have earned over $12 million, from speaking engagements, sales of Going Rogue, her consultancy on Fox News, and TLC's Sarah Palin's Alaska still in production. Women should see this success and be inspired. Gov. Palin did not inherit this money, wheedle it out of an estranged ex in alimony, or engage in any unseemly activity. To steal a line from the former Smith Barney, Gov. Palin made her money the old fashioned way. She earned it. What's wrong with that?

Capitalism Works

If we believe in capitalism, we should celebrate, not chastise Gov. Palin for earning money, as New York Magazine did with its derogatory "Palin, Inc." article. At US 4 Palin, we see Palin, Inc. as something to be celebrated. Perhaps New York Magazine should give copies away gratis - and not take advertising. Maybe MSNBC should follow suit. After all, if we cannot trust Gov. Palin's motivations for charging for her work, why should we trust New York Magazine, and MSNBC? Sounds silly? Because it is silly.

People will spend thousands of dollars on expenses related to all things Palin, because there is a strong market for her, and her message. Gov. Palin's detractors know this and it strikes mortal fear into their hearts.

The US Supreme Court today ruled that our right to keep and bear arms covers all 50 states, and in so doing shot down Chicago's handgun ban, according to a Fox News report. Governor Palin, a staunch supporter and advocate of the Second Amendment discussed the ruling in a brief Facebook Note and referred to a news report via Tweet.

The Supreme Court handed down an important ruling today stating what should be obvious: that the Second Amendment, in the words of Justice Alito writing for the court, “applies equally to the federal government and the states.” Today’s decision in McDonald vs. City of Chicago, in conjunction with the landmark Heller case two years ago, should leave little doubt that our individual right to keep and bear arms applies everywhere and is a right for everyone.

For an interesting perspective on the significance of today’s ruling, take a look at David Rittgers’ article in National Review here.

- Sarah Palin

Retrieved from: http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587#!/note.php?note_id=403024568434

Following Gov. Palin's speech at Stanilaus last night, several reporters made disparaging remarks about her not knowing or caring the mic was open.

Full of snark, they quipped about how it was "not possible to capture dumbness in two soundbites." Apparently, it is possible, because these reporters just did, capturing their own rank stupidity on an open mic.

We can only guess what kind of dispatches these "objective" reporters filed. This behavior is precisely why they are called "lamestream". If these reporters so could not stand Gov. Palin, they had an obligation to recuse themselves. A reporter's job is to cover the news, not broadcast snarky opinions on an open mic.

This video captured an egregiously unethical, and unprofessional act. These reporters should be fired.

- Posted using BlogPress from my Palin-Powered iPhone

"Polarizing" is rapidly becoming the favorite term for detractors of all things Palin, especially in news coverage prior to her speech last night at California State University at Stanislaus in Turlock. "Whether you love her or loath her, this polarizing Sarah Palin is pushing forward here at CSU Stanislaus, helping celebrate 50 years of education here, preps are being made for the event, but tonight a Senator is calling her out," said Jonas Tichenor.

The "calling out" Senator is none other than California State Senator Leland Yee, whose anti-Palin tirades were covered by Stacy Drake, in Brown Plays Dirty Politics with Palin Speech, Says… HuffPo?, The California Persecution of Sarah Palin, and CA Lawmaker Targets Palin, Proves Why State is Such a Mess.

CA State Senator Yee's Anti-Palin Jihad - Who's the Polarizing Figure?

If we refer back to the Tichenor paragraph, CSU was happy to have Gov. Palin speaking on June 25. Her presence raised over $200,000 for the school - the point of her being there in the first instance. CSU arranged for her services through the Washington Speakers Bureau. Yes, Gov. Palin is getting paid for her work, as she should be. CSU raised money; Gov. Palin earned her pay. It's all good. It is State Senator Yee and Gov. Palin's enemies - who are many in liberal San Francisco - who polarized the whole situation with their antics.

Gov. Palin's Stanislaus Speech

The Modesto Bee account of Gov. Palin's speech reports that it was a smashing success. Gov. Palin netted the university over $200,000, the most ever raised in a single event. People paid $500 to see her and her speech on education and freedom was punctuated by standing ovations. How "polarizing" is that?

Why Leftists Call Gov. Palin "Polarizing"

Of course, we expect that leftists will find Gov. Palin "polarizing." In this instance, the more "polarizing" she is the better! Gov. Palin is "polarizing" because she honestly, openly, and transparently cuts through the bull, and clarifies precisely what is wrong with their ill-conceived policies.

But the leftist party machine is not the only party machine Gov. Palin has a long and proud history of bucking. Thus, we frequently see anti-Palin "conservatives" using "polarizing" in reference to her. They do so usually because their dream candidates did not secure an endorsement, or perhaps because Gov. Palin might actually run in 2012, thus denying the nomination to many other "great leaders" the GOP has to offer. Her "conservative" detractors also know that Gov. Palin would put an end to much of the chicanery within the party machine, thus upsetting their little apple carts.

A Common Theme Among Those who Find Gov. Palin "Polarizing"

To a one, those who find Gov. Palin "polarizing" either have a clear, present and vested financial or political interest to which Gov. Palin is a real or perceived threat or they have had their little political racket busted up by her and carry a grudge.

Common-sense Reagan Conservatives rally around Gov. Palin, which is probably most "polarizing" of all.

US for Palin
June 24-26, 2010 Story Items

No, Sarah Palin Did Not Compare Obama to Hitler
by Stacy Drake

I think the point Mr. Sowell was trying to make is clear. Throughout history, despots have used “useful idiots” to grow their regime’s power and influence. He provided TWO examples of historical reference to back up his claim, by listing both Adolf Hitler and V.I. Lenin in the beginning of his post.

Sarah Palin’s Goal Of 50% Renewable Energy Use In Alaska Signed Into Law
by Gary P. Jackson

On January 21, 2009 (Obama’s first full day at work) Sarah Palin, writing in the Wall Street Journal, praised this initiative strongly, while reminding Obama that conventional sources of energy will always be needed. She also announced that she was working on the goal of having Alaska get a full 50 percent of it’s energy from renewables in that same 2025 time frame.

Today, Meghan Stapleton posted about the status of the Alaska Fund Trust and the creation of a successor legal defense fund via Facebook Note on Gov. Palin's page.

First off, let’s keep in mind that this is about a legal defense fund. According to the Summary of Findings in the decision released today by the Alaska Personnel Board, nothing illegal and nothing unethical occurred because not a penny has been distributed. Governor Palin did nothing wrong. And in fact, everyone is in agreement that Governor Palin acted in good faith. Now, let me explain how we got here.

It is no secret that Governor Palin has been subject to political and legal attacks on an unprecedented scale. Since these attacks originate from her opposition, sometimes it can be a badge of honor to be the focus of such irrational hatred. But there is a cost to all of this.

Last year, those who willfully and excitedly violated or abused Alaska law showed they would do it again and again to either bankrupt Governor Palin or paralyze her success for Alaska. Governor Palin had a choice: plead guilty to things she didn’t do so that she could focus on the state and save money for the family – or defend her good name and reputation. She chose to fight back. In the end, Governor Palin and her attorney, Thomas Van Flein, successfully defended against well over two dozen complaints, lawsuits, and allegations. Time and time again during and after the 2008 Presidential election cycle, independent investigators proved that Governor Palin’s actions were sound, her judgment was proper, and her intentions were honest. In fact, the Personnel Board, the ethics board for the Governor of the state, never even had to take up a case as each was dismissed before making it to the next level.

But it did cost the Palins financially.

Seeing this nonsense, it was suggested to me from both sides of the aisle that one way to deal with the substantial financial cost these tactics were inflicting, was to create a trust fund for legal fees – just like all the other legal defense funds for prominent politicians who are targets.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, “Such funds have become increasingly common as scrutiny of politicians has intensified.” (“Palin Backers Set Up Legal-Defense Fund”, Wall Street Journal, p. A-3, April 24, 2009)

When I approached Governor Palin with the idea, she had one primary directive – if it can be done lawfully, then I will support it. She also asked that, if possible, we keep it Alaskan.

One might think that creating a trust fund to collect money to pay legal fees should not be that complicated, but it turns out, it is exceptionally complicated. You should know that as many as seven lawyers were involved in the process; some of whom were and are nationally prominent experts in creating legal defense funds, in evaluating federal and state election laws, state trust law, federal and state tax laws, state reporting requirements and state ethics requirements. It is a sad commentary on public life today when the legal system can be used as a political weapon against an elected official, and it takes a battalion of lawyers to figure out how to fund a defense and counter-attack.

In any event, the legal team concluded that the fund they had created was lawful in all respects. I relied in good faith on that advice and advised Governor Palin of that advice.

Ultimately, the Alaska Fund Trust was borne, and within a day or two, a complaint was filed against it challenging its legality. (And like everything else, the public knew because someone – likely the complainant – violated the law and publicly released the accusation.) And so started another prolonged legal battle – this time to determine if the legal fund created to defend Governor Palin against frivolous ethics complaints was itself ethical. Quite a circle really. We made it clear that no money would be paid out on until the matter had been resolved.

Thus, to this very moment, the money received was frozen and no one, not the Palins, not the Palins’ attorney, no one ever received a penny from the Trust on the Palins’ behalf.

The Personnel Board initially appointed an “independent” investigator. That investigator, we later learned, had connections with, and was associated with President Obama. The Personnel Board had hired President Obama’s personal law firm as an “independent” investigator to review whether a fund created to raise money to eliminate a debt incurred as a result of Governor Palin’s opposition to President Obama was appropriate. We objected to both the illegal leak and the blatant political influence, and a new investigator was appointed.

The new investigator spent considerable time reviewing the old information and collecting new, but I think it proved to be too difficult to reverse an already-public decision. He concluded that the Trust fund violated Alaska law in two respects. His biggest heartburn was that we used the word “official” on the website. And he was distressed that we turned down an offer from a former White House Special Counsel to serve as trustee and instead chose an Alaskan whom Alaskans would recognize – Kristan Cole.

Kristan sat on several state boards as a volunteer public servant. The investigator concluded that because she sat on such boards, Governor Palin as governor was technically her boss, and therefore she should not be the trustee of the fund. That is his conclusion and we respect that. The law is not clear on this aspect, and not one member of the legal team saw this as an issue, but again, we respect the conclusion here and it is not worth the time or money to dispute that. But we do want to thank Kristan for taking on that otherwise thankless task. What is it they say about no good deed?

The other conclusion needs context. There was a point where it appeared that people around the country wanted to start legal defense funds for Governor Palin. The support and good will the people of this country have shown to the Palins is inspiring. But a concern was raised whether all these other potential funds would comply with various laws, including donation limits, limits against contributions from lobbyists or contributions from foreign nationals. So we used the word “official” in the website to distinguish the Alaska Fund Trust from ones we were not sure would be compliant. In our view, that was a solid and common sense reason to use the word “official,” but the investigator believes that it made it appear that the website was sponsored by the State of Alaska, and thus would be a use of Governor Palin’s ”official” office to raise money. We are not terribly persuaded that really would be the case or that any member of the public could be confused, but we respect the investigator’s evaluation of this point and it is not worth fighting about. Again, Governor Palin’s prime directive was simple – if this fund could be set up lawfully, she would support it. If not, it would not have her support.

So Governor Palin has reached a point where she decided to agree to resolve this matter with the investigator rather than spend time and money fighting an ethics complaint about a fund that was created to reimburse her for the money she has spent fighting bogus ethics complaints drawn up by insiders and outsiders violating and abusing Alaska law. Really, this is simple pragmatism and common sense.

As you know, we love a good fight, but we must pick our battles carefully. As a chief executive, Governor Palin makes the calls, and she knows that this battle, though important to her personally, does nothing for the country. She has bigger battles to fight, battles to restore our strength internationally and stand by our allies, battles to stop the downward slide of our economy, and battles to take back control of Congress.

However, I know and you know that no public official should ever have to bear the financial brunt of these attacks. And Governor Palin can lawfully raise money now through a brand new – not official but let’s call it “real” – legal defense fund without any risk of offending an investigator or state law. And such a fund now exists at http://www.sarahpalinlegaldefensefund.org/donate.php.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the Alaska Fund Trust. Your heart was in the right place. And Governor Palin and her family have been overwhelmed by your generosity. If you want to, you can contribute to the new fund. In the meantime, we will try to contact you to get your donation returned from the old trust.

Now – back to motherhood for me! And common sense.

P.S. One last thought as we approach the anniversary of Governor Palin’s “reloading,” thank God she had the fortitude and wisdom to look down the road and see what she did – the state’s bills would have amounted to millions upon millions more and her personal legal bills would be personally insurmountable. I don’t know who would want to hold office under these circumstances and with loopholes our Alaska legislators refuse to close.

- Meghan Stapleton, Mom, Wife, and Now More Knowledgeable Than Ever About Legal Defense Funds

Retrieved from: http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587#!/note.php?note_id=401885808434

Governor Palin today endorsed Todd Tiahrt for Senator of Kansas, via Facebook Note.

I’m happy to endorse Todd Tiahrt’s campaign to be the next U.S Senator from Kansas. Todd is a protector of our Constitution, a pro-family, pro-Second Amendment Commonsense Conservative who has never voted for a tax increase and has fought to end the wasteful spending coming out of Washington. He didn’t just stand on the sidelines complacently, but instead actually battled against the bailouts, the debt-ridden stimulus spending, the cap-and-tax energy schemes, and Obamacare. In fact, remember on the day Obamacare was being debated, Todd Tiahrt was on the House floor all day working to defeat it, and he’s helped lead the charge to repeal and replace Obamacare the moment it was signed into law. We can count on Todd to take on the liberal spending agenda of the Obama administration and fight for lower taxes, more individual freedom, and less government intrusion.

Please join me in supporting Todd Tiahrt’s campaign by visiting his website at www.ToddTiahrt.com and following him on Facebook and Twitter.

- Sarah Palin

Retrieved from: http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587#!/note.php?note_id=401872813434

US for Palin
June 21-23, 2010 Story Items

Landslide! Nikki Haley and Tim Scott Win Big In South Carolina GOP Runoff!
by Gary P. Jackson

What a great night for common sense conservatism. Two really strong candidates, Nikki Haley and Tim Scott won their runoff contests by huge margins, as expected. Both candidates are solid reformers, and both candidates are endorsed by Sarah Palin.

Barack Obama, George Soros, Petrobas, And The Real Reason Why Obama Is Trying To Halt American Oil Production: A Crime Inc. Update
by Gary P. Jackson

I mean how hard is this one to put together? You’ve got Nazi sympathizer George Soros, the self proclaimed "owner of the democrat party" purchasing controlling interest in Brazilian oil giant Petrobas, then just a couple of days later, Barack Obama "loans" the country of Brazil $10 billion, which is then given to .... wait for it .... Petrobas. Glenn keeps saying it's $2 billion, but the commitment is for $10 billion.

Stanislaus Protest Planned, an Exercise in Futility
by Adrienne Ross

Governor Palin will be speaking at Stanislaus University this Friday, June 25th. Much has been made of this particular speaking engagement with people complaining about the Governor being the choice to headline the school’s 50th anniversary celebration.

Governor Palin’s Endorsees Win Again
by Adrienne Ross

The appropriate observation to take away from these elections is candidates' willingness to offer themselves up for service and Governor Palin's ability to once again catapult them to a place of success by rallying support from Americans who are demanding true hope and change.

Renee Ellmers and Clint Didier, Two Strong Conservatives We Can Get Behind
by Gary P. Jackson

Speaking of Sarah Palin, one of the big Papa Grizzlies she has endorsed is Clint Didier who is running for the United States Senate out of Washington state. Clint will be going up against the far left Marxist-democrat Patty Murray, who is an absolute disaster for the state, and the nation.

Rick Santorum: Sarah Palin’s Endorsement Is The Only One Anyone Wants! Team Romney Whines: “Endorsements Don’t Matter!”
by Gary P. Jackson

Santorum: Palin is the only endorsement anyone wants. If you ask who the most influential endorsers are, Palin is numbers one, two, and three, with maybe Sen. Jim DeMint at four. Her endorsement is the only one that matters this year. Just look at what she did for Nikki Haley.

Governor Palin's attorney Thomas Van Flein posted a Note on Gov. Palin's Facebook page June 24, 2010 discussing the baseless civil suits that had been filed against her dismissed. He focused on a particular case, which indirectly involved her husband Todd and how sexism was the case's underpinning.

As most people know, Sarah Palin is relentlessly attacked by those who elevate the state over the individual and by those who lack faith in any higher power except the regulatory power of Washington, D.C. Many of these people use – and abuse – the law, and in the case of Sarah Palin, they have abused our state ethics laws by repeatedly, remorselessly, and routinely filing false and malicious claims against her. So too, they have resorted to our courts, where several civil suits were filed against Sarah Palin. To date, these civil suits have been rejected by the courts as baseless. But we know the toll this caused the Palins. Almost a year ago, Governor Palin pointed out the many groundless complaints, records requests and suits filed against her, and explained that:

“…it hasn’t been cheap – the State has wasted thousands of hours of your time and shelled out some two million of your dollars to respond to ‘opposition research’ – that’s money not going to fund teachers or troopers – or safer roads. And this political absurdity, the ‘politics of personal destruction’… Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn’t cost them a dime so they’re not going to stop draining public resources – spending other peoples’ money in their game…. Some Alaskans don’t mind wasting public dollars and state time. I do. I cannot stand here as your Governor and allow millions upon millions of our dollars go to waste just so I can hold the title of Governor.”

The past year has confirmed that Governor Palin was right. The number of false claims, records requests, mendacious accusations and ridiculous posturing by the left and street corner ethicists dropped dramatically – at least as applied to the mechanics of state government.

But it did not all go away when she stepped aside – some claims and suits are pending and are getting resolved in time. A judge in Anchorage recently issued a ruling throwing out a baseless claim against Governor Palin – and indirectly involving Todd Palin. In this civil claim, Todd Palin was being attacked because he was a close and trusted advisor to his wife, the Governor. That he was should surprise no one. The claimant asserted that because Todd Palin was not being paid by the State of Alaska, any emails copied to him could not be protected by the standard law of deliberative process privilege – a privilege that essentially protects the decision making process in government in order to allow the decision makers the freedom to honestly discuss policy and process and promote the open exchange of ideas. The claimant demanded the right to see emails that were sent to Todd Palin.

In a well reasoned opinion, the judge explored state law, federal law (including an historical discussion on First Lady Sarah Polk, wife of President James K. Polk), and invoked a too rarely used legal principle – common sense – to throw out this lawsuit. In so doing, the court concluded that Todd Palin, as the First Gentleman, though unpaid, was in essence a privileged consultant to the Office of the Governor, and the court compared Todd Palin’s privileged consultations to First Lady Hillary Clinton, in which a federal court determined that the chief executive’s spouse “acts as the functional equivalent of an assistant to the President.” And, with state government employees assisting the first spouse, Todd Palin had a clear and obvious privileged consultative function and is analogous to a de facto state officer.

The court ultimately concluded that “common sense and Federal law” compel the conclusion that “Todd Palin could properly… act[] as an advisor to the Governor” and therefore he was appropriately involved in policy discussions, emails, and deliberative discussions, all of which are protected from disclosure.

It is refreshing to see a court resort to common sense and historical precedent. Further, as more and more women get elected to high office (What are they called now? – “Mama Grizzlies”?), it is notable that challenges such as this, which were based on sexist notions and demeaning attitudes towards women, are being rejected. This suit challenged Todd Palin’s role as a first spouse and was implicitly premised on the idea that a male spouse must somehow exert too much influence over a female chief executive. Hence the demand to “see those emails” from Todd Palin; but contrast this with decades of silence relative to communications to prior executive spouses – female spouses. That dismissive and contemptuous posture towards the new brand of feminist leaders was appropriately condemned by the court as lacking a basis in reality.

There are, of course, some remaining issues to address. The attacks against Sarah Palin will continue. They are distractions meant to keep her off message. There will be times when Sarah Palin will have to take one for the team in order to continue on with her message to the country and simply resolve matters without having to incur crushing personal debt. That is the cost, unfortunately, of public life today. When that happens, read the details closely – like the details in this court opinion. Every time you do you will see that Sarah Palin has always acted with honest intent. You will see that again soon. Today’s ruling is a positive step not just for Sarah and Todd Palin, but for all female chief executives currently in office – and waiting to take office in November.

- Thomas Van Flein, Attorney for Sarah Palin

Retreived from: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=401656023434#!/note.php?note_id=401691963434

Governor Palin posted on Facebook, a schedule of events she is hosting over the next week:

I’m looking forward to heading down to the Lower 48 for some great events.

On Saturday, June 26th, I’ll be speaking at the Oil Palace in Tyler, TX. You can visit their website here for more details.

Then on Sunday, June 27th, I’ll be at the Freedom Fest 2010 in Norfolk, Virginia. If you’re free that day, you can join me, Oliver North, and George Allen at the Ted Constant Convocation Center on the campus of Old Dominion University for an evening honoring our military and first responders (Police, Fire, and EMS). And what better way to kick off the event than to have Lee Greenwood on stage to sing “Proud to Be An American”! I hope you can join us to show support for all the brave men and women who serve in our armed forces and in our communities every day. You can visit the event website here for more details.

On Tuesday, June 29th, I head to Atlanta for the P.U.R.E. Celebration sponsored by Zachariah’s Way at the Gwinnett Arena. Zachariah’s Way is a wonderful organization committed to serving our special needs community. You can visit their website here to learn more about them, and if you’re free next Tuesday, I hope you’ll join us.

- Sarah Palin

Retrieved from: http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin#!/note.php?note_id=401656023434

The Obama administration is an out-of-control, ineffective thugocracy, according to Michael Barone, political analyst for the Washington Examiner. Thomas Sowell, whose book, Conflict of Visions, Gov. Palin referenced in Going Rogue described how the United States is slipping into tyranny.

Obama's Leadership Philosophy: Ineffective Thuggery

In "Obama's thuggery is useless in fighting spill," Barone cited Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar's infamous "boot on the neck" quote and Obama's "so I know whose a-- to kick," as two examples of ineffective thuggery, while BP's gusher gushes unabated 65 days later and state and local governments do the heavy lifting to keep their beaches safe.

The now-reversed moratorium on off-shore drilling is an example of ineffective thuggery at work, for as Barone wrote, "[this] penalizes companies with better safety records than BP's and will result in many advanced drilling rigs being sent to offshore oil fields abroad."

Judge Feldman, who wrote the ruling reversing the moratorium was even harsher. "An invalid agency decision to suspend drilling of wells in depths of over 500 feet simply cannot justify the immeasurable effect on the plaintiffs, the local economy, the Gulf region, and the critical present-day aspect of the availability of domestic energy in this country," as quoted by an Associated Press report.

Gutting the Constitution and the Road to Tyranny

Sowell, of Investor's Business Daily wrote about an even more insidious form of thuggery, that went virtually unnoticed.

Just where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that a president has the authority to extract vast sums of money from a private enterprise and distribute it as he sees fit to whomever he deems worthy of compensation? Nowhere.

And yet that is precisely what is happening with a $20 billion fund to be provided by BP to compensate people harmed by their oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The $20 billion fund was arrived at absent due process of the law, Sowell argues, which is a dangerous precedent that will lead to the imposition of tyranny ostensibly "for the good of the people." In his article, Sowell describes how arbitrary power grabs and over-stepping constitutional bounds was the underpinning of the Nazi regime.

A Conflict of Visions

On Page 385 of Going Rogue, Gov. Palin provided a cogent synopsis of Sowell's Conflict of Visions:

People who adhere to the unconstrained vision (the label applied to them is "liberal" or "left-wing") believe that human nature is changeable (therefore perfectible) and that society's problems can all be solved if only the poor, ignorant, disorganized public is told what to do and rational plans are enacted. And who better to make those plans than an elite bureaucracy pulling the strings and organizing society according to their master blueprint?

Gov Palin continued,

Conservatives believe in the "constrained" political vision because we know that human nature is flawed and that there are limitations to what can be done in Washington to "fix" society's problems....we do not ignore history's lessons and waste time chasing utopian pipe dreams.

Conclusion

Gov. Palin wrote on p. 386 of Going Rogue,

We don't trust utopian promises from politicians. The role of government is not to perfect us but to protect us -- to protect our inalienable rights. The role of government in a civil society is to protect the individual and to establish a social contract so that we can live together in peace.

The foregoing clearly indicates a stark difference in visions between Gov. Palin and the entire Obama administration. Gov. Palin clearly supports limited federal government, and adherence to the Constitution, in this case the Tenth Amendment - enumerated powers. She subscribes to the constrained vision.

Obama clearly subscribes to the un-constrained vision with its concomitant centralized state planning bureaus, czars and commissars. As pointed out both by Gov. Palin and Obama his own words, he wants to "fundamentally transform" these United States. The past 65 days give a good glimpse as to where this transformation will lead. Obama wants us to be not a Shining City on a Hill, but a bankrupt, third rate, third world, ineffective thugocracy.

Regardless of his political leanings, Obama is absolutely unfit to serve. He is not a leader, not a commander-in-chief and not conducting himself as a President. He is not the best man for the job. None of the men who are presumed to be running for 2012 against him are the best men for job either.

The best man for the job is a woman.

US for Palin
June 17 - 20, 2010 Story Items

Alan Colmes Needs Some “Divine Intervention” Himself
by Stacy Drake

The governor's tweet was in reference to Louisiana state senators call for a day of prayer. She did not offer this up as her solution to the current problem at hand.

Todd Palin — the “Good Dad”
by Missy Stewart

"Todd is a good dad." Governor Sarah Palin said these words often on the 2008 presidential campaign trail when introducing her four- time Iron Dog champion husband, Todd Mitchell Palin, to cheering audiences. The First Dude, as she affectionately calls him, is deeply committed to his marriage, is fiercely protective of his children, and...

Yes! I’ve Been Waiting For This: Gov. Palin Endorses Star Parker
by Adrienne Ross

I’ve been waiting for this one: Today Governor Palin endorsed Star Parker for Congress.