Palin goes rogue, bans cell phones, cameras, laptops from speech

// added November 06, 2009 // 59 comments //
Image...
RFIDemocracy
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/11/06/palin-to-keep-low-profile-on-wis...

(CNN) - Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is set to deliver remarks at a Wisconsin Right to Life event Friday evening, one of the few speeches the former Republican presidential nominee will have given since she resigned the governorship last summer.

But Palin appears to be doing her best to keep a low profile on this trip: no press will be allowed into the Milwaukee auditorium where she will speak and those who have paid the $30 admittance fee are unable to carry in cell phones, cameras, laptops, or recording devices of any kind.

Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate told the Wisconsin Radio Network he finds all these restrictions "bizarre."

"You know, for someone who claims to be a rogue and isn't afraid of what other people think it really is sort of hypocritical to not let the media, the press cover your event."

Meanwhile Wisconsin Republican Party Chairman Reince Priebus said he's excited Palin is coming to his state, but stressed the party has nothing to do with this event or its limitations.

Related: Palin's high risk strategy

Palin's speech comes a day after a new national poll suggests the former Alaska governor may face some obstacles should she decide to run for the White House. According to the new Gallup survey, only about one in three Americans would seriously consider casting their vote for her.

The speech also comes a week and half before Palin's highly-anticipated memoir "Going Rogue: An American Life" is released. The Alaska Republican will commence a national book tour soon after and sit down for high-profile interviews with Oprah Winfrey and Barbara Walters.

Oh dear....say it ain't so!
  1. groups:
    News,   Authoritarian Conservativism,   The Age of Stupid
  2. tags:

59 comments // Palin goes rogue, bans cell phones, cameras, laptops from speech

  • eden49
  • Karolein
    • 0
      Karolein  
    • No cellphones, but perhaps they can bring their guns instead. You can bet the interviews with Oprah and Barbara will be recorded rather than live, to control the situation.

    • 3 months ago
  • EmperorThan
  • Maeveeo
  • irishmark909
    • 0
      irishmark909  
    • I like her....I think the Media took her lightly, damaged her career and convinced Americas majority that she could not possibly be serious. So why should she let them into her life now. I agree with her decision to keep out the media.

    • 3 months ago
  • freecrack
    • 0
      freecrack  
    • falsifying information to congress to start a needless war in the name of all of us isnt criminal?
      imprisoning people and denying them habious corpus isnt criminal?
      using the patriot act to spy on americans not illegal?
      giving no bid contracts to halliburton/kbr not criminal, the soldiers eletricuted would certainly say criminal neglagence.
      allowing medical facilities that are infested with vermin isnt criminal?
      where you refering to chinese law cuz ours says they are criminals

    • 3 months ago
  • EmperorThan
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • All you haters keep dreaming about the day that Bush, Cheney and Palin go down. None of these people are criminals. They may be soulless politicians but that doesn't make them criminals. Get over it.

    • 3 months ago
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • samthesixth:

      Haters? Speak for yourself. I don't hate Bush or Cheney or Palin, I am angry and outraged and demand justice. See the difference? Hate is the province of theists.

      As for the question of criminalty, Bush And Cheney are certainly criminals by any metric.
      Palin is only known to be profoundly ethically and morally challenged so far. Since she quit politics and a majority would not vote for her, her career is over so we'll probably never know.

      "All told, Haas provides clear descriptions of each of 269 war crimes committed by George W. Bush, including sources for the supporting evidence for each along with complete bibliographical references. The book is incredibly well researched."

      http://www.redress.cc/americas/pjballes20090908

      Read it and weep.

    • 3 months ago
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • samthesixth:

      Sleep,

      I am not a Repub or a supporter of the Repubs. I never referred to yo as a hater. You picked up that label when I threw it out. Defensive? One could make a case against Bush and any other President to include Clinton and Obama. You write "Palin is only known to be profoundly ethically and morally challenged so far." Not so. She is known for more than that, she has beaten the ethics charges, and her morals have been proven by her willingness to raise a severely disabled child. Obama, Pelosi and Reid are far more ethically challenged. Biden cheated in law school. I don't like either party as they are full of corporatist hypocrites.

    • 3 months ago
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • samthesixth:

      Sam
      "I never referred to yo as a hater. You picked up that label when I threw it out. Defensive?"
      Only inasmuch as it directly followed my comment but i'll take your word for it.

      "One could make a case against Bush and any other President to include Clinton and Obama."
      Fair enough. I'm not going to venture to list Clinton's issues but a sore point for me was when Obama voted for the FISA amendment during the primaries after promising to do exactly the opposite. he has never fully regained my trust. Civil liberties trumps everything in my world. What's more, the oath of office is about upholding and defending the Constitution and nothing more or less, something Obama should know, given his credentials.
      A vote for Obama was a vote against McCain and Palin which is sound judgement as the evidence now suggests.
      Remember McCain leaping to defend Georgia during that same period ("We are all Georgians today") turned out to be a grossly erroneous leap to judgment as georgia is now known to have been the aggressor.
      Then we recall McCain 'suspending his campaign' in order to rush off to Washington to save the economy of which he had previously and publicly admitted he knew little about.
      McCain has always been a grandstanding opportunist and Palin could use some civics 101 night-classes because she is profoundly uninformed as evidenced by her infamous interview with Katy Couric. Thankfully the polls show here support has plummeted.

      "Not so. She is known for more than that, she has beaten the ethics charges, and her morals have been proven by her willingness to raise a severely disabled child."

      It's not over yet. There are many questions lingering about Palin's ethics and they are being quietly pursued. Like what is "Pie Sky"? Money laundering? Yet to answered but suspiciously secretive.
      Since you mentioned the child: "The governor, eight months into her pregnancy, noticed amniotic fluid Thursday morning prior to giving a keynote luncheon address at the Republican Governor’s Energy Conference in Texas. After wrapping up the speech, Palin and her husband consulted with her physician about possibly flying home on an earlier flight. After being granted permission from her doctor, she and her husband proceeded with the trek home."
      A 13 hour travel day, BTW. Sounds like an attempted abortion to me.

      "Obama, Pelosi and Reid are far more ethically challenged"
      Debatable at best but feel free to quantify that statement. If you'd said Feinstein, Rangel, Harman, Lieberman instead you would have had me.

      "Biden cheated in law school."
      I got arrested for pot in high school, resulting in a criminal record for possession of a narcotic. I consider it water under the bridge and a youthful indiscretion. It happens to the best of us.

      "I don't like either party as they are full of corporatist hypocrites."

      I agree, though both parties have a handful of honest and outspoken members.
      Gravel, Kucinich, Feingold, Sanders (I know, he's an indie), Paul, Grayson to name a few off the top of my head.

      Afraid Palin never jumped out as ethical at all.

    • 3 months ago
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  
    • My hope is her 'would be' son-in-law will expose some illegalities, which would place her in court, complete with testimony 'under oath'. I think he knows more about the building of her home, which supposedly Todd and a few friends built. I would think if the home issue was investigated, she would be found guilty of several wrong doings. Some think the builders of the sports facility in Wassilla helped build her home, not Todd and a few friends. I think if that were true, she would be a criminal.

      Just dreaming. I hate the thought of 2012 including Palin. She is very devisive. She is still working to divide America and the campaign of '08 is over. Politics run-a-muck.

    • 3 months ago
  • bailey78
  • PureEm
    • 0
      PureEm  
    • Her speech centers are even more screwed up than Bush. I think it's alarming that one in THREE people are even considering the possibility of electing her. In another 4 years, you might as well elect Ms Teen South Carolina (the "everywhere like such as" girl) into the Oval Office.

    • 3 months ago
  • SleepDirt
  • PureEm
  • Conniepae
  • wayseeker
    • 0
      wayseeker  
    • She must know that something told to that many people will without a doubt leak out. I wonder what her angle really is. Maybe this is her way of telling the press to go to hell. This should be interesting.

    • 3 months ago
  • SleepDirt
  • EdJoyProductions
  • aj727b
    • 0
      aj727b  
    • She is probably intending to make some very extreme remarks, possibly related to violence. She doesn't want to be held accountable by the electorate for actually saying what she and her lunatic husband believe in. I'd love to be a fly on the wall there...

    • 3 months ago
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • But her deep understanding of the workings of the legal system more than make up for it, wouldn't you agree?

      "Well, let's see. There's ― of course in the great history of America there have been rulings that there's never going to be absolute consensus by every American, and there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So, you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but ―" --Sarah Palin, unable to name a Supreme Court decision she disagreed with other than Roe vs. Wade, interview with Katie Couric, CBS News, Oct. 1, 2008

    • 3 months ago
  • EdJoyProductions
    • 0
      EdJoyProductions  
    • SleepDirt:

      LOL, how about the Bush Doctrine question. I loved the immediate ::i dunno what you are talking about:: look on her face during that interview. That vacant look in her eyes was precious and terrifying at the same time.

    • 3 months ago
  • SleepDirt
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • SleepDirt:

      But who could forget "Ohh, good, thank you, yes." --Sarah Palin, after a notorious Canadian prank caller complimented her on the documentary about her life, Hustler's "Nailin Paylin"?

    • 3 months ago
  • Varex_Sythe
    • 0
      Varex_Sythe  
    • Well at least she "learns" from things that happen to her. Someone snuck a recording device into her last speech and it showed that she has not a single clue when it comes to economics.

    • 3 months ago
  • zphoenixdownz
  • EdJoyProductions
  • wayseeker
  • EdJoyProductions
  • wayseeker
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • zphoenixdownz:

      I agree, polls are designed to manipulate public opinion by the way the question is shaped.
      Polls seek a pre-determined outcome always. A close friend worked in the industry years ago and he told me that he thought the entire culture was despicable.

    • 3 months ago
  • artemis6
  • SleepDirt
  • CalgarC
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • Also too you betcha in what sense Charlie the real America my country my god oh my god all of those that are put in front of me except Roe v Wade abstinance only and when the Russians come into our airspace where do they go? Alaska!
      Do I make myself clear?

    • 3 months ago
  • LadybugLady
  • wayseeker
    • 0
      wayseeker  
    • One in three people would consider her for President? That means 1/3 of our country have lost their mind. That means there are that many people listening to Fox Anti-News. This is truly scary.

    • 3 months ago
  • lordsbassman
  • EdJoyProductions
  • jon_foshee
  • vans1170
  • freecrack
  • bigloutech
  • EdJoyProductions
  • ii386
  • desertcat
    • 0
      desertcat  
    • Its makes perfect sense, no record of what she said and when she puts her foot in her mouth, its her word against you. When you spew hatred and know it can lead to violence you sure don't want your name connected with any waco who might act on what you advocated.

    • 3 months ago
  • maisry
  • EdJoyProductions
  • isnamthere
    • 0
      isnamthere  
    • EdJoyProductions:

      It's the same motivation as it is for the maggots of the Bush administration who will NEVER testify in court UNDER OATH. They want to be free to lie, and then lie later about the fact that they told any lies.

    • 3 months ago
  • KSirys
    • 0
      KSirys  
    • Who cares, she's not going to make it and she's going to be another britney spears looking for attention in the next few months.

    • 3 months ago
  • LowShred
  • Wharf_Rat
    • 0
      Wharf_Rat  
    • No Media? Not letting people have there cell phones or any type of recording device? I'm bet they will have a list of people, they want to keep out at the gate too. I'm on the fence w/ Obama right now (not the way teabag's are,) but these are the tactics of a fascist or communist dictator.

    • 3 months ago
  • Progresshiv
    • 0
      Progresshiv  
    • Only 100,000,000 Americans would seriously consider voting for her? Whew- that's a relief!

      It's the legs, I tell you. They are legs that can bring down an empire- legs that can bring men to their knees- legs that carry a set of hips and a waist and breasts that salute the flag with a perky, "Howdy, Pardner! Wanna go beat some rats?" Yes, Sarah Palin's legs are an American phenomenon unequalled since Marilyn Monroe's boozy "Happy Birthday, Mr. President."

      It's been too long, America: throw down your high-falutin' "principles" and take a roll in the hay with the prettiest little filly to hide in the barn since My Friend Flicka. And she winks, too!

    • 3 months ago
  • Ihatethemall
  • Vierotchka
  • Ihatethemall
  • Vierotchka
  • SleepDirt
    • 0
      SleepDirt  
    • Image...
    • Progresshiv:

      "Oh God, Do you think its possible she is also into S&M?"

      Yes, I think she'd oblige you.

      **April 30, 2009 03:43 PM ET | Dan Gilgoff | Permanent Link | Print**

      By Dan Gilgoff, God & Country

      Check out this fascinating new graphic analysis from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

      It shows that most white evangelicals and Roman Catholics, along with most frequent churchgoers, say it's OK to "sometimes" or "often" use torture on suspected terrorists. A slight majority of mainline Christians and religiously unaffiliated Americans, meanwhile, say torturing suspected terrorists could "rarely" or "never" be justified:

      (44% of white evangelical protestants believe that "the use of torture against suspected terrorists can sometimes be justified".)

      Full results at link.

      http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/04/30/poll-most-evangelicals-an...

    • 3 months ago
  • Ihatethemall

Add your comment

current videos