Palin's fund-raising lags

Mitt Romney recently raised a little more than $10 Million in one day. It's unlikely that Sarah Palin's PAC has raised that much the entire time it has been in existence (almost two years). That doesn't deter those speculating that Palin may run, however, and a recent Washington Post story about a fund-raising letter sent by Palin's PAC to 400,000 people may fuel rumors that she'll run. I'm here to throw some cold water on that notion.

Direct mail solicitations typically get a 1% response rate, so we might expect 4000 people to respond to the PAC's letter. Even if 4000 people send an average of $100, the PAC will only raise $400,000; at an average of $1000 -- unlikely -- the PAC would raise $4,000,000. $400,000 may not seem a small amount to Joe and Jane Average, but it is in presidential politics where fund-raising ability on a large scale really matters: more than $1 Billion was spent during the 2008 campaign. One candidate spent about 3/4 of a billion dollars.

A Los Angeles Times story about Romney's fund-raising prowess notes -- while writing about last quarter's reports -- that Ron Paul raised about $3 Million with two PACs and adds, "Money raised through PACs can’t be used for a presidential bid." [emphasis added]

Can money raised by Palin's PAC be used to fund a presidential bid? A run by Palin?

The 'Spiral of Silence'

It has been said by some that the press hasn't asked questions about Sarah Palin's pregnancy, as though the matter were taboo. When one reads what was reported in two widely read national newspapers at the time, one clearly gets a different impression.

On September 8, 2008, Howard Kurtz wrote in his "Piling on Palin" column at The Washington Post:

... When the McCain campaign announced last Monday that 17-year-old Bristol Palin is pregnant, there was no reason to avoid covering it, and it is one heck of a human interest story. But the reason the campaign went public is that national reporters were calling to ask about charges by an anonymous blogger on Daily Kos that the governor faked her own pregnancy and is actually the grandmother of 4-month-old Trig.

Campaign officials were deluged with questions from reputable news outlets about the governor's amniotic fluid, the timing of her contractions and whether she would take a DNA test to establish the baby's parentage, not to mention bogus charges about her son being a drug abuser. There's an important distinction here -- mainstream outlets have not given such rumors any credence -- but that is lost on frustrated McCain aides who have to ask Palin about each new line of inquiry. ...

And The New York Times' Monica Davey wrote on September 1, 2008, in "Palin Daughter’s Pregnancy Interrupts G.O.P. Convention Script:"

... The Palins’ statement arrived after a flurry of rumors had made their way through the Internet over the weekend, growing and blooming, it seemed, by the minute.

Some claimed that Ms. Palin had not actually given birth to Trig, but that Bristol had, and that the family had covered it up. Various Web sites posted photographs of Ms. Palin in the months leading up to his birth this year, and debated whether her physique might have been too trim for her stage of pregnancy. The McCain campaign said Ms. Palin announced Bristol’s pregnancy to stop the swirl of rumors.

Ms. Palin’s own pregnancy took Alaska by surprise this year. Even those who worked for her in the governor’s office said they were surprised. Her announcement, in March, was reported in The Anchorage Daily News, which noted at the time that Ms. Palin “simply doesn’t look pregnant.” ...

Reporters were asking questions; there was not a "spiral of silence," -- interestingly, a turn of phrase that itself rings of conspiracy: I am not sure whether some aren't projecting their own conspirational mindset onto journalists. Instead, the media didn't report that Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy because there wasn't evidence to write a story that she did. It's an interesting misconception -- perhaps perversion -- of journalists' responsibilities to believe that they should report rumor as fact.

Interestingly, both writers state that they were informed by the campaign that Bristol Palin's pregnancy was announced to stop the rumor that Sarah Palin was not the mother of Trig.

Shapeshifting Theory

Most of you have recently seen what you thought were pictures of Bristol Palin looking decidedly different than she used to look. Some, even a doctor, have said that Bristol had plastic surgery -- but what do all the doctors who've said nothing think? -- do they care? -- others have attributed her changed appearance to a weight change.

What is it? How should I know? I don't know who the subject of any of the pictures is, old or new, because I've never seen Bristol Palin. Nor do I know anything about the camera/lens, lighting, distance, or angle of the shots, not to mention whether they've been photoshopped.

There is another possibility! Bristol has a double. It's common among celebrities, corporate executives and politicians. One reason they employ a double is out of concern for their safety: The president of a huge corporation may have to address a shareholders meeting, but some people may hate the company, so the pres. wants to make sure he (or she) can safely travel to the meeting. Out comes the double, into a limo, then the motorcade proceeds to the convention hall. All the while the pres. gets into his own car and drives himself to the meeting. Why? If anyone is planning an attack, they'll attack the double.

Doesn't that make a lot of sense? Isn't it possible that Bristol has a double? Wouldn't that explain a lot?

Conspiracy Theories

Kate Zernike of The New York Times writes, in "The Persistence of Conspiracy Theories:"

No sooner had President Obama released his long-form birth certificate than Orly Taitz, the doyenne of the “birther” movement, found reason to doubt it.

“A step in the right direction,” she said, even though it was precisely the document that many birthers had been demanding of the president. And then she argued that it was still subject to authentication.

Donald Trump, similarly bouffant, blond and politically inclined, likewise breezed past the new evidence of Mr. Obama’s citizenship, pausing only to take credit for forcing the release of the document before suggesting that the president was hiding something else — bad grades.

So much for Mr. Obama’s hopes of stopping the “silliness.”

To many, those who doubt Mr. Obama’s citizenship are driven simply by racial prejudice; they are unwilling to allow that America’s first black president could hold the office legitimately.

Many scholars of conspiracy theory agree. But they also note that such theories are hardly unique to Mr. Obama; they have a long history in the United States and elsewhere, coming from left and right, covering all sorts of subjects, political and otherworldly (the twin towers were not hit by airplanes; Paul is dead). And those who doubt Mr. Obama’s citizenship fit the mold of other conspiracy theorists: they don’t loose their grip on their beliefs easily, if at all. ...

Ms. Zernike describes some other conspiracy theories, then writes,

In a way, it is human nature to want to construct a narrative to resolve anxieties, to be drawn to mystery or the perception of it.

But the strong embrace of conspiracy theories is also embedded in the American experience. A fear of enemies — real and imagined, internal and external — defined those who forged this country. A place created as God’s country was bound to see the subversions of Satan behind every uncertain turn. ...

... What Richard Hofstadter called “the paranoid style in American politics” is encouraged by popular culture, in movies like “Birth of a Nation” and “The Da Vinci Code,” and by those whom Professor Goldberg [a history professor at the University of Utah and the author of “Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America.”] terms the “conspiracy entrepreneurs” — whether Glenn Beck or Jerome Corsi, who went from self-styled expert on John Kerry’s military record to self-styled expert on Barack Obama’s heritage. The Internet, where you never have to confront an idea you don’t like, allows these theories to grow deeper and wider. ...

Ms. Zernike's article is worth reading in its entirety, here, and Richard Hofstadter's essay, "The paranoid style in American politics," can be read, here, at Harpers Magazine, where it appeared in 1964.

Ms. Zernike makes the point that the "paranoid style" is not just an affliction of what Hofstadter called the "Radical Right" and isn't only seen in a political context.

Update: Hofstadter's essay is also featured in a collection of links at "The Paranoid Mentality."

Major babygate blogger going soft?

Yesterday afternoon (pacific time), "Kathleen" of the blog politicalgates posted an article in the UK Guardian's Comment is free/America section, asserting as fact that Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy. The last paragraph began:

Sarah Palin's pregnancy hoax is relevant, ...

The same article was posted at the politicalgates blog, but shortly after the post went up the Guardian pulled its post, apparently out of libel concerns. The post was re-worded, at the Guardian and at the blog, with the beginning of the last paragraph changed to:

The questions about Sarah Palin's pregnancy are relevant, ...

At the time of this writing, the Guardian has pulled its post again.

The post as it currently appears at politicalgates is here. The post may reappear at the Guardian; if it does, it may be found here.

politicalgates bloggers have in the past asserted as fact that Palin faked a pregnancy, and "Patrick" has even challenged Palin to sue him, so, although it's understandable that the blogger would alter the text of the post at the Guardian in consideration of the Guardian's concerns, it isn't clear why she should soften the post on her own blog.

Update: Legally, a reason to soften the post is that the writer cannot prove that Palin faked a pregnancy.

Update: The post at the Guardian is back (link above).

Update: Part of politicalgates' post echoes Professor Sharlott's concern about a "spiral of silence." I think that the back-and-forth between the Guardian and politicalgates refutes the notion that a "spiral of silence" exists. I think that the Guardian was being prudent rather than part of a "spiral of silence" when it required the change to the last paragraph. As I've written before, if people could prove that Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy, the story (stated as fact) would be everywhere.

Perhaps it would be better to say that there has been a "spiral of prudence." Has politicalgates become part of it? In any event, they've apparently had an earful of professional legal advice.

Update: The Guardian/politicalgates post makes the statement, "Palin could end the public discussion immediately by presenting hard evidence, such as hospital or insurance records," ignoring the fact that the burden of proof isn't Sarah Palin's. What they're essentially saying is: "We can't prove that you weren't (pregnant), so you prove that you were." Is it any wonder that such a jailhouse lawyer's argument should be met with scorn and laughter?

Update: The politicalgates/Guardian post states: "This statement [that her water had broken in Texas] by Sarah Palin was the trigger for scepticism on the part of some journalists regarding Palin's birth story, as well as the start of investigations by bloggers and citizens."

Yes, I do recall that this motivated the investigation by "Audrey" of Palin's Deceptions; however, the writer ignores part of what Professor Sharlott wrote:

... Palin thus seemingly confirmed that her water broke in Texas, although her answer was sufficiently muddled that one might argue otherwise. ... [emphasis added]

.

Sarah Palin's 'Wild Ride' -- Part II

Politico's story, "Mission for anti-Palin movement: Expose her," is interesting. The story seems to raise expectations for the upcoming books by Frank Bailey, Joe McGinniss and Geoffrey Dunn. Will any of them achieve "their ultimate goal: the absolute and complete exposure of Palin as a fraud unworthy of a role in American civic life?"

I don't know the value of beating a dead horse, but some believe that the only way to completely expose Palin as a fraud is to prove that she did not give birth to Trig Palin. They've been unable to do so. It must be very frustrating. Why doesn't the mainstream media state that she faked the pregnancy? Is there a "spiral of silence?" I think not. The mainstream media wants evidence that would prove that Palin faked the pregnancy. With evidence, the story would be everywhere.

What is that evidence? It isn't pictures from the internet; it isn't a statement by anyone that Palin didn't appear to be pregnant. It's a birth certificate! which would name the birth mother. But in Alaska it isn't until 100 years after a birth that birth records are available to the public; until 2108:

• A person may obtain only his or her own birth certificate, except for parents who may obtain their own child's certificate.
  
  
• A birth certificate can also be furnished to a legal guardian, a legal representative, or to a person who provides documentation showing the birth certificate is needed for the determination of property rights. A legal guardian must submit a certified copy of the guardianship papers granted by the court when requesting a birth certificate. If you are a legal representative, include a letter stating whom you represent and how you are related to the person named on the record.
  
  
• Use the full first, middle, and last names as they appear on the certificate when filling out the request form.
  
  
• We can only process requests for births that occurred in Alaska. For births that occurred outside of Alaska, requests must be sent directly to the appropriate state.

Of course, one could ask Sarah Palin to show the birth certificate (assuming that she has one or can obtain one from the state). But she is under no obligation to do so, because the burden of proving that she is not the natural mother rests with those claiming that she is not the birth mother; and she is not required to cooperate with them.

Some have said that Obama showed his (birth certificate), so Palin ought to show Trig's. Imagine that! Trig Palin isn't running for President; he won't be eligible to run for another thirty years or so.

I could go on, but time would fail me to tell of all the absurdities ... , so I'll just tell you what I think. This is my personal opinion. Like all opinions it doesn't prove a thing: The "Wild Ride" is a tall tale. Sarah Palin never said she leaked amniotic fluid; her dad, Chuck Heath, did. Some people exaggerate. Some may have thought that the "Wild Ride" painted a larger-than-life, heroic picture of Palin. So, was she pregnant? I don't know! It's possible she faked it, but possible that she was pregnant. I may never know, but I won't believe that she faked it unless convincing evidence appears.

Palin pal says she is not running

From Politico's Palin not running, Graham says:

Sarah Palin doesn't like politics and is not running for president, Rev. Franklin Graham says.

The influential - and controversial - pastor has traveled with Palin to Haiti and said said the former Republican vice presidential candidate "likes speaking on the issues, and I agree with many of the issues she brings up. I don't see her as running for president."

He is otherwise undecided on the other presidential candidates, he said in an interview aired Sunday on ABC's "This Week." ...

And from ABC News' story, "Franklin Graham: Trump Might Be Candidate of Choice," the clip from Christiane Amanpour's interview with Graham on "This Week:"



I don't know whether Graham has been told by Palin that she won't run.