Sarah Palin Information Blog

Sarah Palin Web Brigade

  • Upcoming Palin Events

  • Sarah Palin’s Endorsees

  • Sarah Palin Channel

  • Amazing America

  • The Undefeated

  • ‘Stars Earn Stripes’

  • ‘Game Change’ Lies Exposed

  • Good Tidings and Great Joy: Protecting the Heart of Christmas

  • Our Sarah: Made in Alaska

  • America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag

  • Going Rogue: An American Life

  • Other Sarah Palin Info Sources

  • Login/RSS

  • Governor Palin on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinUSA

  • Governor Palin on Facebook

  • SarahPAC Notes

  • RSS SarahPAC Notes

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • SPWB on Facebook

  • SPWB on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinLinks

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Join the SPWB Twibe!

  • Posts by Date

    November 2012
    S M T W T F S
    « Oct   Dec »
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Archive for November, 2012

Chuck Heath Jr. Describes the Palin/Heath Thanksgiving Day 2012

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 25, 2012

Posted today at Chuck Heath Jr.’s website.

See a larger version of the photo here.

Here’s a picture of almost everyone in the Heath/Palin clan taken on Thanksgiving Day. It was so nice to finally get everyone together and it was an especially meaningful day because Track had just arrived safely from Afghanistan a couple of days beforehand.

Getting us all together seems to be harder and harder to do lately. Between the kids hockey and basketball games, book signings, hunting/fishing trips, Bristol and Sarah’s hectic schedules, military duties, college, Todd training for Iron Dog, etc… it’s a wonder we are ever able to assemble the whole crew.

My house was packed with family and friends. Everyone pitched in to cook their specialties. Mom made a delicious ham, Sarah baked cookies and made a couple of potato/cheese/moose-bacon casseroles, Heather made the salads and sweet potatoes, Molly baked the rolls, my mother-in-law Jean baked many pies, I prepared a dry turkey, and Dad made a mess. My father-in-law, Mark, said a wonderful prayer and we all dug in. (Lots of other people contributed, too!)

My daughter celebrated her first birthday party, too. She had a blast tearing into her first cake and everyone was roaring with laughter as she smeared it all over her face.


Overall, it was a great day and we enjoyed the respite from all of the distractions in our lives. We’ve got many challenges ahead of us this year… I guess we’ll start dealing with those on Monday.

We hope you had a great day, too!

Read the rest here.  And check out Chuck Jr.’s  inspiring “The Porch” for today here.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

Bristol Posts Palin Family Thanksgiving Photo

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 24, 2012

Bristol posted this photo on her Facebook page yesterday:

First full family picture :)

Posted in Uncategorized | 7 Comments »

A Day to Give Thanks

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 22, 2012


There are many admonitions in the Scriptures to give thanks to God.   For example:

Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good;
his love endures forever. (Psalm 118:1 NIV)

I Chronicles 16:33-34
33 Let the trees of the forest sing,
let them sing for joy before the Lord,
for he comes to judge the earth.

34 Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good;
his love endures forever.

18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.
I Thessalonians 5:18

Beginning with the Pilgrims in Plymouth, Massachusetts in 1621, at least one day has been set aside in America each year to thank God for his blessings.  The dates of these days of thanks varied from state to state and locally until George Washington issued a Thanksgiving Proclamation in 1789, during his first year in office.  Abraham Lincoln issued a Proclamation of Thanksgiving in 1863 that made Thanksgiving Day a national holiday.  See that history here and here.

I like this brief description of the first Thanksgiving Day that I received in an e-mail from DaySpring earlier today and which can be found here.

After enduring religious persecution in their native England and for twelve years in Holland, the pilgrims sailed for America. They were modest men and women with a great hope and inward zeal. They rested in the providence of God that He was leading them to a land of religious freedom to advance the gospel of the kingdom of Christ.

The voyage of the Mayflower took twice as long as Christopher Columbus’ voyage, enduring several wintry storms. After arriving in their new land, they faced disease, famine, bitter cold and many dangers. However, when the Mayflower made its return voyage, none of the pilgrims returned with it.

Their first harvest occurred in the autumn of 1621. Their own seed had barely grown, but the Indians had shown them how to plant corn which yielded a huge harvest. On the first Thanksgiving, they celebrated God’s goodness to them with a party of ninety Indians. Their Thanksgiving feast lasted three days and included a festival of sports.

Having survived the brutal first winter in the New World, in which half their number died , the Pilgrims were thankful for their first corn harvest.  Surrounded by their Native American friends, they gave thanks to God for his goodness.  The story of Squanto, the English-speaking native American who taught the Pilgrims how to plant corn and fish, along with other skills,  and helped them form a friendship with another local tribe, is fascinating.  It is one of the great stories of how God caused unfavorable circumstances for one person to turn around and be used to save a people.

A lot has happened in this country and the world just before Thanksgiving Day this year.  Israel just entered a tenuous truce with Hamas after 8 days of rocket attacks.  Many people are still recovering from the devastation left by Hurricane Sandy.   Organizations like Operation Blessing are helping some of those hit hard by Hurricane Sandy to celebrate Thanksgiving today.  Here is a photo I received in an e-mail today from Operation Blessing of volunteers and relief workers  serving a “full Thanksgiving feast for first responders and residents of New York who were hard-hit by Hurricane Sandy.”

Photo Prayer of the Day

So how do we give thanks when times are hard?  I think first we have to look at what is really important.  We live in a materialistic society in which one measure of success is an abundance of material things.  But there are so many things that are more important.

For people of faith, the very most important thing is a personal relationship with God and the hope of eternal life.  Each day is in  itself a gift from God.  Good health is a blessing.  Relationships with family and friends are among our most important blessings.  Psalm 127:3 tells us that “Children are a heritage from the Lord.”   These types of blessings are the enduring blessings.

And yes, we are thankful for material blessings also, when our hard work pays off and we are able to achieve our goals.  But these are secondary to the blessings that last a lifetime and an eternity.  God has promised to meet all of our needs (Philippians 4:19), and sometimes He does that in unexpected ways.

So let each of us reflect upon and thank God for our blessings today.   Let us pray for those who have been impacted by war and disaster and for our military who are spending Thanksgiving away from home, defending our freedom and that of others.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!  Have a wonderful day!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

SarahPAC says thanks

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 22, 2012

From an e-mail sent out by Tim Crawford at SarahPAC:



On behalf of all of those we supported together, we would like to express our sincere appreciation for your patriotism, support, and dedication during our shared efforts this election cycle.

Our conservative movement continues, and we share with you the successes of the candidates you made it possible to support.

In 2010, with your efforts, we supported 90 great candidates and worked to elect over 50 new commonsense conservative leaders to Congress and state legislatures across our nation. Your support was critical to these initiatives and was achieved with the leadership of people like you, who share values and a responsibility to our nation.

The 2012 election provided the opportunity to build on that success, and we thank you for making possible the only Republican pick-up in the U.S. Senate. This change would not have been possible without your direct support.

This cycle, with your help, we worked to intensify support for grassroots and commonsense candidates in primaries who successfully took on challengers in their bids to bring those ideals to the Senate. Now elected, these new leaders will fight for constitutional principles and fiscal discipline. With your support, we also worked to return proven leaders to Washington to assure steady hands remain at the forefront and whose mentorship will be the guiding force to these new conservative Senators.

As 2012 draws to a close and the next opportunity looms on the horizon, our joint efforts remain crucial. The power brokers in Washington will still look for the easy path with candidates – those they know and that are habitual candidates.

We will never stop identifying and supporting local commonsense conservatives with strong messages who understand the need to put people over politics, principals over promises, and ideals over self interests.

You will always be the core and the guide and we are proud and thankful to join with you.


Tim Crawford
Treasurer, SarahPAC

Paid for by SarahPAC
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee

P.O. Box 7711
Arlington, VA 22207

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Whitney Pitcher: Under the Magnifying Glass

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 19, 2012

From article by Whitney Pitcher at Little Blog on the Prairie:

In the weeks following the election, Republicans are assessing what went wrong that led to their defeat. Much to the criticism of some in the party, Governor Romney has hypothesized that President Obama won because of the “gifts” that he offered minorities. Others have speculated that the GOP was not able to effectively reach out to the changing demographics of America or that the party misinterpreted polls and got cocky. Others have pointed to poorly designed and implemented GOTV technology.Compared to the 2008 election, there is one reason for defeat that is conspicuously missing from the “Wednesday morning” political strategizing — blaming the GOP choice for vice president.

Paul Ryan, of course, was not the reason for Mitt Romney’s defeat. His nomination provided a spark for many in the Republican party. He was an articulate voice for the GOP ticket and a seemingly good fit for a Romney campaign nearly singularly focused on the economy. He is an intelligent Congressman who has shown leadership in the House on the budget and making strong stances against Obamacare, particularly the IPAB—the unelected board of bureaucrats tasked with managing how Medicare pays. Ryan has served as a Congressman in Washington DC since 1999 and worked for House members for several years during the early and mid 1990s as well. However, despite his strong stance against the Obama administration’s profligate spending, he also supported  the TARP bailout during the Bush administration and the auto bailout set in motion during the Bush administration. He has been a good Republican soldier in Washington D.C. for nearly twenty years, which made him ideal for Romney, especially as someone from the same state (a swing state too) as the current RNC chair.

In 2008, Sarah Palin was quite the opposite in some respects. She was the governor of Alaska–about as far away from Washington D.C. as one can get. She had garnered a reputation for bucking her own party– calling out the Alaska GOP chair for doing party business on state time, taking on and defeating an incumbent governor in her own party, cleaning up the ethical mess caused by that incumbent she defeated, and even suing a GOP presidential administration to enable energy development in Alaska. During the campaign, she wanted to abandon the micromanaging of her handlers and speak on passion and principles rather than talking points. She was the embodiment of the feminist ideal–a great family, a successful career, not to mention a state basketball championship and the ability to shoot a moose and cook it up for dinner. This proved to be a perfect target for the media, the Democrats, and GOP Establishment to go after Governor Palin, not only for the blamecasting loss, but also the treatment and coverage throughout the campaign, which was much harsher than what was shown Paul Ryan.

The Romney campaign was, of course, smart enough not to hire the likes of Steve Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace (unlike MSNBC and ABC), so the source of much of the redistribution of blame of the 2008 campaign was missing from the 2012 campaign. Ryan was not a threat to the GOP machine, because in many ways, he was already a part of it. There was no need for Romney campaign staffers, some of whom had trashed Governor Palin during the 2008 general election, to send out emails to coordinate a strategy to shield themselves from blame if they lost, as Steve Schmidt had done.So far during the 2012 election fallout, Romney advisers are blaming strategy and messaging, not directly their own candidates.


For Governor Palin, it went beyond false claims surrounding policy and into false charges regarding her character– charges that she abused her power by pressuring a commissioner to fire a state trooper who once was Palin’s brother-in-law. State senator, Kim Elton launched a legislative inquiry into the matter, deeming it an “October surprise”(i.e. he intended it be political). During the inquiry process, the Obama camp even made contact with the troopers’ union of Governor Palin’s former brother-in-law.Ultimately, the politically motivated legislative inquiry found her as abusing power, while the personnel board, who were all appointed by Governor Murkowski, no friend of Governor Palin, exonerated her. Following President Obama’s election, Kim Elton was given a cushy job in President Obama’s Department of Interior. Elton had also allowed former chief of staff to then Senator Obama and once interim chief of staff to President Obama, Pete Rouse, to use Elton’s Alaskan address so that  Rouse could vote in Alaska even after he hadn’t lived there for more than twenty years. Democrats sought to destroy her character, not solely mislead on her policy.

During the campaign, Governor Palin was criticized for being held back from the press–a poor campaign move by operatives like Schmidt and Wallace. Prior to her becoming the VP pick, emails obtained by the Anchorage Daily News noted that she was to be a McCain surrogate across several networks, yet the campaign held her back when she was picked. When she did talk to media embeds, she was criticized for “going rogue”. Meanwhile, Paul Ryan only spoke to the traveling press corps four times during the campaign and never gave formal press availability. Ryan’s limited press interaction never became a major story, however, only the subject of a singular tweet from a member of the traveling press corps.

Not only was Governor Palin more harshly covered by the media, her family was as well. Todd Palin’s voter registration became a huge news story when he inadvertently checked the box for the Alaska Independence Party (AIP) when he simply intended to note he was an independent (he later corrected this). However, Paul Ryan’s wife was not placed under the same intense scrutiny–despite the fact that she had been a congressional staffer and a corporate lobbyist in the past.  During their respective campaigns,  Governor Palin’s children was the mother of a four school aged (or younger) children and a son in the military while Congressman Ryan’s children were all under the age of 10. The young age of his three children and a busy campaign schedule were never a reason for faux concern from the media, as it was for Governor Palin.  Not to mention how Bristol Palin was put under the spotlight by the media and the Left during her concurrent pregnancy.

Despite claims made by McCain campaign staffers even prior to the campaign’s end, Governor Palin was not reason for the McCain-Palin ticket’s defeat. In fact, she helped the ticket. Among those who noted Palin’s presence on the GOP ticket affected their vote, 56% voted for McCain-Palin compared to 43% for Obama-Biden. John McCain and Sarah Palin received 59,934, 814 votes while  Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan received 59, 142,004 votes–a more than three quarters of a million vote difference in favor of McCain-Palin. This was despite the fact that the Romney campaign made more contacts with voters on a grassroots level than the McCain campaign. These vote differences are in no way an indictment of Paul Ryan’s candidacy, nor does an indictment lie in the context of solely a presidential campaign. The indictment lies with the GOP Establishment, Democrats, and the media who all seemed to have the same goal of destroying Governor Palin–a goal they haven’t achieved despite continued efforts. Revisiting the 2008 campaign is not an attempt to rehash the past, but to put it in greater perspective. This month’s election now provides an even bolder contrast to further reveal how much the media, the Democrats and even her own party wished to smear and discredited Governor Palin–and how much they continue to do so.

During this election cycle, GOP Establishmentarian, Karl Rove disingenuously represented Palin’s effect on the ticket by saying McCain was leading prior to picking her as VP and he poo-pooed the effect of her endorsement as “not worth snot”. In the end, Rove’s endorsement successes were non-existent while Governor Palin had great success. The Democrats still reference Palin, in attempts to diminish her, but their reference to her only shows her influence and their fear. John Kerry referenced Governor Palin  in his speech at the Democratic convention when discussing Mitt Romney’s policy on Russia. Obama campaign manager, Stephanie Cutter, referenced Palin in response to Rudy Guliani questioning Joe Biden’s mental capacity. This past week, the head of Obama’s SuperPAC and former deputy White House press secretary, Bill Burton took a shot at Palin in response to John McCain’s criticism of Susan Rice’s comments on the attack on the American consulate in Libya.She still remains a target for and a threat to both parties.

A willingness to serve in the capacity of vice presidential nominee means that your record, your family, and your character will be put under a magnifying glass–as it should. With Governor Palin, however, the GOP establishment, Democrats, and the media used (and continue to use) the magnifying glass the same way a mean kid uses it to direct sun’s rays to an ant hill–to destroy. A magnifying glass can be revealing for objects on either side of it though, and thankfully, Governor Palin has used the magnifying glass to further reveal the corrupt nature of the very people who seek to destroy her.

Read more.




Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Apologies To Sarah Palin (Redstate)

Posted by M.Joseph Sheppard At Palin4President2016 on November 17, 2012

Saturday, November 10, 2012

Apologies To Sarah Palin

In light of the revelation that Romney-Ryan received fewer votes than McCain-Palin, despite running against an incumbent president with the worst record in our nation’s history, I think it’s time to lay the theory that Sarah Palin cost McCain the election to rest.

In fact, I would argue that McCain would have lost by a much bigger margin without her on the ticket. He is no more loved by the base than Romney is.

Apologies can be sent here:

The Office of Sarah Palin

P.O. Box 871235

Wasilla, AK 99687

Cross posted at Redstate The comment section is also at Redstate at the link

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

A Clear Sighted View From New Zealand “Why The Left Hates Sarah Palin”

Posted by M.Joseph Sheppard At Palin4President2016 on November 17, 2012

Here is an in-depth article reviewing Palin hate from a Kiwi point of  view. The very cleverly named “coNZervative” blog from down under examines roots of Palin hate and the media distortion that drives it.


Why the Left Hates Sarah Palin

Posted on November 17, 2012 

This article is by American writer and comic Evan Sayet, first published on his blog 2 Nov. Sayet insightfully critiques the tribalistic hatred of a prominent Centre-Rightist, Governor Sarah Palin.  I include it here, because the same thing happens in NZ all the time, on Blogs and in the media and passes itself off as “objective reporting.”  His article starts with a conversation with a Democrat who parrots “Sarah Palin is Stupid” which is almost an exact replica of a Facebook conversation that took place this week between myself, DPF atKiwiblog and others, about the denigration and alleged stupidity of an ex NZ MP (which I’ll post on, separately).

This annoys me, as Sarah Palin – like Ronald Reagan before her – has become a mockery meme, and is unfairly mocked along with her husband and children, by smug liberals and partisan journalists. They constantly miss-report, make things up, and market false memes.  This is something Joseph Goebbels was masterful at. The continual denigration of Mitt Romney and the Republicans by the Democrats parroted by a very partisan media, is now widely acknowledged as a factor in Barack Obama’s re-election. One of my earliest blogs was about the ‘Sarah Plain can see Russia from her home’ distortion, which you can review here:

I’ve actually heard this misquoted about five times on RadioNZ (never corrected) over the last few months.  But, here is Sayet who says et much better than I can.

English: This is an alternate crop of an image...
It just happened again.

I spend a fair amount of time at my local coffee shop.  I like to do my writing outside and, besides, it gives me an opportunity to try and initiate political conversations with the people who pass by — my hope always being to begin to enlighten them as to what conservatives really believe (and not just what the leftist media tells them.)

Today, the conversation turned to Sarah Palin and my latest acquaintance blurted out: “Oh Ihate her.”  Since she did not yet know my politics, and since we were in Los Angeles, it is clear that she expected to hear back what you usually hear back in this city: “Yeah, I hate her, too.”  Instead, I asked her why.

At this point I could have predicted her response because it’s the same response you get from liberals no matter who on the Right you’re talking about: “Because she’s stupid.”  I replied: “Being stupid is no reason to hate someone, but tell me, which one of her policies do you disagree with?”  It wasn’t hard to predict her response: “All of them!”

I continued to push.  “Well, then, if it’s all of them, it should be easy for you to name one.”  Her reply?  “They’re too many to list.”

“So don’t list them, just give me one,” I said.

This went on for awhile until my new acquaintance finally admitted that she didn’t know any of Ms. Palin’s policies.  Before she ran off – Democrats always run off when asked to provide facts to justify their hatred for Republicans – I looked her in the eyes and said, “If you don’t know any of her policies, perhaps you should look into them.”  She promised she would.  She won’t.  If there are two things you can count on with Democrats, they are filled with hate and empty of facts.

But it got me to thinking.  Given that these people don’t know any of Ms. Palin’s political positions, what is it about her that they hate?  It has to be her life story.  Now, to all decent people, Ms. Palin’s life story could not be more laudable.  She married her high school sweetheart to whom she remains married and with whom she is apparently still in love.  In the harshest of climes, she and Todd started a small business which, apparently, they ran well enough to purchase a home and raise a family.  Despite the long hours required to run a family business and raise children, when Ms. Palin saw that the public schools were not doing a good job in educating her children, she joined the local PTA and was so effective there that the people who knew her best – and in small towns like Wasilla there are very few secrets – elected her to be their mayor.

Apparently, Ms. Palin was so effective in that job that the mayors of the other small towns and big cities elected her president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.  After a highly successful stint as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, she ran an uphill battle against an entrenched Republican governor and was elected to the top position, Governor, of the largest state in the nation.  She did that job so well that her approval ratings – despite having ruffled the feathers of the leading political family in Alaska – bordered on 80 percent.

As Ms. Palin’s political horizons continued to grow, she found out she was pregnant with her fourth child, a baby with Downs Syndrome.  Despite knowing in advance that this child would require even more attention and care than other kids, Ms. Palin opted to give her child – Trig – life.

So, given that those who hate – hate!!! – Ms. Palin know nothing more than these facts about her, what is it about Ms. Palin’s life story that generates this blind loathing?  The answer is that, at every turn, Ms. Palin’s story debunks the myths of victimization and self-centeredness that is at the heart of the modern liberal ideology.

First, Ms. Palin is married with children.  The Democrat Party’s treasured storyline is that women with children – especially those who take care of them themselves – are oppressed, victimized and doomed to a life without personal fulfillment.  Ms. Palin’s life proves them wrong and the Democrats hate her for this.  If Ms. Palin were a Democrat she would have offed the last child before he was born so that she could have more “me” time to pursue her own wants and pleasures.  There is clearly something very “wrong” with this woman who allowed her “special needs” child to live.  They hate her for that.

One of the most obvious demographic differences between the Left and the Right is that people without children – those too self-centered and jealous of others stealing “their” attention, angry and hate-filled “feminists,” radical homosexuals and school children too young to have started a family — are just about guaranteed to pull the lever for anyone with a “D” next to their names.  Those married with children are just as assured to pull the lever for someone from the Right.

And Sarah Palin ran a small business.  Democrats don’t run businesses.  In fact, Democrats don’t do anything.  If you eliminated from the voting roll everyone who did nothing other than talk – the academic, the newscaster, the actor, the politician – and those who game the system, collecting welfare and years of unemployment benefits and “workman’s compensation” and food stamps, how many people would be left voting Democrat?

Let’s put it this way, if having had a job – having done something that required either physical labor or risking one’s own money – were a prerequisite to work in the White House, Barack Obama would have to fire 94 percent of his top advisers.  That’s a real number.  Ninety four percent of Obama’s top advisers have never done anything like run a small store, paint a bridge, wire a house for electricity or anything else other than flap their lips.

This is the genesis of the notion that Palin is “stupid.”  Liberals are convinced that there’s something “the matter” with people who have jobs.  This is what they mean by “What’s the Matter with Kansas,” Kansas being a place where people work – Hollywood, Cambridge Massachusetts, the TV studios in Manhattan are places were people talk.  To the liberal,anyone who has a job must be stupid, after all, not everyone is as good a talker as they are, but surely everyone can find one excuse or another to sit at home and collect welfare.

In fact, to the modern liberal, anyone who has a job is not just stupid, he (or she) is dangerous. These people “cling” to their guns and their religion because they toil for their reward.  These people are constantly on the verge of violence, whether it’s an attack like the one they caused in Tucson (according to the leftist script) or just by going home and beating their children.  Consider the lyrics of “the working man’s troubadour” by Bruce Springsteen:

You can read the rest of this excellent post  AT THIS LINK

Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Outstanding Article Discussing What Sarah Palin And Hillary Clinton Brought To The Political And Social Arena

Posted by M.Joseph Sheppard At Palin4President2016 on November 17, 2012

Here is an outstanding article discussing what Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton brought to the political and social arena through their various strengths and forbearance in the face of intense and unfair pressure.

By Linda Baeil writing at the San Diego North Country Times


What’s behind GOP’s problem with women voters

 •  Linda Beail

What do women want? This is one question Republican candidates and strategists must be asking in the wake of the 2012 election. A 10-point gender gap, the largest since 1996, gave President Obama a thin margin of victory. While women gained a record number of seats in the House and Senate, the number of those congresswomen who are Republicans dropped from nearly one-third to less than a quarter on election night.

The perception of a Republican “War on Women” may be overblown. But the disconnect with women voters in policy and rhetoric, and the absence of women candidates in the presidential race from either party, might cause us to reflect on the debates and issues that engaged women in 2008.

Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin not only served as role models who cracked the glass ceiling of presidential election politics, they also embodied different perspectives and choices regarding women in leadership. Clinton’s experiences of media coverage in the Democratic primary demonstrated the continuing double-bind women candidates find themselves in with regard to gendered assumptions about power. In order to be perceived as competent, she downplayed traditional femininity and was seen as having a “likability problem.” When she teared up in a New Hampshire coffee shop, women voters responded positively to her feminine display of emotion, but it reinforced all of the pundits’ fears and questions about female leadership as tough enough for the Oval Office.

For her part, Palin brought the “mommy wars” and conversations about what it means to be a good mother into the national spotlight, and women across the electorate responded. Palin did not just give voice to a pro-life position on abortion; she embodied it – while also claiming to be a feminist. Cradling her Down syndrome infant at campaign rallies, Palin scrambled the notion that women candidates and voters are pro-choice; she was applauded by Republicans’ social conservative base because she herself had made the choice to carry her pregnancy to term at great personal cost. Palin also presented a new face of the Republican Party: one of a young working mother.

As questions arose about her seriousness and policy knowledge, Palin faced a familiar dilemma both for female candidates and women in society: being dismissed as merely attractive, valued for sexuality but not intelligence. While Sarah Palin was the Voldemort of the 2012 election, “She Who Must Not Be Named,” and dismissed by most pundits as an embarrassing mistake by John McCain, the phenomenon of Palin in the 2008 and 2010 elections might clue her party in to some of what was lacking this year.

In 2012, Republicans have been criticized repeatedly for comments made about women – from Rush Limbaugh’s calling Sandra Fluke a “slut” for seeking insurance coverage of contraception to Senate candidate Todd Akin’s comments about “legitimate rape.” Many of the sound bites in this election season spoke about women as if they were reducible down to their reproductive organs.

In the 21st century, women – conservative or liberal – view themselves as much more than this. In an economy when most families need both working parents just to make ends meet, and 40 percent of women contribute as much or more to their family’s income than men, these essentializing assumptions appear antiquated and tone-deaf. Silence on issues of pay equity only reinforces this perception among women – particularly young women and single moms – that the Republican Party may not see them as the strong and multidimensional citizens that they are.

In 2008, the presence of Palin on the ticket, and her juxtaposition with the narratives of other women like Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama, offered women an opportunity to discuss issues that are complex and relevant to their lives: motherhood, sexuality, work, family, power and femininity. Sarah Palin should not be ignored as simply a failed candidate. Her “hockey mom” persona offered one possible image of power with a womanly face: pit bull aggressiveness with feminine lipstick. Palin may have been our first “third wave” feminist candidate, posing the contradictions of women’s progress and its limits in our political sphere. Palin’s embodiment of those paradoxes did more to energize women voters – both those who loved her and loathed her – than all of Mitt Romney’s “binders full of women.” If only we had had such compelling narratives of women and power in this election.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Gov. Palin: We stand with Israel and Netanyahu

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 17, 2012

Posted on Governor Palin’s Facebook page yesterday:


Sarah Palin · 3,486,036 like this

Yesterday at 11:49am · 


  • We stand with Israel and Netanyahu’s strength that he wisely uses to protect his country. May he have the wisdom of Solomon as Israel’s leadership moves forward. You can keep track of the developments by following @IDFSpokesperson on Twitter.

Follow Prime Minister Netanyahu on Twitter here and on Facebook here.

Official IDF Twitter accounts in English:





Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Charlotte Allen: Sarah Palin Is the New Ronald Reagan

Posted by Dr. Fay on November 17, 2012

Sarah Palin

From an op-ed at the Los Angeles Times by Charlotte Allen:

The Republican Party has been doing a lot of hand-wringing and finger-pointing since the presidential election. Half the conservative columnists and bloggers say the GOP lost because it overemphasized social issues such as abortion and gay marriage. The other half says the party didn’t emphasize them enough. And everyone denounces Project ORCA, the campaign’s attempt to turn out voters via technology.

But I’ve got a suggestion for cutting short the GOP angst:Sarah Palin for president in 2016.

You think I’m joking? Think again.

In 2008, Palin, running as my party’s vice presidential candidate, was widely supposed to have cost John McCainthe election. But that wasn’t so. A national exit poll conducted by CNN asked voters whether Palin was a factor in their voting. Of those who said yes, 56% voted for McCain versus 43% for Barack Obama.

Furthermore, Mitt Romney, the GOP’s anointed contender this year, got almost a million fewer votes than McCain did in 2008. (Meanwhile, President Obama, although winning reelection, lost far more voters than the Republicans, with nearly 7 million fewer voters checking his name on their ballots than did in 2008).


Palin can more than keep up with the Democrats in appealing to voters’ emotions. Hardly anyone could be more blue collar than Palin, out on the fishing boat with her hunky blue-collar husband, Todd. Palin is “View”-ready, she’s “Ellen”-ready, she’s Kelly-and-Michael-ready.

A Palin “war against women”? Hah! Not only is she a woman, she’s got a single-mom daughter, Bristol, to help with the swelling single-mom demographic. On social issues, Palin, unlike Romney, has been absolutely consistent. And let’s remember that most Americans, whatever their view of choice, disapprove of most abortions.


Palin’s son Track is an Iraq war veteran, so she can be proudly patriotic without being labeled another George W. Bush, looking to do aggressive nation-building. She seems aware there is only one nation in need of building right now: America.

Furthermore, looks count in politics, and Palin at age 48, has it all over her possible competition, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will be 69 by election day 2016 and who let someone talk her into adopting the flowing blond locks of a college student, making her look like Brunnhilde in a small-town Wagner production. Men love Sarah Palin, and she loves men.

She’s tough as nails too. After Election 2008, she was supposed to have been through. This year eight of the 14 GOP candidates Palin endorsed for Congress won election or reelection, including tea party favorite Ted Cruz for a Senate seat in Texas.

Sure, there is going to be never-ending nastiness from the left, but she’s already lived through that once. Katie Couric? A has-been. Tina Fey? Her shtick was already wearing thin in 2008.

There are also the snooty East Coast Republican intellectual types, such as Peggy Noonan, who look down their noses at a woman who doesn’t shop at Neiman Marcus and didn’t attend an Ivy League university. But Peggy made a fool of herself calling the election for Romney on Nov. 5. Who’s going to care what she and her ilk have to say next time?

Some Republicans will say Palin has too much baggage from 2008, and we need to look for a new Sarah Palin. But I don’t see what’s wrong with the one we’ve got. Ever since the 1990s, Republicans have been looking for the next Ronald Reagan. Reagan is now revered in bipartisan circles, but during his presidency he was, like Palin, ridiculed by liberals. They cited “Bedtime for Bonzo” and sneered at his no-name college degree.

Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan: charming and affable and unwilling to back down if she’s right. I can’t see what’s wrong with that.

Read more.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »