Sarah Palin endorses Richard Mourdock against Dick Lugar

From the Washington Post, the Fix: Sarah Palin endorses Richard Mourdock against Dick Lugar

WHAT YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED:

* Sarah Palin is backing state Treasurer Richard Mourdock over Sen. Dick Lugar in Indiana’s May 8 GOP Senate primary. “Conservatives of all stripes are uniting behind” Mourdock, she announced in a Facebook post. It’s the highest-profile endorsement yet for the primary challenger and it pits Palin against her old running-mate, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who just cut a radio ad for Lugar.

* Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney spoke to a group of college students in Ohio today, urging them to start their own businesses like his friend Jimmy John: “Take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business.”

* Vice President Joe Biden woke up a drowsy crowd of donors today, telling attendees at a fundraising breakfast that “you all look dull as hell ... the dullest audience I have ever spoken to.” (He got big laughs, according to a pool report.) The breakfast was with more than 200 members of the Turkish and Azerbaijani communities; tickets started at $2,500.

* Days after winning a brutal member-vs-member primary with Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), Rep. Mark Critz has been brought into the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s Frontline program for vulnerable incumbents. Critz faces a tough race for the new 12th district against Allegheny County attorney Keith Rothfus (R).

WHAT YOU SHOULDN’T MISS:

* The ad wars are heating up in Arizona’s 8th district, where Ron Barber (D) faces Jesse Kelly (R) in a June 12 special election for the seat left open by retired Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D). The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is launching a $150,000 ad buy while the National Republican Congressional Committee has put $300,000 into ads.

* Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee will the keynote speaker at the New Hampshire GOP’s May 30 Victory Dinner, which kicks off the general election season in the state. Tickets are a cool $100.

* New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) will campaign with Gov. Scott Walker in Green Bay and Milwaukee next week, helping his fellow Republican governor raise money for his June 5 recall election.

* The House passed a student-loan bill that pays for low interest rates with money from a preventative health-care fund, a GOP-backed bill that Obama has threatened to veto. Democrats would pay for the interest rate freeze by closing a loophole that allows some wealthy company shareholders to avoid Medicare payroll taxes.

The goofy Sarah Palin sculpture reminds me of Harold Washington in women's undies

From Chicago Now (Dennis Brynne blog): The goofy Sarah Palin sculpture reminds me of Harold Washington in women's undies

Conservatives are riled over an ugly sculpture of Sarah Palin, now on exhibit at the Bridgeport Art Center. The sculpture, which has been on tour, features a gapping, yawling mouth in which a pig can be roasted.
Conservatives also have been riled about the nude (full frontal) painting of  of Palin in the Old Town Ale House. (The artist reportedly used his own daughter as a model, and isn't that creepy?) Disrespectful! Nasty! Blah and blah.

Not me, though. I kind of like Palin's portrait, even if it isn't the real thing. When it comes to paintings of former vice presidential candidates, I'm just glad that it's not a portrait of Joe Biden. Considering all the nutty stuff that Biden says, the mouth would have to be large enough to roast a buffalo whole.

Everyone needs to step back and remember that caricature   is a time-honored art form, especially in political commentary. And so, the Palin caricatures put me in mind of a controversial one of the late mayor and progressive icon, Harold Washington.

David K. Nelson, a student at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, painted the portrait in 1988, showing Washington in women's underwear. Its display in the museum  so angered the ultra-touchy black leadership that a delegation, which included some cops, went to the Art Institute and swiped it. Yep, under the cloak of law, the government came in and took down the portrait. Rarely has censorship been so blatant. The excuse? The portrait was an "incitement to riot."

Eventually, the portrait was returned to the Art Institute, but nobody wore the collar for this egregious violation of the First Amendment. Ah, Chicago.
 

Sarah Palin says Obama wants to ban kids from farm work. Is she right?

From DC Decoder: Sarah Palin says Obama wants to ban kids from farm work. Is she right?

Sarah Palin says the Obama administration wants to ban kids from working on family farms. In a Facebook post Wednesday she charges that the Department of Labor is working on regulations that would stop children from doing agricultural chores that teach hard work and help feed America.

 “This is more overreach of the federal government with many negative overtones,” the ex-Alaska governor writes. Is she right? Are before-school milkings, after-school stall mucking, and summertime hay-bale hauling at risk? Weeellll, it would have been better if Ms. Palin had gone to the source material before putting this up. Maybe. It is true that the Labor Department is working up new regulations bearing on under-age-16 agricultural work. It has been working on them for some years now, with lots of input from farm groups, which are very much worried about that ending-farm-chores thing. So in that sense Palin is resounding a previously rung alarm.

However, “the proposed regulations would not apply to children working on farms owned by their parents”, says the Labor Department press release from last August announcing publication of the proposed law revisions in the Federal Register.

Palin says in her Facebook post that the new regs “would prevent children from working on our own family farms.” This would not appear to be correct, unless there is some definition of "family farm" we nonfarm workers aren't familiar with.

What the regulations would do, according to the Labor Department, is update the list of farm jobs that children under age 16 cannot be hired to do by nonfamily farms. Among the new tasks on the list: pesticide handling, timber operations, and work around manure pits and storage bins. Farm workers under 16 would no longer be able to cultivate, harvest, or cure tobacco, either. Agricultural work accounts for 75 percent of the job-related fatalities for workers under 16, notes the Labor Department. “Children employed in agriculture are some of the most vulnerable workers in America,” said Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis last August.

Many farm-state lawmakers still believe the rules go too far.Sen. Jerry Moran (R) of Kansas earlier this month published an opinion piece on Politico that questioned whether those who drew up the regulations knew much about agriculture, and charged that the Labor Department originally had wanted to narrow the parental farm exemption. “The future of agriculture, and our individual rights, depends on stopping this vast overreach of executive authority,” wrote Senator Moran.

Palin Mocks 'Holiest of Days for EcoLiberals'

From Fox News: Palin Mocks 'Holiest of Days for EcoLiberals'

By Sarah Palin, April 22, 2012

On this holiest of days for EcoLiberals, how about if Americans celebrate Earth Day with responsible energy development that leads to greater independence and conservation?

There’s no better way for President Obama and his administration to celebrate Earth Day than to embrace a real, environmentally sound commitment to energy independence instead of relying on foreign countries that lack environmental safeguards. One aspect of the “all-of-the-above” approach I have been discussing for years involves, of course, the necessity to “drill, baby, drill.”

Sarah Palin's Previous Lies About Secret Service Agents

From Huffington Post: Sarah Palin's Previous Lies About Secret Service Agents
Sarah Palin has disgraced herself yet again, this time by attempting to politicize the Secret Service prostitution scandal that rocked President Obama's recent trip to Colombia. Palin stooped so low -- even for her -- to attach a remark about President Obama eating "dog meat" to her comments. Her obsession with the President--and his wife -- apparently knows no bounds.

And, of course, narcissist that she is, she made plenty of hay about the report that one of the Secret Service agents was "checking her out" while he was assigned to protect her. Palin will find a way to have the spotlight shine on her anyway that she can. It is always about her.

In the aftermath of the 2008 campaign, however, Palin was far more complimentary to the Secret Service than she is today. Indeed, she claimed that she and the agents assigned to cover her kept a little secret together.

As was rather graphically and directly depicted in both the film and book versions of Game Change -- as well as in my own book, The Lies of Sarah Palin: The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power -- Palin went through something akin to a psychological breakdown in the aftermath of her disastrous interview with Katie Couric (and just prior to her debate with Joe Biden.)

As a way of tightening up Palin's loose screws, John McCain thought it would be a good idea to bring her out to his ranch in Sedona, Arizona, where Palin could be with her family and away from the intense urban environment of the Eastern seaboard.

Following her daily practice sessions at the McCain compound, Palin would break out on a jog, with the Secret Service following close behind. On one of her runs, she took a header and severely scraped the palm of her right hand while breaking her fall.

After the election, in an interview with Runner's World, Palin concocted a story that her fall was "top secret" and asserted that she and the Secret Service had kept it from the press:

Palin: I fell coming down a hill and was so stinkin' embarrassed that a golf cart full of Secret Service guys had to pull up beside me. My hands just got torn up and I was dripping blood. In the debate you could see a big fat ugly Band-Aid on my right hand. I have a nice war wound now as a reminder of that fall in the palm of my right hand. For much of the campaign, shaking hands was a little bit painful.

Runner's World: I don't remember news reports about it. Palin: Heck no! I made those guys swear to secrecy. And I probably should have gotten a couple stitches. But I was insisting with these guys, "Absolutely not, let's just wash it out." I appreciated how much care they took to help me out. So anyway, I have a little scar on my hand, and I've seen a couple of pictures from the debate or of me waving to someone on the campaign trail with that band-aid and I think, nobody else knows about it.

Runner's World: So the Secret Service guys kept silent?

Palin: They did! And I have this great respect for them that they've kept silent all these months later.

Wasn't reported? Nobody else knows about it? She bizarrely claimed essentially the same thing in Going Rogue, although in this rendition her knees got into the action, too:

I lost traction and crashed, tumbling into the dirt, gravel slicing into my hands and knees. It took a second to register what I had just done. One of the Secret Service agents helped me up. It was quite embarrassing.

My hands and knees were a bloody mess, and one thing was scarlet with road rash. Suddenly I was very thankful for the agents. They helped me into the golf cart, and I tried to manage a laugh -- between winces.

Once again, Palin claims that she and the agents engaged in a bond of concealment:

'Okay, you guys, you have to swear to secrecy!' I said. 'Please don't tell anybody I crashed. I feel like a fool.'

The guys were so sweet. They promised.

"So sweet," indeed. In fact, the accident was reported the next day by several news agencies, most notably Getty Images. Wolf Blitzer reported about it on CNN. The caption for the Getty photograph of Palin's bandaged hand read as follows:

Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin waves with a bandaged hand as a result of falling while jogging, as she and her husband Todd Palin board her campaign plane at the Flagstaff, Arizona airport for the trip to St Louis, Missouri.

This is yet another of those instances in which Palin's assertions are simply bold-faced lies intended to somehow make her look more rugged or more adventuresome than she actually is. And it is precisely the same type of fabrication that drove those in the McCain campaign absolutely batty, to the point where several believed that she wasn't fit to serve as president.

Sarah Palin Attacks Obama's 'Terrifyingly Naive' Assault On Energy ProductionFrom Huff Po Politics: Sarah Palin Attacks Obama's 'Terrifyingly Naive' A

From HuffPop Politics: Sarah Palin Attacks Obama's 'Terrifyingly Naive' Assault On Energy Production
Sarah Palin is blasting President Obama's energy policies again, taking issue with remarks he made Tuesday in an attempt to curb oil market manipulation.

"Today's speech reflected a lack of awareness of what the problem really is, and that solution has to be part of, beyond a three-leg solution but multifaceted solution, and that is what we proposed," she said on a phone call with Fox News. "Really, our president's naive assault on American energy is going to doom our economy."

Obama pushed Congress Tuesday to give oil market regulators more power to limit speculation, but Palin said that is "just one leg of the stool" for reducing pain at the pump. She criticized the president for putting the brakes on the Keystone XL pipeline and said he needs to tap all domestic energy sources including "drill, baby, drill," and "frack, baby, frack." Palin blamed Obama for being "ignorant" about policies that could foster energy independence.

"He doesn't understand free market principles," she said. "There are so many things that contribute to his terrifyingly naive and purposeful assault on our energy production that it puts us in a pretty scary place."

Last year Palin eviscerated Obama's energy policies in a Facebook post, accusing the president of intentionally driving up the price of gas.

"Let's not forget that in September 2008, candidate Obama's Energy Secretary in-waiting said: 'Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.' That's one campaign promise they're working hard to fulfill!" she wrote. "Hitting the American people with higher gas prices like this is essentially a hidden tax and a transfer of wealth to foreign regimes who are providing us the energy we refuse to provide for ourselves."

Sarah Palin's Ghost Stalks Women on Mitt Romney's Vice President List

From ABC News: Sarah Palin's Ghost Stalks Women on Mitt Romney's Vice President List
Among the women most likely on Mitt Romney's list of possible running mates, New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, have bubbled into VP speculation because of their potential appeal to female voters.

They're two young conservatives who are telegenic and haven't spent a whole lot of time in government. Sound familiar?

The two are among a handful of Republican women who might be perfectly qualified or suited to be on the bottom of the ticket this year, but the ghost of Sarah Palin and her turbulent bid to be vice president stand in their way of being evaluated on their own terms.

After watching Palin's rushed introduction to the contiguous 48 states, and her stumble through national media interviews, Republicans aren't likely to put another relatively obscure woman on the national stage, inviting parallels to be drawn and the same level of scrutiny to be applied.

"The specter of Sarah Palin does hang over the whole process. There's no doubt about that," said Dan Judy, a Republican strategist. "That whole experience ended up not being particularly positive, and I think that picking a woman -- even one who is incredibly well qualified -- would open the door to a lot of questions about trying to pander to women or making kind of a purely political pick."
PHOTO: Sarah Palin
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
Sarah Palin, the GOP candidate for... View Full Size
PHOTO: Sarah Palin
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
Sarah Palin, the GOP candidate for vice-president in 2008, and former Alaska governor, delivers the keynote address to activists from America's political right at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, Saturday, Feb. 11, 2012.
Obama-Romney Likability Gap Watch Video
Nikki Haley Would Say 'No' to Being VP Watch Video
Secret Service Sex Scandal: New Evidence Watch Video

That might seem unfair. Ayotte, a new senator from New Hampshire, has more experience in government than Barack Obama had when he ran for president four years ago. She worked in the state attorney general's office beginning in 1998, was the AG from 2004 to 2009, and was elected to the Senate in the 2010 midterms.

Ayotte even argued before the Supreme Court in a case against Planned Parenthood, though short of that she hasn't been tested on a national level.

The possibility of another female running mate wouldn't be talked about in Washington circles so much if it weren't for the so-called gender gap haunting Romney, who trails Obama 57 to 38 percent among women in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll.

Thankfully for Romney, his wife has done a good job rallying and exciting moms after a Democratic strategist called her unfit to talk about the economy because she never had a job. Ann Romney might not be her husband's actual running mate, but you can imagine her acting like one in the fall to win as many women voters as possible.

Romney's campaign refuses to discuss the VP search on the record, bequeathing the responsibility of floating names, for now, to the chattering class.

That's how Haley, the Indian-American governor of South Carolina, became a candidate for the spot, despite saying in an interview that she would decline the offer.

A tea party icon with a few years' experience in the state legislature, Haley has emerged as a telegenic Romney surrogate who is nonetheless irrelevant to most Americans outside of South Carolina. Her own official website calls her a "virtual unknown" in 2004, when she won a GOP primary to be a state legislator, and she is still in her first term as governor.

As a running mate, Haley could have the same effect Palin had -- a tea party member to rally the base around a moderate whom conservatives were once skeptical of supporting.

Romney's campaign, however, is not likely to pair the establishment candidate with a running mate who might share Palin's penchant for "going rogue" and speaking lines that aren't approved by the party.

"With a national media, they're going to ask her follow-up questions, which is where Palin fell apart," said Laura Woliver, a professor of political science and women's studies at the University of South Carolina. "The other thing is, she won't help him with the gender gap, just like Palin didn't help McCain with the gender gap. She has not really worked on women's issues and has not done much to help women in South Carolina."

Romney said in a TV interview Tuesday that he isn't reluctant to pick a woman as his running mate, and that he's looking for someone who "could lead the country as president if that were necessary."

"There are women who meet that requirement, as well as men," Romney told CNBC's Larry Kudlow. "We got a long list of people who are really extraordinary leaders in the Republican Party, and you can think of those names, as I can."

Other women who could otherwise have been options to be Romney's No. 2 are Susana Martinez, the New Mexico governor who could curry favor with Hispanics but who said she doesn't want to leave her developmentally disabled sister alone by moving to Washington; Kay Bailey Hutchison, the most senior female Republican senator; and even a fellow private-sector maven like Carly Fiorina, the former chairwoman of HP who ran for Senate in California.

Though no one knows who the VP nominee will be right now, many insiders expect what Judy called a "boring pick" -- an already known establishment Republican like Bob McDonnell, Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, or the tea party senator Marco Rubio.

"I think it's so soon after the Sarah Palin thing, you're going to see a much safer pick, a more conservative pick," Judy said.

Sarah Palin Responds to Roger Ailes Comments: Don't 'Dictate' My Life

From the Christian Post: Sarah Palin Responds to Roger Ailes Comments: Don't 'Dictate' My Life
n a speech at the University of North Carolina, Fox News mogul Roger Ailes stated that former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin had "no chance" at being president. Palin later dismissed the remark and offered some suggested reading.

"Interesting," Palin remarked after Ailes disregarded the former Alaskan governor. In an interview with Breitbart.com, Palin explained that she is no stranger to the "in your dreams" attitude.

"I haven't heard all of his remarks, but I wonder if he is aware that the same thing was said about me when I ran for city council, mayor, and eventually governor," Palin stated.

Palin also stated that nothing was more motivating than someone suggesting that a goal in unobtainable.

"No doubt many people who are told they can't do something will work that much harder, and they succeed," Palin imbued. "Maybe you guys should send him a copy of Steve Bannon's 'The Undefeated.'"

Palin advocated every individuals right to choose their own ambitions by stating that others had no right to "dictate one's path in life."

Like us on Facebook

The former governor gave the air that she was prepared to go after what she wanted. She added that most people are better at "never giving up when you're fighting for something precious like our exceptional nation and our children's futures."

Ailes clarified his statement later on Friday, suggesting that his comment was not a personal attack on Palin.

"When I hired most of the Republican contributors, none of them had any immediate prospects of becoming President -- I wasn't referring to any of their long-term prospects, including Governor Palin," Ailes said in a statement.

"I hired all of them because they made for good television at the time. Sarah Palin is young and nobody can predict the future," he explained.

The Palin Counterfactual

From the New York Times: an opinion piece The Palin Counterfactual
After Rick Santorum’s exit from the race last week, Philip Klein and HotAir’s Allahpundit considered what would have happened if Sarah Palin rather than Santorum had been Mitt Romney’s right-wing foil. I think that this point from Klein is interesting …

… Had Palin been in the race as the conservative alternative, it would have been very difficult for Romney to attack her given the passionate following she has among many conservatives, because he wouldn’t want to risk alienating them. Even if he had ultimately triumphed after a brutal primary fight, a lot of her loyal supporters would have found it difficult to bury the hatchet for the general election.

By contrast, Santorum came into the race with a very small following and was polling in the low single digits early on … His defeat is a disappointment to his supporters, no doubt, but less likely to sting as badly for as many people as a Palin defeat would have. Now that the primary is over, it will be a lot easier for Santorum voters to get behind Romney in the general election than it would have been for Palin given her built in fan base.

… but it depends on the assumption that a Palin-Romney race would have been even more “brutal” than the Santorum-Romney race we just watched. And as intuitive as that sounds, I’m not entirely persuaded. Here’s the Allahpundit sketch of how it might have played out:

Hard to believe she wouldn’t have given him a much tougher race than Team Sweater Vest: She would have appealed to the same blue-collar and evangelical Republicans as Santorum did while almost certainly being better funded thanks to her supporters’ enthusiasm. The debates would have been an opportunity for her to make inroads with centrists who dislike Romney but were leery of her grasp on policy: Had she done well in those, she could have turned around some doubters while stealing Newt’s thunder as the anti-media candidate.

Where enthusiasm and potential fundraising is concerned, Palin clearly would have had a huge edge on Santorum, giving her the opportunity to build the kind of infrastructure that he conspicuously lacked. But then again, nothing in her post-2008 career suggests an aptitude or appetite for the kind of work required to build a smooth-running (or even occasionally-misfiring) national campaign. Team First Dude and Co. would have spent much more money than Team Sweater Vest, no doubt, but whether they would have spent it wisely is another question. (Recall that Rick Perry spent a lot of money, too.)

Where the debates were concerned, meanwhile, I would give the edge to Santorum. This was a campaign in which individual debate moments mattered, but what really mattered was being consistently solid in performance after performance, — and again, nothing we’ve seen from Palin post-2008 suggests that she would have had the discipline or briefing-book mastery necessary to impress week after week. Santorum, on the other hand, was dogged and disciplined and detail-oriented (even, alas, when the details involved the Cuban-Venezuelan-Bolivian “threat”), which paid dividends for him over the long haul that the debate calendar became. The debates made him seem a more plausible contender; there’s no reason to think they would have the same impact for Palin, and some reason to suspect the reverse.

As for wooing centrists, keep in mind that Santorum was relatively successful at executing a kind of pincer movement in which he won some blue-collar voters to Romney’s left (not all of whom were Democrats trying to sow havoc in the G.O.P.) as well many voters to Romney’s right. The Sarah Palin who governed Alaska as an independent-minded populist might have executed the same maneuver even more effectively. But would the Sarah Palin who’s been branded as the Most Polarizing Woman in America have had the same capacity to win over independent voters in the Midwest? (Do we really think, as a for instance, that she would have outperformed Santorum among Catholics, the obvious place where he underperformed his?) There was a period when pundits were speculating, wrongly but not totally implausibly, that Santorum might have a better chance in the general election than Mitt Romney. Would anyone have argued the same about Palin, given her persistently upside-down approval ratings and the fact that the public’s perceptions of her seem so locked-in and unlikely to change?

The best reason to think that Palin would have given Romney a much longer and tougher fight than Santorum is that she would have polled in the double-digits from the beginning and might have consolidated the not-Romney vote early, by winning Iowa and South Carolina and clearing figures like Gingrich off the decks. But I still have trouble seeing which of the various crucial states Santorum lost to Romney that Palin would have won. Michigan? Ohio? Illinois? It’s certainly possible that she would rediscovered her Alaskan touch, and extended the campaign beyond what Santorum managed or even somehow won it. But I suspect that her trajectory might have looked more like Gingrich’s — some time at the top of the polls, a big win here or there that led the press to briefly anoint her the frontrunner, but then a swift drop-off once the Republican electorate focused on her general election liabilities.

NBC erred in calling Sarah Palin a 'co-host' during her 'Today' show stint

From NY Daily News: NBC erred in calling Sarah Palin a 'co-host' during her 'Today' show stint

Okay, admit it, the folks at NBC’s “Today” show blew it with Sarah Palin.

No, no, not in booking her. That was a masterstroke for NBC and Fox News, both of which gained high visibility points for bringing her in last Tuesday.

Where the people at “Today” messed up was by calling Palin a “co-host” and not just an extended guest.

By giving her the exalted co-host title, “Today” producers and NBC News officials triggered a debate over the division’s sense of credibility that continues a week after the former Alaska governor graced the show.

In short, a Ringling Bros.-worthy piece of marketing turns into a discussion about, well, how serious they are at NBC News.

That’s just a crock of feathers.

Former “Today” host Bryant Gumbel, now host of HBO’s terrific “Real Sports,” told Newsweek’s Howard Kurtz he was “embarrassed” by the Palin show and believes hosts “used to be judged not just on their popularity level but the extent to which they were capable of interviewing someone or reporting on a situation, or able to have a degree of gravitas. Now that is secondary to being popular.”

RELATED: COURIC'S 'GMA' FINALLY BEATS 'TODAY'

He’s not alone, nor is he the sharpest critic of NBC’s move. Some naysayers suggested Palin’s half dozen segments in a two-hour show changed the face of TV news.

Okay, maybe that’s an overstatement.

But calling Palin anything more than a guest left NBC News vulnerable to a debate that shouldn’t have even happened.

Palin didn’t handle big interviews. She wasn’t sent out to cover breaking news. She wasn’t called on to convey any critical information.

Her spotlight moment came when Matt Lauer interviewed her, not vice versa.

She was a guest with a fancy title — a guest who could get people talking and might blunt the potential impact of former “Today” host Katie Couric filling in for a vacationing Robin Roberts over on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

That was critical for NBC because “GMA” lately has been closing the gap on “Today.”

Going into the week, ABC had pulled to within 137,000 viewers, potentially jeopardizing “Today’s” streak of winning 850 consecutive weeks.

Based on preliminary figures, it looks like the streak continues. ABC won Wednesday, but NBC took the other days — including Tuesday, when Couric and Palin went head to head.

In the larger picture, ABC and NBC should both be commended. By casting Couric in the starring role in the mornings — and NBC’s response with Palin — they got people, notably the media, talking about morning television in a way they hadn’t in a long time.

And despite the hand-wringing — the embarassments, if you will — serious journalism survived.

Easter Pause

So sorry to have missed so many days of posting - unexpected family matters cropped up.

And now it's Easter, so more family matters.

Will get back on track Monday.

Thanks for your patience.

John McCain kids about Sarah Palin for VP again

From Politico: John McCain kids about Sarah Palin for VP again
Sen. John McCain, who was roundly criticized for putting Sarah Palin on the ticket in 2008, joked Wednesday that Mitt Romney should tap the former Alaska governor as his running mate.

“I think it should be Sarah Palin,” McCain said on CBS as he broke into laughter, when asked about Palin’s suggestion Tuesday night that the eventual presidential nominee should “go rogue” in their VP selection.

Asked by the laughing hosts of “This Morning” whether he had spoken to Palin about this, the Arizona senator said, “No, I haven’t.”

“I think that we have some very qualified candidates. Obviously, Marco Rubio is in the top tier, Chris Christie, there are a number of candidates we have out there, Bobby Jindal, Mitch Daniels. We have a wealth of talent right there, and I’m sure that Mitt will make the right choice,” he said.

As he burst into laughter again, McCain added, “Obviously, it’s a tough decision.”

Asked again what advice he would have for Romney when he gets ready to name his vice presidential pick in a later interview on CNN, McCain quipped, “I think that I would obviously tell him … not to rush to judgment for one thing.”

McCain, who has endorsed Romney in the 2012 race, also called on Rick Santorum to drop out of the contest following the former Massachusetts governor’s three-state sweep Tuesday.

“It’s clear that [Romney’s] the nominee,” he said on CBS. “American voters will be looking at Mitt Romney from that viewpoint. They’ve watched this rather disastrous campaign which has really raised the unfavorables of all of our Republican candidates rather dramatically.”

He continued, “I hope that Rick Santorum would understand that it’s time for a graceful exit.”

It’s a duel at sunrise for Sarah Palin and Katie Couric on NBC and ABC’s dawn patrols

From NY Daily News: It’s a duel at sunrise for Sarah Palin and Katie Couric on NBC and ABC’s dawn patrols
SARAH PALIN ON ‘TODAY’, NBC, Tuesday morning - 4 stars

KATIE COURIC ON ‘GOOD MORNING AMERICA’, ABC, all week - 3 stars

Be less afraid.

That may be the main message we civilians should take from Tuesday’s parallel appearances by Sarah Palin on NBC’s “Today” show and Katie Couric on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Yes, we know why the networks set this up. ABC thinks showcasing its latest hot hire all week might push “GMA” past “Today.” NBC hopes Palin’s one-day visit will bring enough of her posse, plus curiosity-seekers, to fend off that challenge.

Did it work? Who knows? In the end, the numbers are network bean-counter stuff.

What we can say is that Palin, who was billed as a co-host but really was more of an extended guest, played her role smartly. Couric made it a little more about Katie, but she knows the morning game. She makes two hours slide down like a latte.

What’s interesting in the broader picture is what these gigs say about where two of the best-known, most ambitious and most polarizing women in the modern politics-and-media game might be going from here.

Katie and Sarah don’t leave a lot of people in the middle. You love ’em or you hate ’em.

They both know that, too, and while they have benefited from it — passion always beats indifference — their game plans Tuesday sent signals they wouldn’t mind looking a little more welcoming.

From the moment she hit the national stage in 2008 as John McCain’s surprise running mate, Palin has loved playing Mama Grizzly.

When true conservative believers want red meat, she delivers. She’s in such demand as a firebrand and energizer that she quit the Alaska governorship to do it full-time.

But it was a different Palin who showed up Tuesday for “Today.”

It’s not that she backed off on her ideology. She plugged the “marketplace” and got in swipes at the “lamestream media” and Hollywood, favorite targets of those who think America has lost its way.

But Palin also knew she was talking to millions of people who don’t attend political rallies. This was a place to show off a mom who’s proud of her kids, who applauds the entrepreneurial spirit of an ideological opposite like Oprah Winfrey and who can admire Tori Spelling’s stylings for hors d’oeuvres at a fancy Hollywood party.

Palin smiled, used her indoor voice and generally joined the lighthearted banter, some of it self-deprecating, that sets the morning show mood.

Be less afraid.

Couric, meanwhile, continued her game plan from Monday's “GMA,” dusting off the upbeat, chatty and bemused persona that worked so well for her over 15 years at “Today.”

Amid stories involving cops and politics Tuesday, Katie also interviewed Camille Grammer about why she left “Real Housewives.”

This isn’t the Katie who pressed Palin during their famous 2008 presidential campaign interview, who continually needed the gravitas to prove she belonged in the traditionally male seat of the “CBS Evening News” anchor.

Before Katie starts her daytime talk show on ABC later this year, she wants to be sure we know she’s having fun again.

And that there’s no reason to be afraid.

Weinbaum Column: Game change: How Palin almost ruined McCain's quest to lose

The RollaDailyNews: Weinbaum Column: Game change: How Palin almost ruined McCain's quest to lose
Rolla, Mo. —

Sometimes watching a hit piece on someone you admire means facing the outrageous arrogance of the left. In my case, after weeks of avoiding Game Change, I let the remote land on it during a rare bad mood. I figured, why not? I couldn’t feel much worse. Even with that, I knew this would be a tough watch.

Like millions of Americans, I’m a Sarah Palin supporter, but knew nothing of her until the night Senator McCain introduced her to the American people as his VP candidate. What a breath of fresh northern air! She rocked!

I’ve studied and written about Palin’s record, experience and charisma. Before I proceed I wish to state this undeniable fact:

Governor Palin had more experience in running things than Obama, Biden and McCain--COMBINED!

Let’s enter into the realm of the lib-think that adapted the movie from the book of the same name by first talking about the background for a disease that still affects Progressives to this day--PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome):

· The Blood Libel accusation of Palin as responsible for Congresswoman Gabby Gifford’s shooting.
· Bill Maher’s abhorrent smear of Palin using the “C” and “T” words on HBO, coincidentally where Game Change is.
· David Letterman comparing Palin to a slutty stewardess and saying her then 14 year-old daughter Willow would probably get knocked up by Yankee star, Alex Rodriguez.
· Dem operatives accused Palin of a new ethics violation daily after the 2008 election.
· The Obama Administration ran an anti-Palin ad about a month ago. Last time I looked Palin wasn’t running.

What’s apparent is Democrats are still scared to death of Sarah Palin-which is exactly why she should have run in the2012 race. When I met her briefly at CPAC, that’s what I told her. The look on her face said it all. It was her time and she knew it. We need her leadership. We need her competence. We need her common sense.

Now to the movie: Game Change, produced by people who made political contributions of $200,000—all to Democrats, was released three weeks ago on HBO. This flick shows Governor Palin, a hardly-vetted VP choice by “Maverick” John McCain. Fresh off the Alaska political tundra, her introductory speech was superior. She was a natural, a charismatic attractive phenom, a conservative attractive, pro-life democratic hack nightmare!

John McCain, in his infinite RINOism turned her over to two dumb political managers, Nicole Wallace and Carl Schmidt. Palin was made over, mocked over, bashed over, leaked over, sent on interviews with Lib enemies, and then abandoned by this dynamic duo of dullness. Finally she went rogue and returned to her own self, something McCain’s toadies wouldn’t recognize if it came up bit ‘em--a winner.

Palin began managing herself. Then she kicked Biden’s arse in the VP debate.

Drill Baby, Drill

According to the movie, Palin had the gall to advise, even beg the McCain campaign to vet the most unknown candidate ever to run for President, Barack Hussein Obama. After tinkering with it, McCain, as he usually does, agreed with the MSM and cretins on the left, which included the two buffoons running his campaign. He played right into the hands of his enemies and prohibits his campaign from leveling with the American people.

He stopped his campaign from talking about Reverend Wright, his association with Nation Of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan and the self-acclaimed terrorist murderer wannabe, Bill “we didn’t do enough” Ayers and his equally violent wife, Bernadine Dohrn. The 20 years the Obamas spent under Reverend Wright’s anti-American, anti-white, anti-Semitic rants were anathema to McCain.

It wasn’t for John McCain to decide. Nor was it Wallace’s or Schmidt’s right to deny us.

They had in their possession information that was so crucial that by not delivering it to the American people they put this country in peril. The McCain/Palin campaign could have revealed Obama’s likelihood to inject a Socialist Black Liberation Theology with its coziness with Islam, an intentional destruction of our economy and a degeneration of our allies and rote anti-Semitic, pro-Muslim policies. A revelation of who Barack Obama really was should have been job #1 by the McCain/Palin team. It borders on treason to have this information and not share it.

Sarah tried to tell us but was stopped by the buffoons who couldn’t wait to show themselves as good losers.

Nicole, our ever stalwart RINO, confesses she didn’t vote for John McCain—in fear of a Sarah Palin presidency.

All one needs do when confronted with this ridiculous one-sided view of Palin is compare her to the disaster currently holding the Presidency. Just say these words and perspective suddenly appears: “…compared to WHO?!”

The movie should call up a warning. Wise up Republicans and recognize winners when you see them—Sarah Palin is a winner! Let’s send RINOS like Schmidt, Wallace and yes-John McCain to the side they’re really on, the Progressives.

Oh yeah—and “DRILL BABY, DRILL!”

"Today" Show Flips Out, Brings in Sarah Palin, "Surprise" Guest to Ward off Katie Couric

From Forbes Magazine, Gossip section (i.e., Media and Entertainment Section): "Today" Show Flips Out, Brings in Sarah Palin, "Surprise" Guest to Ward off Katie Couric

NBC and the “Today” show are flipping out over Katie Couric guest hosting ABC’s “Good Morning America” this week. On Tuesday, “Today” will use Sarah Palin, failed candidate for many things, to try and blunt Couric. Couric, of course, is credited or blamed with derailing Palin with a famous interview on the “CBS Evening News” in which Palin couldn’t name a newspaper she read for information.

NBC is so angry that Couric–who co-hosted “Today” f0r years–is going to be opposing them, they’ve chosen this path. It may do them more harm than good since the average “Today” viewer is certainly not a Palin follower. She’s a Fox News creation.

But “Today” is suddenly being portrayed as in ratings trouble, and Ann Curry seems to be getting the blame. It’s very unlike the “Today” show to be defensive.

Meanwhile they’re touting a surprise guest for tomorrow– “A legend returns”–is how they’re billing it. Is it one of their prior hosts–Jane Pauley or Bryant Gumbel? Is it John Legend? Is it J. Fred Muggs? (You’re too young to know a chimp actually co-hosted “Today” in the 1950s. Really.)

And then, to make things more interesting, Oprah is coming to see Gayle King on rival “CBS Morning News.” This is after King swore to me in my Parade interview that Oprah would not be a guest there for some time. It’s been less than 90 days since King and Charlie Rose took over that show. So all bets are off, everywhere.