Letterman: "Come on, Mitt. Snap out of it. This is live TV.
What the heck are you thinking about at this moment?"
Posted on 03/07/2010 1:04:00 PM PST by Kaslin
“Palin used to be about the people, but she isn’t anymore. These days, Palin is all about Palin…”
Ouch! Did I really hear that comment on a “conservative” radio talk show?
It happened last week after former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin appeared on NBC-TV with Jay Leno. I was listening online to talk show hosts Barry Young and Michele Larson at Phoenix, Arizona’s 550 KFYI radio, as they discussed, among other things, whether Palin’s TV appearance had made her look more, or less, “presidential.”
“Karen,” a caller to the show, claimed that she had been one of the several hundred people who gathered outside a Phoenix-area store where Palin appeared last December, and waited overnight for the opportunity to meet Palin and purchase an autographed copy of her book.
When, after all those hours of waiting, Karen finally got in the door to see Palin, she was forbidden from taking a photo with the former Governor. “They actually took your photo for you when you were speaking with Palin” Karen explained to the two Arizona talk show hosts, “and then they would try to sell you a copy of it for twenty dollars after you got through the line.” And it seems that the selling of the photos was the deal-breaker for Karen and her admiration for Palin. According to her, Palin, who was apparently at one time all “about the people,” was now gratuitously “all about Palin.”
Whether or not you liked Palin’s performance on “The Tonight Show,” and whether or not you think Palin has a future in American politics, are both interesting topics that are worthy of discussion. But I’m not interested in debating those matters here.
For the moment, I’m far more concerned with people who purport to be “former fans” of Palin (later that same day a caller to my own talk show expressed similar disgust, stating that "Sarah has totally sold out” – whatever that means), but now are somehow offended or “put-off” by her. What’s the problem? Her rising celebrity status? Her venturing into national media? Her apparent financial success?
The continual attacks on Palin from the cultural left, while reprehensible, are nonetheless understandable. Given its narrow-minded allegiance to stereotypes, liberal America simply doesn’t know what to do with a sexy, telegenic woman who believes in things like traditional marriage and American exceptionalism. Women who believe as Palin does, so the liberal assumptions go, are supposed to fit the frumpy, dowdy, "church-lady" description. But Palin shatters that assumption, and thus, the left’s response to her is to lash-out.
But regardless of one’s political or cultural leanings, any American who feels uncomfortable in the face of Palin’s recent choices and fortunes should ask themselves “why?” Why is it so unnerving to observe a woman in the public eye rise from modest, middleclass status, to wealthy, high-powered celebrity status, in less than two years?
American freedom, and American-styled capitalism, provide an environment where “rags-to-riches,” Palin-type stories actually happen. No other society to precede America provided such enormous opportunity for upward mobility, and no other contemporary society does it better than we do now.
Yet part of the success of American capitalism is found in the fact that, just as we generally do well at extending opportunity to everyone, we generally don’t try to guarantee specific economic outcomes to anyone. History shows us that when government authorities step-in and try to assure some arbitrary “minimum level” of economic success, people lose their inclination to work hard, behave responsibly, and become their very best.This means that Americans are quite free to succeed, yet we live with the risk of failure as well. It’s a scary thing, this notion of American freedom, but it has a track record of serving humanity in profound and equitable ways.
But with no guarantee of economic outcome, some people inevitably create more success than others do. And our current President and Congress, undergirded by their leftist, economic redistributionist philosophies, are intent on changing this “imbalance of outcome” according to what they think is “fair.” Indeed, they are determined (to reiterate a phrase that is woefully overused by the Obama Administration) to “level the playing field.”
Americans are currently (and overwhelmingly) rejecting the agenda in Washington. Yet I suspect that some of the same “conservative” Americans who are decrying President Obama’s “socialism,” are also uncomfortable with Sarah Palin being too much “about Palin.”
“But if she keeps charging people for photos and all of that” a caller to my talk show told me, “she’s going to irritate her core supporters.” Yep, Sarah Palin’s choices may very well alienate her supporters. And without our government guaranteeing economic outcomes, all our economic choices entail a level of risk. But Palin is nonetheless free to charge for photos, risky as that may be - and I’m free to decide whether or not to buy them.
Will “conservatives” let Palin be Palin? Will Americans allow the “free market” to remain free?
For your consideration ping.
Arizona? QWell that just tells you that some JD supporters are pissed at her and understandably so. McCain needs to go!!!
Ridiculous.
>>Do Conservatives Begrudge Palin for Her Success?<<
I think RINO’s do.
Well, heck! In Oregon I remember Ollie North coming to a local GOP politician’s fund-raiser (a $1,000-a-plate dinner). Those people paid $1,000 just to eat dinner in the same room with Ollie... LOL...
Fortunately for me, I was working with that particular politician and didn’t have to pay the $1,000 ... :-)
As Ollie was “flying by” on the way out of the dinner, I (at least) got a quick handshake from him...
The next time I saw Ollie was when the Moonies sent me to one of their “political conferences” (all expenses paid, thank God...) which was the rage with the GOP and Ollie spoke there (in Miami...). I got to see Fawn Hall, too, that time...
Haven’t we seen dozens of pictures of Sarah at her book signings?
Does the caller ever consider the time it would take if Sarah were to stop every minute to pose for a picture?
Sour grapes is what it is. For shame. Sarah owes her nothing.
exactly
>>When, after all those hours of waiting, Karen finally got in the door to see Palin, she was forbidden from taking a photo with the former Governor. “They actually took your photo for you when you were speaking with Palin” Karen explained to the two Arizona talk show hosts, “and then they would try to sell you a copy of it for twenty dollars after you got through the line.”<<
A friend of ours got her picture taken with Palin, no problem. The security guys were even telling Sarah she had to go, but Sarah told ‘em to back off and that she had time for a photo.
Maybe it’s when you are part of a crowd that you are treated like, well, part of a crowd.
All politicians ask you to pay for photo ops with them. The problem is that people have put Sarah on a pedestal and she cannot live up to these unreasonable expectations that she is some sort of goddess or is not the same as other politicians. She’s great, but she IS a politician. She needs to make money to help her promote herself and her policies and to allow her to help other candidates with their campaigns. Nothing special or unusual about this.
Must be those “life-long Republicans, that voted for Bush.”
Is Too Tall Jones really tall?
Has anyone confirmed that this caller's assertion is true, that either Palin or the event organizers were charging for photos? For Austin Hill to write a column mentioning it without at least first attempting to verify it is the height of journalistic dishonesty.
you mean like the time Clintoon went on some MTV show and talked about his undies?
Then why is someone taking her picture with the guest and trying to sell it? Couldn't they give it away?
Flatly untrue.
The problem is that people have put Sarah on a pedestal and she cannot live up to these unreasonable expectations that she is some sort of goddess or is not the same as other politicians.
The problem, in this specific instance, is that an anonymous caller has made a slanderous accusation, without proof, and the host of the radio program has chosen to repeat it without even attempting to verify it.
Who cares what 4th rate yappers have to say.
Just because their candidate for the senate was voted out of office a few years ago and is carrying baggage,
that is their problem.
That will probably happen when digital cameras, photo paper and ink are free. Until then, somebody's costs should be paid.
I agree with the previous poster: There is no evidence in this story that Sarah Palin is charging for pictures.
How do we know the caller’s not a plant? Nowhere has this been shown except some caller who says she voted for Bush ...
Pray for America
Neither you, the original caller nor Austin Hill has provided the slightest evidence this actually happened.
We have, however, right here on Free Republic, had many after-action reports from Freepers who have actually attended these book signings and had pictures taken and NOT ONE of them that I've seen has reported being charged for photos.
I wasn't there. I don't know for certain either. The burden of proof, however, is on the ones spreading the accusation. If I had to bet my own money, though, I'd bet this story is a lie, because it beggars belief that if this was being done at Palin's appearances the MSM would have trumpeted it non-stop from the heavens.
Thank you, troll.
Now, at the risk of being dubbed a troll I will respond.
Mrs Palin is certainly free, within her rights, and permitted to charge $20, $200, or $2,000 for a picture with her. I myself wouldn't pay to have my picture taken alongside another, let alone stand in line for several hours to get a book signed, (then act like I 'connected' with someone and 'know without reserve' that that someone is God's gift to the world because she said "Hi" and looked me straight in the eye for 1.5 seconds).
But the way I see it, this is not a matter of capitalism, it is a matter of tact. Just because baseball players do something does that make it less tactful? No, it does not.
Thomas Jefferson used to allow total strangers, who ventured up his little mountain just to meet him, stay at Monticello. He gave them bed and board. No charge.
It doesn't cost a dime to give away a digital pic. Just transfer it to one's flash drive.
Could it be lefty callers just trying to create an impression that Palin is losing support?
Picture this: 25 people per minute are filing by and having pictures snapped. What you describe works great at family picnics, not so well at a receiving line. If I were a photographer, Id refuse to do it for free even if I were Sarah’s biggest fan.
I’ve had a picture or two taken of me at events like this. I lend my camera to a friend to shoot the pic. I can understand, however, why an organizer of such an event would disallow pics at all. It slows the line wayyyyy down. A 2-3 second greeting becomes a 15 second pose for a snapshot. It’s rude to people way back in line.
I still support her and her ideas, but I never worshiped her like some people seemed to. She is a human being. It's just that of all the current humans looking to run our lives, she promises the most freedom.
-PJ
But Palin is nonetheless free to charge for photos, risky as that may be - and I’m free to decide whether or not to buy them.
Granted, the media trashed her hard. If I were her, I'd be glad
to get some of my own back. With a vengeance. But I'm an ass, and she shouldn't be.
The more I see, the less likely I think she'll be declaring a candidacy.
Which sucks, as the current crop of potential candidates is pretty sad.
I'd still vote for her, though.
Is it possible that the person who told that complainer just wanted to make some extra money for himself?
What I meant was the seminar callers. The libs that try so hard to get through. Those lines are standard, seems like.
But I understand your point.
The premise that Sarah Palin is charging for photographs is false and this story is very suspicious.
In last week’s small local paper (back home in Virginia), a lady proudly published a impromptu photograph she had taken with Sarah at the Daytona 500 a couple of weeks ago, along with an accompanying letter describing the unexpected encounter. She literally ran into Sarah while wandering around the pits, and when she asked for a photograph, Sarah very kindly obliged and then spent some time with her chatting about home and family. Nothing at all like this article suggests. Certainly no discussion of a fee or charge.
And I know that this lady’s encounter actually happened as described because the newspaper and the photograph with Sarah is sitting right here in front of me as I write this post. Wish I could post it, but it is not published online.
Silvie, if you can, please direct Austin Hill (and Chris Plante and anyone else at WMAL) to this thread since he needs to be educated about a few things concerning his piece (as posted), which is based on a completely false premise, with some likely seminar callers pulling his chain.
Thanks!
Hmm, it seems to me I read about this here on FR
Then he was stupid.
Or perhaps it was different then but anyone that would invite total strangers in to their homes to spend the night is asking for trouble. That wouldn’t make them tactful it would make them fools.
Not that I understand your point. Walking down the street, being approached by someone for an autograph and waving them off because they didn’t give you a $20 would make you insensitive. Arranging a meet and greet so you can accomodate yours “fans” easily and swiftly is just a practical means used to meet their “need” in a controlled setting. But I suppose you think celebrities should sit their butt down for free and spend a week greeting thousands of perfect strangers with nothing given in return. That wouldn’t be practical and charging cuts down on demand.
I don’t know if she charged or not. I couldn’t care less. This isn’t even about her but entitlement. Celebrities aren’t worth defence very often but on this point they are. Myself I wouldn’t pay to meet anyone these days but I don’t begrudge them for charging or those who pay or believe them lacking in “tact”.
Thank you for reiterating this. My whole point in my previous post was directed at this completely unprofessional behavior by Austin Hill. It's quite simply either journalistic incompetence or deliberate malfeasance.
It might be a good idea to forward to this Palin's people as well.
“I think RINO’s do.”
Yup, the libs and RINOs certainly do begrudge Palin’s popularity.
No, not her success. She has been terribly slandered by liberals, and I am glad to see her enjoy success. However, many of us are upset that she endorsed crazy John McCain. You talk about a nutty family, there is the embezzler and former mistress Cindy posing with duct tape across her mouth. The pudgy daughter Meghan who makes those dumb statements also posed with duct tape across her mouth.
“Do Conservatives Begrudge Palin for Her Success?”
No. Liberals might however.
That was another poster in post #11.
But Palin is nonetheless free to charge for photos, risky as that may be - and I’m free to decide whether or not to buy them.
Of course she's free to do so, and we're free to decline, but all of that is irrelevant. The problem is that the author is tacitly and dishonestly implying that the accusation of the caller is true when he has no proof that it is.
Is it possible that the person who told that complainer just wanted to make some extra money for himself?
That is possible as well, but again the problem is the caller and author both implied that it was Palin's people who were responsible and that it was their policy for the event.
Her money was earned honestly and not from some back room deal among back slapping legislators or marring a wealthy money slave or getting it handed to her for doing nothing...what is to dislike?
Sure, why not?
Sarah ought to just do it out of the goodness of her heart. Do it the Obama way, and "spread the pictures around."
Sure it could. Or it might be true. The problem is that the people who are spreading the story have provided no proof or made no effort to verify it, yet we're all wasting a lot of bandwidth in blind speculation.
As I've stated consistently on this board, I believe it's far too early to commit to any prospective candidate, including Palin. I'm just fed up that debate and discussion can't be conducted honestly and politely.
exactly
As for me, I would gladly pay twenty bucks for a nice professional shot of me and Sarah. But then I'm actually a fan of hers, plus I don't expect something for nothing.
Well, the way I see it. She can endorse whoever she wants to. It’s up to the voters of Arizona if they want to vote to reelect McCain or vote for J.D. Hayworth. Personally if I lived in Arizona I would vote for J.D. Hayworth. Though I don’t think that McCain is the RINO many try to make him out to be.
pillut48 and her beautiful daughter went to see Sarah and she posted an after report.
pillut48, was Sarah charging for photos at the book signing?
(((PING)))
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.