The "Sarah Palin Channel" - A Review: It's All About Sarah

By VinnieF

I could sum up my review of the Sarah Palin Channel by the following:

• This is just another cheap grifting attempt of Sarah's.
• The content is low-level meat for her Tea Party-loving fans.
• There are some rather crazy people who think Sarah is America's finest leader.

Of course, if you're a regular Po'Gates reader, this is nothing new to you. Still, I think it's important the we have an article here on Sarah's latest adventure. It is rather revealing about the true nature of Sarah and her fans.

In writing about Sarah I find myself wanting to say "I find it incredibly narcissistic that ...". This is certainly no exception. The fact that she thinks people should have to pay ten bucks a month to hear her ramblings is incredibly narcissistic. The fact that she thinks people should hear all about the boring details of her family is incredibly narcissistic. The fact that she still presents herself as some major political player is incredibly narcissistic. I think you get the point.

Simply Another Grifting Endeavor

Fortunately, Sarah's grifting power has significantly faded. Her last book was a flop. Her Fox News appearances are getting rarer and rarer. While "Amazing America" will continue, her role is rather minor and not the lucrative deal that Sarah Palin's Alaska was.

So, welcome to the Sarah Palin 'Channel' where you spend ten bucks a month to hear about everything Palin. Obviously, her reach is dwindling. The only people who will pay for this are her truly devoted fans.

Sarah's opening video talks about how this new site will finally allow all of the Palinbots to join together in some new found, Sarah-driven community. Of course, she could do all of this without them having to pay. But no, if you want Sarah to pretend to care about you and your views, you'll have to pay her for the privilege.

It's All About Sarah

The opening video also brags about how this is supposed to be some innovative, interactive site where you, the Palin devotee, gets to be a real part of it. However, it's very clear that the site is all about Sarah, her family and her thoughts on things. There are no investigative reporters of any kind. The initial video talked about 'special guests' but after several weeks there have been none. Many of the videos brag heavily about her former accomplishments. For example, the one that portends to talk about how her PAC selects candidates to endorse, brags profusely about the PAC's supposed successes and is effectively an advertisement for her PAC.

She has had a few videos where she actually answers questions from the website trying to give the impression that one can participate. Oh what a thrill it would be to have Sarah read your question out loud in one of her videos. Not surprisingly, the selected questions are all softballs and most of them are ones about her favorite subject - Sarah. The first question of all is whether she's going to run for President. (She gives the "won't close any doors" answer. More on this below.) There are some truly inane questions such as why Piper wears number 22 when playing basketball and does she prefer Eddie Van Halen or Sammy Hagar. Seriously! Recently, a block was added near the top of the page with links to all of her books just in case you haven't bought them all yet.

For at least a week now she's had a link up asking users to submit their own videos. None of these have yet been published. Knowing who her fans are, my guess is they simply haven't received any that don't reveal the true craziness of her fans.

Her family also figures prominently as if they matter at all. Mom contributes deep thought with "Sally's Word of the Day" (which doesn't even come every day). A link to Bristol's blog gets prime placement every day. She's included Trig in a number of videos. In some he's sitting besides her while she talks to the camera. In a video about little league star Mo'ne Davis, Sarah ends up talking more about her own kids sports endeavors than she talks about Mo'ne.

It appears that part of the appeal to her fans is that you actually get an inside look at her family. You can filter her videos on the following four categories: America, Obama, Immigration and "Palin Family". There are already 14 videos in this last category. It really reeks of typical celebrity adulation as opposed to any serious political thinking.

There's a video (the "First Video") of her playing with their new dog. The poor quality of the video makes it hard to hear what little she's saying. For the most part she's just playing with the dog and showing it can respond to some basic commands. While the dog is supposed to be for Trig, we don't see him playing with it at all. While I'm a huge Obama fan, I have absolutely no interest in watching him or his family members playing with their dog.

A Lazy Effort

I'm convinced that Sarah is rather lazy by nature. Remember that she hired a City Manager in Wasilla to do much of the work Sarah was supposed to do as Mayor. Remember the "Where's Sarah" buttons were made before she was selected as McCain's VP nominee as people wondered where their governor was.

For this effort, she knows that she's appealing to her base so there's no need to excel. And indeed she doesn't.

The sheer amount of content is pretty small considering this is a 'channel'. For the two week period ending Thursday, August 28, only 19 videos were made. The total amount of published video footage averages 7 minutes and 30 seconds per day. The videos are getting shorter and shorter with the five videos from the week of August 25 averaging only 2 minutes and 28 seconds each. Sorry, the Word or Image of the day doesn't count as 'content'. By comparison, the Blaze, another pay site, had 40 stories published on Tuesday, August 27 alone. They have also had over 17 videos for the week of August 25.

The quality of her videos is quite amateur and getting worse. It's usually just Sarah rambling into a microphone, largely from a scenic location in her home along the lake. Her yapping face is interspersed with moving pictures that are inserted based on what she says. For example, if she mentions the Constitution they might show a rolling picture of the Constitution. My hunch is that she sends the raw footage off to some video editor who adds the pictures even though this is pretty basic video editing.

While some of the earlier videos appeared to have a somewhat cohesive script, that's changed in the last several weeks. The standard now appears to be that she just goes off with the word salad that we know so well. It's really embarrassing.

The Videos

Let's look at a few of the specific videos.

Richard Dawkins (link to video)

Of course, Sarah will use Trig as a political prop any time she can. So when a dreaded atheist makes a crass comment on Down's Syndrome babies, Sarah has to brag that she didn't abort Trig. This was her chance to make a profound statement on the subject. Instead we get this:

"Recently the world's most famous atheist, Richard Dawkins, he told a woman on Twitter that it was immoral to give birth to a baby with Down's syndrome. He said, and I quote 'Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world [if you have the choice].' The 'it' is a beautiful and innocent life that happens to have just one extra chromosome."

"Well, Mr. Dawkins, what a cold hard world you must live in to say such a thing. I truly feel sorry for you. Mr. Dawkins, I'd let you meet my son. If you promise to open your mind, your eyes, and your heart to a new kind of absolute (beauty?). But in my request for you to be tolerant, I'd have to warn Trig that you must be tolerant too (?) because he'd probably look at you as if you were kind of awkward. I'll make sure that he's polite though."

"And, Mr. atheist, my son and every child, every adult like him, they're winners. They do win! You see, they've got more chromosomes than you."

Yes, that's the sum total of what she had to say on this. Very deep!

Sarah's Ice Bucket Challenge (link to video)

This is supposed to be a joke. It's a copy of Patrick Stewart's challenge. She rambles on about how she's too old and 'prim and proper' to actually do the challenge the normal way. It's a slow and boring presentation. She then daintily prepares a glass with ice and a Diet Dr. Pepper, and proceeds to drink it as if that's her challenge.

She then challenges Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Odd that she would put the two in the same request. I'm sure Hillary really feels the need to respond. NOT!

Then, as if it's some big surprise, someone dumps a bucket from off camera. There was clearly no ice in the bucket. It was probably warm water. She then runs off screen not to be seen again. I guess she really is too 'prim and proper' to actually show herself after being dumped on. (Maybe a wig fell off. I don't know.)

Looking at Matt Damon's toilet water challenge and this one shows the contrast between a real political activist vs. a woman who's nothing but a grifter.

It's All the Same Jihad (link to video)

Time to discuss a really deep issue. Not surprisingly, her solution is simply to bomb ISIS.

"... It's all one and the same. They all have the same mission. Different name, same mission. Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas. They're completely united in their hatred of Christians and Jews in their mission to kill us all, in their quest to destroy the countries that they hate, Israel, and the United States. We need to wake up. Come on, we can't reason with Jihadists. Come on Barack. We can't negotiate with them. We can only defeat them. And we must. Who can defeat them? The United States military."

Yes, Sarah is simply throwing red meat to her war-loving, Obama-hating base. They cheer along with their Fox-based ignorance in the comments:

"What needs to be exposed is the Obama's Admin. complicity - being in cahoots with the Muslim Brotherhood terrorists to help them accomplish the NWO goal here ..."

"You Know some said the the Weapons of Mass Destruction that weren't found in Iraq when Saddam was the leader were actually moved to Syria."

"I think so, too. He [Obama] is sold out to our enemies."

"B. Hussein is a Muslim sympathizer, and possibly even a closet Muslim."

"Obama is a Sunni & 100% with them"

"Hussein 0Zero is a Hater. A Hater of Israel AND! the United States of America. That's right!"

The Anniversary of Her Being Selected as the VP Nominee (link to video)

Remember what I said earlier about hitting new heights of narcisstic behavior. Yeah, this is one of those.

As noted, most of her recent videos are 2-3 minutes long. This one is over 22 minutes. You'd think one would say something new, something deep in that much time. Of course, you'd be wrong.

The first 15 minutes is a rather slow-paced recounting of the story of her getting the nomination. Obviously, this was the biggest event of her life. But we all know the story already and there's really nothing new here. Of course, there's a lengthy discussion of how the teleprompter failed as she was giving her big speech. So why spend so much time on this?

"It was the night that my life changed and I think it's safe to say much of the political landscape changed."

Really?! She's really saying that there was a significant change in the 'political landscape' as a result of her being nominated. Let's look at what actually took place in the country at the time. Obama was ahead in the polls, there was a McCain bump from the Palin selection, the bump faded within a couple of weeks, and Obama then took over even stronger than before. Obama won dominantly in 2008. Is she saying her nomination led to the 'landscape' of Obama winning the Presidency? Twice? If that's really the case, I guess we should thank her.

She then asks what's changed since then. She jumps into the "criticize Obama" section which can be found in most of her videos. For this one, she cherry picks some economic numbers to make it look like things have been horrible under Obama. It never hurts to throw in something about food stamps too for racist effect. Oddly, at one point the moving picture is of a stock market ticker. I guess mentioning the radical rise in the market during Obama's regime wouldn't be appropriate.

The things that haven't changed? Her core team hasn't changed. She mentions a few people but fails to mention just how the team is still together. That at least four of them now have full time wages working for Sarah PAC and many others get lavish 'consulting' fees.

Finally, she has to brag about her great family and how all of the attacks haven't fazed her at all. She says is too focused on other families with real hardships that makes her blind to 'sticks and stones'. Did I mention that I find all this self-adulation rather narcissistic?

How Much More Of This Do We Have To Take?!

I think most of us Po'Gaters have been groaning as Sarah's 15 minutes continues to linger on. We can take some solace in the fact that it's fading even if the pace is agonizingly slow. While I'm sure she'll be around much longer to some extent, I honestly believe this is her last hurrah.

First of all, this isn't much of a hurrah. The press related to the release of the channel was pretty harsh. Even conservatives aren't saying much about it. Judging by the number of comments, there aren't many people subscribing. Again, using the two week period from August 15th through August 28th, there were a total of 1,110 comments. This averages about 70 comments per article or 80 comments per day. (Oddly, three articles have no comments.) C4P, on the other hand averages over 500 comments per day. However, there is much less back and forth on the Sarah Palin Channel.

One key difference I see is that the C4P crowd is somewhat reluctant on the subject of Sarah running for President. Yes, there are definitely nuts there thinking she'll run but I've seen many argue a modicum of common sense on this issue. The C4P site even has a disclaimer saying that they're for Sarah as Sarah not because of her being a possible candidate. Believe it or not, the commenters on the Sarah Palin Channel are even more deluded in thinking that Sarah will run for President in 2016.

I've written before that Sarah uses her potential candidacy as a tease. I think this is now accepted as fact by most of us. For the rabid Palin fan, the thought of her running for President is all they got. Given the 2012 election timetable, Sarah will likely announce that she's not running in 2016 about September of 2015. My prediction is that the Sarah Palin Channel will die soon after that.

However, there's also a strong possibility that Sarah will grow tired of spewing her nonsense to her fans well before then. She is indeed a quitter. She'd end up blaming Obama for it.

Postscript

I'm trying to finish up this article and the crazy videos just keep coming. They are seriously getting worse by the week. It continues to devolve to the level of celebrity idolatry (i.e. come see what I eat for breakfast) or tired old talking points. I just have to comment on one of her latest ones. It's a "behind the scenes", seven minute video that says nothing. It's so unprofessional it isn't funny. The whole premise is that two tourists from New Jersey showed up at the house and Todd told them to come on in and meet Sarah. They become the stars of the video. (If this is her first 'special guest' they're certainly not very special.) I'm not clear if she's trying to tell her fans that they should just drop by and she might put them on their own video or what. Just plain weird.

Ugh! I'm sick to death of watching her videos. Objectively, they're truly nauseating and boring. To think that this woman was a VP nominee is shocking!

Also, too, there's now a new "Sarah Palin Channel" on YouTube. The channel consists of a seemingly random selection of several videos uploaded in the last few days. This is obviously another attempt to give away the product hoping people will actually like it. Given the small number of views, and the heretofore mentioned poor quality of the videos, I doubt it will work.

Bonus

In the description of one of her uploaded videos titled "Vote them out", it is explained that Sarah fights against "Democrats" as well as "Republicans", because both belong in her opinion to the "permanent political class in DC". Surely the GOP has taken note.

Screenshot:

First court order in new custody trial between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin: None of Levi's motions have been dismissed, trial setting conference scheduled, evidentiary hearing required, court notes that "a best interest finding" in regard to their son Tripp has never been made in the past

Parental expert Bristol Palin: 

The custody trial she thought would never happen

By Patrick

UPDATE MAY 2014: Mentioned below are all our posts in which we reported the details of the new custody proceedings between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin concerning their son Tripp. We published the complete legal exchanges between the parties, including the new affidavits and court orders. Almost all of these documents have never been published elsewhere.

+++

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

BREAKING - The heat is on: Levi Johnston files for joint custody and asks court to hold Bristol Palin in contempt and return Tripp to Alaska - UPDATE: Read Levi's new court filings! Levi asserts that Bristol took Tripp out of state against a court order, seeks a court ruling about the custody, provides detailed affidavit

+++

Thursday, March 13, 2014

New filings in the custody case between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin - Exchanging legal arguments and new affidavits, and Bristol is on the defensive: No sign of necessary "written consent" by Levi to remove Tripp from Alaska, just the opposite

+++

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Custody trial Levi Johnston vs Bristol Palin, the next round - Levi's lawyer tears Bristol's legal arguments apart and shows that Alaska case law is not in Bristol's favour - "A child is not a chattel to be bargained away for consideration"

+++

Thursday, April 3, 2014

First court order in new custody case between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin: None of Levi's motions have been dismissed, trial setting conference scheduled, evidentiary hearing required, court notes that "a best interest finding" in regard to their son Tripp has never been made in the past

+++

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Levi's and Bristol's custody trial is now scheduled not just for one, but two days!

Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston: The custody trial, part 2, is taking shape. While the new proceedings have been ignored by the media this time around, in sharp contrast to 2009/2010, when the media was all over it, we here at Politicalgates kept a watchful eye and published all the new exchanges between the attorneys. 

Levi's lawyer Darryl L. Thompson presented three new motions, and Bristol's lawyer John J. Tiemessen (who also is Sarah Palin's lawyer) responded to them, with both parties presenting new affidavits.

We reported about the new proceedings in great detail and published all the documents HERE, HERE and HERE.

Being challenged with facts and hard-hitting legal arguments in court is obviously not the favourite activity of the Palin-camp, and that's probably why, in a rather bizarre move and apparent "pre-emptive strike", the Palin-camp in January this year leaked the false fact to the media that Levi "lost" the custody case - at a time when the newly opened case hadn't even begun.

But now things are under way, as they should be. Superior Court Judge Eric Smith scheduled a trial setting conference on May 2, 2014 and made clear in his new court order from March 31st, 2014 that all of Levi's motions have legal validity, but as the facts are disputed, an "evidentiary hearing" on all the issues is required.

A very inconvenient fact for Bristol Palin, explained at the end of the order: A "best interest finding" in regard to Tripp's custody has never been made in the previous custody trial! There is also another interesting, and rather inconvenient remark: "The court also notes that the parties entered into the stipulation nearly four years ago when the parties' son was one year old, and it appears that they have not adhered to the agreement since its inception."

Well, that's only too true, as Levi could call himself lucky if Bristol allowed him to Tripp.

For example, during the last six months, while Bristol was in Arizona, Levi hardly saw Tripp less than a handful of times.

In the voluntary stipulation from August 2010, it was agreed that Levi should get access to Tripp twice a week.

But the court now also notes: "The court never approved this agreement."

So from this new court order it is more than obvious that things will now start over again. At the end of the proceedings, there should be a solution that really is in the best interests of Tripp. This is all that matters.

Things are looking good for Levi, and this comes as no surprise. What did surprise us however is the fact that the media not only published false facts before the trial even begun, but that up until now, virtually keeps total silence about it.

Therefore, we will continue to keep a watchful eye on the proceedings.

Here is the new court order from March 31st, 2014:

Custody trial Levi Johnston vs Bristol Palin, the next round - Levi's lawyer tears Bristol's legal arguments apart and shows that Alaska case law is not in Bristol's favour - "A child is not a chattel to be bargained away for consideration"

Levi with his son Tripp (2009)

By Patrick

UPDATE MAY 2014: Mentioned below are all our posts in which we reported the details of the new custody proceedings between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin concerning their son Tripp. We published the complete legal exchanges between the parties, including the new affidavits and court orders. Almost all of these documents have never been published elsewhere.

+++

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

BREAKING - The heat is on: Levi Johnston files for joint custody and asks court to hold Bristol Palin in contempt and return Tripp to Alaska - UPDATE: Read Levi's new court filings! Levi asserts that Bristol took Tripp out of state against a court order, seeks a court ruling about the custody, provides detailed affidavit

+++

Thursday, March 13, 2014

New filings in the custody case between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin - Exchanging legal arguments and new affidavits, and Bristol is on the defensive: No sign of necessary "written consent" by Levi to remove Tripp from Alaska, just the opposite

+++

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Custody trial Levi Johnston vs Bristol Palin, the next round - Levi's lawyer tears Bristol's legal arguments apart and shows that Alaska case law is not in Bristol's favour - "A child is not a chattel to be bargained away for consideration"

+++

Thursday, April 3, 2014

First court order in new custody case between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin: None of Levi's motions have been dismissed, trial setting conference scheduled, evidentiary hearing required, court notes that "a best interest finding" in regard to their son Tripp has never been made in the past

+++

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Levi's and Bristol's custody trial is now scheduled not just for one, but two days!

It's the next round in the newly opened custody trial between Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston, a case that the media chooses to ignore - for reasons we can only speculate about.  However, here at Politicalgates we are still more than happy to inform the public about the details of the legal proceedings, and the contents of the exchanged documents. After all, the trial could become far more exciting than some people might expect.

Being challenged with facts and hard-hitting legal arguments in court is obviously not the favourite activity of the Palin-camp, and that's probably why, in a rather bizarre move and apparent "pre-emptive strike", the Palin-camp in January this year leaked the false fact to the media that Levi lost the custody case - at a time when the newly opened case hadn't even begun.

However, now the new case is truly underway, and in two previous posts (here and here), we published the complete legal documents and the affidavits which have been submitted by Levi and Bristol so far. It has become more and more obvious that Bristol is now in a rather unfavourable situation, as Levi finally has excellent representation, a lawyer who really cares for Levi's interests, and who has discovered the weak points of Bristol Palin's legal argumentation.

The latest filing by Levi's lawyer Darryl L. Thompson is the most hard-hitting yet, and he really tears Bristol Palin's legal argumentation apart. The Palin-camp will not like that, as they don't really believe that laws apply to them. So far, Bristol's actions have made it abundantly clear that she regards Tripp as her private property.

But that's not what the law says. Only the "best interests of the child" are what matters.

As Mr. Thompson explains in the last paragraph:

"Equal access to both of his parents in the interim would be practical and not detrimental to his best interests. Both parents are willing and capable of meeting all of Tripp's needs, there is mutual love between the child and both his parents, and he is too young to express a preference. Levi is now married and Tripp has a half sibling, and the case law requires the court to consider the desirability of fostering his relationship with Breeze, and the court by entering an order can cure the problems of lack of stable and consistent contact with his father and opens the door fully to fostering that loving relationship with his father and child."

In the real world, anyone would understand that. In the world of the Palins, such words are treacherous, as there is a world out there which is divided into friends and enemies, and Levi doesn't belong to the first category. But that's what courts are for, after all - bringing the parties back to the realities of the situation.

Here is the latest filing by Levi's lawyer:

BREAKING - The heat is on: Levi Johnston files for joint custody and asks court to hold Bristol Palin in contempt and return Tripp to Alaska - UPDATE: Read Levi's new court filings! Levi asserts that Bristol took Tripp out of state against a court order, seeks a court ruling about the custody, provides detailed affidavit

The happy time was not to last - 

but now Levi wants to make sure that Tripp has a father as well

By Kathleen

UPDATE MAY 2014: Mentioned below are all our posts in which we reported the details of the new custody proceedings between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin concerning their son Tripp. We published the complete legal exchanges between the parties, including the new affidavits and court orders. Almost all of these documents have never been published elsewhere.

+++

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

BREAKING - The heat is on: Levi Johnston files for joint custody and asks court to hold Bristol Palin in contempt and return Tripp to Alaska - UPDATE: Read Levi's new court filings! Levi asserts that Bristol took Tripp out of state against a court order, seeks a court ruling about the custody, provides detailed affidavit

+++

Thursday, March 13, 2014

New filings in the custody case between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin - Exchanging legal arguments and new affidavits, and Bristol is on the defensive: No sign of necessary "written consent" by Levi to remove Tripp from Alaska, just the opposite

+++

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Custody trial Levi Johnston vs Bristol Palin, the next round - Levi's lawyer tears Bristol's legal arguments apart and shows that Alaska case law is not in Bristol's favour - "A child is not a chattel to be bargained away for consideration"

+++

Thursday, April 3, 2014

First court order in new custody case between Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin: None of Levi's motions have been dismissed, trial setting conference scheduled, evidentiary hearing required, court notes that "a best interest finding" in regard to their son Tripp has never been made in the past

+++

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Levi's and Bristol's custody trial is now scheduled not just for one, but two days!

It has been a long wait, but now things are getting serious: Levi Johnston wants Tripp to have a father who is able to see him on a regular basis. In addition, he wants to stop Bristol taking Tripp away, often for months, whenever it pleases her.

A court battle against a member of Palin family is not something which most people would fancy. You don't just fight against Bristol and her lawyer. You also fight against Sarah, who doesn't like to be challenged and also hasn't hesitated to call Levi a "deadbeat dad" in public, and you also fight against Sarah Palin's propaganda machine with lots of fake "grassroots" blogs and a group of fanatic, rabid fans who are willing to trash anyone in posts and comments on the internet who dares to challenge their Queen.

But Levi doesn't care. He is not a coward, and he's fighting for his child, as any good father would do.

The motions are now available in the public court records. To see the filing, one has to visit the website for the court records, then click on "Search Cases Since About 1990", then give in Levi Johnston's name in the search mask, then click on case number "3PA-09-02261CI", and the scroll down to see these latest filings:

The Palin-family has an atrocious track record when it comes to custody trials. After Sarah Palin became the Republican nominee for Vice President, the media discovered court records which put members of the Palin-family, and Sarah Palin in particular, in an awful light - as well as their lawyers. A judge went so far as too severely criticize the members of the Palin-family for their terrible behaviour during the trial.

Newsweek reported in September 2008:

An Anchorage judge three years ago warned Sarah Palin and members of her family to stop "disparaging" the reputation of Alaska State Trooper Michael Wooten, who at the time was undergoing a bitter separation and divorce from Palin's sister Molly.

Allegations that Palin, her husband Todd, and at least one top gubernatorial aide continued to vilify Wooten—after Palin became Alaska's governor and pressured state police officials to take action against him—are at the center of "Troopergate," a political and ethical controversy which has embroiled Palin's administration and is currently the subject of an official inquiry by a special investigator hired by the state legislature.

Court records obtained by NEWSWEEK show that during the course of divorce hearings three years ago, Judge John Suddock heard testimony from an official of the Alaska State Troopers' union about how Sarah Palin—then a private citizen—and members of her family, including her father and daughter, lodged up to a dozen complaints against Wooten with the state police. The union official told the judge that he had never before been asked to appear as a divorce-case witness, that the union believed family complaints against Wooten were "not job-related," and that Wooten was being "harassed" by Palin and other family members.

Court documents show that Judge Suddock was disturbed by the alleged attacks by Palin and her family members on Wooten's behavior and character. "Disparaging will not be tolerated—it is a form of child abuse," the judge told a settlement hearing in October 2005, according to typed notes of the proceedings. The judge added: "Relatives cannot disparage either. If occurs [sic] the parent needs to set boundaries for their relatives."

(...)

In a press release issued last week by her new lawyer, Palin continued to attack the character of Wooten—still serving as a state trooper in Palin's hometown of Wasilla. The release repeats allegations that Wooten had threatened members of her family, including her father, with violence; that Wooten had threatened to "bring" Palin and members of her family "down;" and that Wooten had once been the subject of a court-imposed domestic-violence protection order. A court filing by Wooten's lawyer indicates that within months of being issued, the violence protection order was dismissed.

There was a court-imposed domestic-violence protection order against Wooten in place, Sarah Palin's lawyer claimed in September 2008?

A very bold claim indeed! We at Politicalgates reported about this particular chapter of Sarah Palin's history already in a detailed post from June 2012. It turned out that the judge dissolved the order immediately after he discovered that he had been lied to, and even scolded Sarah Palin's sister Molly for keeping Wooten's kids away from him.

This was explained in detail in an old post by (former) Alaskan blogger Andrew Halcro, which is still available today via the Wayback Machine:

In a statement released on September 2 through her attorney Thomas Van Flein, Palin once again shows how her propensity for a misrepresentation of the facts got her into trouble to begin with.

Palin is attempting to get the investigation moved into the executive branch so it is reviewed by the personnel board.

In her statement, Palin writes, "In 2005 and early 2006, State Trooper Mike Wooten was the subject of a court-imposed Domestic Violence Protective Order."

As has been the governor's history with this issue, she offers up another twisted fact.

In 2005, Palin and her sister Molly went to the Palmer Courthouse while Mike Wooten was in Portland with his stepson. They convinced a judge to grant Molly a domestic violence restraining order against Wooten. This was done so Molly could retain full custody of the children.

When Wooten returned from Portland, he realized that there was a order prohibiting him from seeing his kids. Three weeks later, Wooten was granted an appearance in front of the couple's divorce judge.

In front of Judge Suddock, Molly testified that Wooten never hit her or never physically abused her or ever touched the children. She told the judge she was feeling pressure from her family to file the order.

Suddock immediately dissolved the order because there was no proof of any domestic violence and called the order an abuse of the legal system. He then scolded Palin's sister for keeping Wooten's kids away from him.

This appears to be Palin's classic approach to deflecting attention away from situations she has created; blame the other person.

Money quote:

"In front of Judge Suddock, Molly testified that Wooten 

never hit her or never physically abused her or ever touched the children. 

She told the judge she was feeling pressure from her family to file the order."

+++

So we do hope that Levi Johnston will not be subjected to the same type of awful treatment, but that the Palin-family finally will have the best interests of Tripp in their minds. One can only hope!

+++

UPDATE:

The gossip-website "TMZ" today published a very short piece about the new motions filed by Levi Johnston's attorney, however, the accusations by Levi Johnston against Bristol Palin are much more serious than it appears from this short article at "TMZ."

First, let's correct some false information which was recently spread around the media: Levi Johnston did not "lose his custody case." I don't know if Bristol and Sarah Palin wanted to believe this, and therefore leaked this false piece of information to the media, but the facts are as follows: Levi Johnston filed for custody on October 19, 2013. This case was closed, but only because this "new" case was consolidated by the Alaska court with the "old" custody case, which was started in April 2009 and was closed due to "lack of prosecution" in July 2012. The 2009 case has now been reopened.

Screenshots from the Alaska Court Records website:

So clearly there was a good deal of "wishful thinking" involved on the part of the Palin-family or people close to them. In addition, they were clearly caught completely "off-guard" by Levi Johnston new filings. Levi has finally found a lawyer who truly represents his interests, which unfortunately appears to have not been the case in the past. Now the time has come to correct mistakes - and the new court filings show that Levi means business! He's fighting for the right to see his son, and rightfully so.

There are two separate motions which were filed by Levi Johnston's attorney, Darryl L. Thompson in Anchorage:

- First, Levi's attorney asserts that Bristol Palin is in contempt of a court order, which does not put Bristol Palin in a good light, as she clearly completely ignored the order, and removed Tripp from Alaska without Levi's or the court's WRITTEN CONSENT, as she was obliged to do..

Let's take a look at this motion (the "first" motion, "Motion For Order Shortening Time") by Levi's attorney. "TMZ" rather surprisingly did not publish the original court filings by Levi's attorney, in contrast to 2009, when Bristol filed for custody. Fortunately we had already utilized our well developed network in Alaska to get hold of the original documents. (Many thanks!)

This first motion has already been granted by the Alaska court on February 25, 2014 (see the above screenshot)!

The first motion:

DOWNLOAD LINK 1

DOWNLOAD LINK 2

Screenshot of the first page:

Regarding the legal background of this motion:

On October 19, 2013, the court issued a "Court Domestic Relations Pretrial Order", which is standard procedure in these cases.

This official Alaska website explains the exact content of these standard "Domestic Relations Procedural Orders" (in addition, see here).

Bristol very conveniently overlooked this part of the order:

A. Neither party shall allow the removal of any child who is the subject of this action from the State of Alaska without written consent of the other parties or an order from the court.

Screenshot from the official website:

As Levi's attorney explains in the second motion, Bristol Palin removed Tripp from Alaska after October 2013 against Levi's will (and of course also without his "written consent", we might add). Bristol not only took Tripp away from Alaska for days, but for several months!

Therefore Bristol Palin obviously "in contempt" of this court order, and that's why Levi's attorney asks in this motion that Bristol Palin should

"...appear in court and show cause why she should not be held in contempt and for sanctions for her failure to comply with the Court Domestic Relations Pretrial Order in Case No. SPA-13-0251 1 CI dated October 19, 2013 and for fees associated with having to file the motion as a sanction."

+++

So let's now take a look at the second motion which was filed by Levi Johnston's attorney.

The second motion:

DOWNLOAD LINK 1

DOWNLOAD LINK 2

Screenshot of the first page:

This second motion, "Motion for Interim Custody Schedule", is much longer and includes an incredibly interesting and also very moving affidavit by Levi Johnston.

Screenshots of Levi Johnston's affidavit:

Levi's affidavit is self -explanatory and Levi explains at length why he is seeking joint custody of his son, Tripp. We believe that Levi has an excellent case, and we stand with him. He is a great father, and he has a right to see his son, just as any father has. As shown above in detail, fighting against a member of the Palin-family is not a very pleasant thing, but the law is on his side.

"Refudiating" Sarah Palin: Talking to Alaskans, getting the facts

Guest post by Maelewis

We were recently at a get-together where our hosts gave us the warning not to talk politics because some of their guests were very conservative and they didn't  us want to upset their friends. The first people we ran into were from Alaska. My husband's first question was, "So, is Sarah Palin running for the Senate?" We decided that we should involve them in conversation with the hopes of learning something about Sarah Palin. They provided confirmation for things that we already know, but it's nice to hear it from more than one source. And, I'm reporting our conversation with the hopes that the Politicalgates community will enjoy learning what we learned. (I think that you have figured out that when people tell us not to talk politics, they shouldn't put people from Alaska in the same room with us).

Disclaimer: I don't want to describe the people in any detail because they still live in Alaska. They are credible, and I have no reason to doubt anything that they say. I also don't want to provide too much personal description, just in case someone could figure out who they are.

They had been part of the Alaska State government before Sarah was elected governor, and when she first took office, one of them thought that Sarah was "kinda cute." That impression quickly changed. They said that they worked for Governor Palin. I asked, "Did you work with her?" "No," they answered, they worked FOR her. Sarah never did any work; she didn't like to work and she didn't work. Other people did Sarah's work for her. The thing that bothered them was that Sarah was dumb. They were used to working with people who learned on the job, and grew with the job. Sarah never learned anything, and she didn't want to learn anything. They also resented her choosing to live in Wasilla instead of living in Juneau.

I asked why Sarah quit her job as governor. It was for the money; they didn't see any other reason. (At this point, a good reporter would cite Sarah's claims of frivolous ethics violations charges and her abuse of her office to raise money to cover her legal fees. It was my choice to keep the tone conversational instead of confrontational. I wanted to give the impression that I didn't know much about Palin, and they were educating me. I wanted them to talk).

So, when my husband asked if Sarah was running for the Senate, after saying no, they added that Sarah is probably not a citizen of Alaska anymore, since she spends far more time out of the state than in Alaska. They doubted that she could get elected in Alaska right now.  Later in the conversation, they added that in the future, she might make some moves in a national direction, but it would only be for the attention and the money (most of all the money). They said that Sarah would  never chose to do anything that involved hard work.  I suggested that she would need a staff. No, they said, other people do the work for her. Their attitude was that she didn't want the job, just the high profile and the money.

I did ask the "jackpot question," was she really Trig's mother? One of them hesitated, and finally said that she claims to be his mother. I said that Sarah IS Trig's mother, but did she give birth to him? The other person reported seeing Sarah two weeks after Trig was supposed to have been born. Sarah was thin, her figure was thin and her face was thin. The person was indicating that she found it hard to believe that Sarah Palin had just given birth two weeks before. (If I am allowed to read body language, there was doubt, serious doubt, but no one speaks about it).

Other tidbits: About that word salad, they knew all about Sarah's word salad before we saw Sarah on the national stage. Sarah was good scripted, but not unscripted. Since her VP campaign in 2008, she has gotten worse. I asked why, hoping to hear about the substances that impair speech, but they thought that it had to do with her need to chase fame. They talked about Sarah's use of fundamental religion as something that she latched onto recently as much for show, and then they joked that she wore a Jewish star when she needed to connect with a special interest or group. They described being at a reception at the Governor's mansion in Juneau, where a woman, who was Jewish, wore her Jewish star. When Sarah saw the woman and the star, she turned her head and walked away. My husband's reaction was that was an indication that Sarah was antisemitic. He didn't know about Palin's history of using racial terms in describing a Jewish political opponent.

Out of respect for our host and the candid conversation of her guests, we didn't want to push the Sarah Palin issue. I asked if they had one super story, the kind that I could tell my Democratic friends and get a good laugh. They didn't even hesitate. They described an event when Lisa Murkowski, as a Senator from Alaska, addressed the state legislature. Then, the custom was for there to be a reception at the Governor's Mansion, following the address. Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska, was upstairs and kept everyone waiting, and waiting, and waiting. It was hours, and it was noticed. Finally, a very upset Sarah Palin emerged, hair flying and messy, no makeup, and clearly upset. Levi had just appeared on TV, giving an interview, and they were trying to decide how to respond.  (I will let everyone process that -- Governor of Alaska, former Vice Presidential candidate, obsessing over a teen aged boy appearing on TV. How could she handle that famous 3 AM phone call? It explains her emotional over-reaction to petty things, and probably much more). The conclusion of our new friends form Alaska was that Palin belonged in Wasilla, adding that she was trailer trash, and that was the nicest thing that they could say about her.

+++

BONUS:

What could be more appropriate as a bonus for this wonderful post by our reader maelewis than the documentary by a man who went to Alaska on a search for the "real" Sarah Palin - Nick Broomfield's excellent documentary "You Betcha":

Infamous quitter Sarah Palin gives interview to infamous disgraced "Christian" activist and former Abramoff associate Ralph E. Reed and provides one of the most hilarious quotes of the year, while promoting her new book about Christmas!

By Patrick

The proof: Sarah Palin can see Santa Claus from her house! (picture from 2008)

What can you say! What a big surprise on a Saturday night! From time to time, I like to search youtube for the latest clips of ex-Governor "Granny Grifter" Sarah Palin - well, "just because", you never know! One might find a clip which has been overlooked so far, ideally containing ridiculous quotes in a situation riddled with hypocrisy - and today, I found exactly what I was looking for! It feels like I have received an early Christmas present!

As we have already pretty much forgotten, Sarah Palin made a screech in June at an event of the "Faith and Freedom Coalition." The dubious background of these self-appointed super-Christians got barely noticed back then. However, this is going to change right now! 

These "Christians" were so incredibly proud of Sarah Palin being at their event that they posted a short interview with her on youtube a few days ago. Sarah is being interviewed by none other  than Ralph E. Reed, the founder of the Faith and Freedom Coalition. One of the original moral majority. And he and Sarah have a lot in common as he himself is in the same top-ranking grifter category as the Quitter from Alaska, as we can see below!

This interview is noteworthy for another "epic" quote by Sarah Palin. As expected she delivers and her jumbled thoughts go astray yet again. This time in a weird, disjointed and disastrous botched attempt to appear humorous (that is at least what I think, and which really is the best one can say in her favor in this case).

Watch the interview:

Where to start?

The hair!!! OMG...no more needs to be said.

Anyway - here is the quote, starting from 1:05, when Palin discusses her new book about Christmas::

Quote:

"Oh it's gonna be a great Christmas book, lots of nice festive joyful things within the book, like recipes and traditions of our family that are probably pretty unique, because we are from Alaska, and live near the North Pole, so we have access to Santa Claus and all the good things that come with Christmas."

I mean, come on! You couldn't make up such a Palin-quote! It's a gift! Sarah Palin invokes close proximity to Santa in her bid to prove that Christ is the center of Christmas. Much in the same way as proximity to Russia makes her a defense expert, Sarah seems to imply that proximity to Santa means that she is an expert on the traditions of Christmas. Or something!

However, this interview also provides us with an excellent opportunity to take a closer look at one of  Sarah Palin's new "associations" - namely Ralph E. Reed, who founded the Faith and Freedom Coalition in 2009 and asks the questions in the interview.

Well, let's start with another quote by Sarah Palin, in an interview with Bill O'Reilly from 2010:

In the interview, Palin said, after being asked about "Obama's Pastor" Reverend Wright:

"Well, I believe that it is not negative campaigning or off-based to call someone out on their associations."

So let's take a quick look at Sarah Palin's new friend, Ralph E. Reed!

Wikipedia reveals a lot of very, very interesting information regarding Ralph E. Reed. He was, for example, in the past a close business associate of infamous lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and supported  some of Jack Abramoff's shady deals, for which Abramoff and several others were then later sent to prison.

From Wikipedia:

Reed was named in the scandal arising from lobbying work performed by Jack Abramoff on behalf of Indian gambling tribes. E-mails released by federal investigators in June 2005 revealed that Reed secretly accepted payments from Abramoff to lobby against Indian casino gambling and oppose an Alabama education lottery. Additional e-mails released in November 2005 show that Reed also worked for another Abramoff client seeking to block a congressional ban on Internet gambling. These cases are being investigated by multiple federal and state grand juries and by the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. Abramoff pleaded guilty to three felony counts in federal court, raising the prospects of Abramoff testifying against others.

Those e-mails and other evidence revealed the participation of the Christian Coalition in the alleged fraud, particularly the Alabama chapter of the Christian Coalition, which received large amounts of donations from the casino money. It is alleged that Abramoff engaged Reed to set up an anti-gambling campaign to include the U.S. Family Network, the Christian Coalition, and Focus on the Family in order to frighten the tribes into spending as much as $82 million for Abramoff to lobby on their behalf. To represent him in connection with the scandal, Reed retained defense attorney W. Neil Eggleston of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP. Eggleston served as White House associate counsel during the administration of President Bill Clinton.

In December 2005, three Texas public interest groups filed a complaint with Travis County Attorney David Escamilla on December 1, 2005, alleging that Reed failed to register as a lobbyist in 2001 or 2002 when he was working for Abramoff. Escamilla said on March 27, 2006 "his office had concluded its investigation -- but that a two-year statute of limitations on misdemeanors from 2001 and 2002 had expired."

On June 22, 2006 the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs released its final report on the scandal.

The report states that under the guidance of the Mississippi Choctaw tribe's planner, Nell Rogers, the tribe agreed to launder money because "Ralph Reed did not want to be paid directly by a tribe with gaming interests." It also states that Reed used non-profits, like Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform, as pass-throughs to disguise the origin of the funds, and that "the structure was recommended by Jack Abramoff to accommodate Mr. Reed’s political concerns."

The "Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal", one of the main reasons why Jack Abramoff was ultimately convicted and sent to prison for six years, has its own, very detailed page at Wikipedia. The introduction reads like this:

The Jack Abramoff Native American lobbying scandal is a United States political scandal relating to the work performed by political lobbyists Jack Abramoff, Ralph E. Reed, Jr., Grover Norquist and Michael Scanlon on Native American casino gambling interests for an estimated $85 million in fees. Abramoff and Scanlon grossly overbilled their clients, secretly splitting the multimillion-dollar profits. In one case, they were secretly orchestrating lobbying against their own clients in order to force them to pay for lobbying services.

More from the excellent Wikipedia page about the scandal:

Abramoff and his partner Scanlon are alleged to have engaged in a series of corrupt practices in connection to their lobbying work for various Indian gaming tribes. The fees paid to Abramoff and Scanlon for this work are believed to exceed $85 million.

In particular, Abramoff and Scanlon were alleged to have conspired with Washington power broker Grover Norquist and Christian activist Ralph Reed to coordinate lobbying against his own clients and prospective clients with the objective of forcing them to engage Abramoff and Scanlon to lobby against their own covert operations. Reed was paid to campaign against gambling interests that competed with Abramoff clients. Norquist served as a go-between by funneling money to Reed.

Allegation of double dealing

On June 22, 2000, Susan Ralston e-mailed Abramoff, "I have 3 checks from elot: (1) 2 checks for $80K payable to ATR and (2) 1 check to TVC for $25K," [...] "Let me know exactly what to do next. Send to Grover? Send to Rev. Lou?"

Thus eLottery money went through Norquist's foundation, Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), the Faith and Family Alliance, and Reed's company, Century Strategies, while the last check was sent to Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition (TVC).

In 2000, Abramoff forced the Choctaws to give the Alabama Christian Coalition of America $1.15 million in installments. Norquist agreed to pass the money on to the Coalition and another Alabama antigambling group, both of which Reed was mobilizing for the fight against a proposed Alabama state lottery.

In 2002, after Abramoff worked with Reed to close the casino of the Tigua tribe, he persuaded the tribe to hire him to lobby Congress to reopen the casino.

Of the $7.7 million Abramoff and Scanlon charged the Choctaw for projects in 2001, they spent $1.2 million on their behalf and split the rest in a scheme they called "gimme five."

The 2006 report by the U.S. Senate Committee about this scandal reveals more - and Ralph E. Reed is given a very prominent role in the report.

The "contents" of the 2006 report explain some of the main facts and make it abundantly clear that Ralph E. Reed played a very prominent role in the "Abramoff-scandals":

Excerpt from the report:

Substantial Fees and Conduits – Setting the Stage for Scanlon

As the Tribe’s trust and confidence in Abramoff grew, Rogers would often discuss with Abramoff issues affecting the Tribe, both at a local and national level. In 1999, Rogers and Abramoff discussed various legislative proposals in Mississippi and elsewhere that threatened the market share of the Choctaw’s casino operations, and which the Tribe wanted to somehow counter. It just so happened that a few months earlier, Ralph Reed, the former executive director of the Christian Coalition and one of Abramoff’s long-time friends, had reached out to Abramoff: “Hey, now that I’m done with electoral politics, I need to start humping in corporate accounts! I’m counting on you to help me with some contacts.” Abramoff saw an opportunity: he suggested a grassroots effort and recommended the Choctaw hire Reed to orchestrate an anti- gaming effort.

The Tribe agreed to hire Reed to mobilize grassroots opposition to various legislative proposals throughout the Gulf Coast that would have increased gaming, thereby diminishing the Choctaw casino’s market share. No one from the Choctaw had any direct contact with Reed; rather, Abramoff served as the liaison with Reed and his firm, which eventually became a subcontractor to Preston Gates.

In March 1999, Abramoff and his associate, Shawn Vasell, spoke with Reed about the Choctaw’s grassroots needs. According to a draft engagement letter from Reed to Abramoff, Reed was hired to defeat a bill that had passed the Alabama House of Representatives “authorizing dog tracks in the state to install video poker and other casino-style games on their sites.” Reed promised to “build a strong grassroots network across the state against the extension of video poker and [REDACTION].” He claimed that no firm had better relationships than his with the grassroots conservatives in Alabama, including the Alabama Christian Coalition, the Alabama Family Alliance, the Alabama Eagle Forum, the Christian Family Association, and “leading evangelical pastors such as Frank Barker of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham.” Reed boasted that “Century Strategies has on file over 3,000 pastors and 90,000 religious conservative households in Alabama that can be accessed in this effort.”

So Ralph E. Reed was selling his "believers" as his own private "Christian" PR-army to Jack Abramoff in order to support his criminal dealings.

He did not do this for free, of course, but received a handsome fee. Ralph E. Reed is obviously a very talented grifter, just like Queen Sarah from Alaska. It should come as no surprise that they both like each other!

More from the 2006 report:

On April 6, 1999, Abramoff informed Reed that he “spoke with our managing partner [at Preston Gates] and he has approved the subcontractor arrangement” and instructed Reed to “get me invoices as soon as possible so I can get Choctaw to get us checks asap.” When Abramoff believed he could not get money quickly enough to Reed, Abramoff suggested that the Choctaw pay Reed directly: “Ralph, I am not sure that I can get this wire moving fast enough today. Give me your wire info and I’ll do what I can.” Abramoff then asked, “Any chance that a wire from Choctaw directly would be OK?” Reed’s response is unknown; however, the Committee has seen no evidence that the Choctaw paid Reed or his firms.

By mid-April, things were moving. In an e-mail entitled “Disbursement on behalf of Choctaw Indians,” Abramoff assured Reed that the money was on its way. Using the Choctaw’s money, Reed paid for grassroots activities including, telemarketing (patch-through, tape-recorded messages and call-to-action phone calls), targeted mail, legislative counsel and local management, rallies, petitions, “voter contact, television and radio production, the remainder of phones, the statewide fly-around, the pastor’s and activist rally, the church bulletin inserts, and other items.”

Reed also claimed that he was leveraging his contacts within the Christian community for the Choctaw’s benefit. Reed reported to Abramoff that there would be “a saturation statewide radio buy with a new ad by Jim Dobson that he will record tomorrow.” Reed assured Abramoff, “We are opening the bomb bay doors and holding nothing back. If victory is possible, we will achieve it,” and, one day later, again promised, “All systems are go on our end and nothing is being held back.”

By May 10, 1999, the Choctaw had paid Reed $1,300,000 through Preston Gates, with another $50,000 outstanding. For reasons unclear to the Committee, in late 1999 the Tribe discontinued paying Reed through Preston Gates. Rogers recalled that there came a time when either Reed or Preston Gates (or both) became uneasy about money being passed through Preston Gates to Reed. Abramoff thus searched for another conduit.

In the exhibits to the report, extensive email-correspondence between Abramoff and Reed can be found - examples (click to enlarge):

In 2010, a feature film starring Kevin Spacey as Jack Abramoff was released. The movie is based on the real events and has the title "Casino Jack." 

Also in 2010, a documentary film about the Abramoff scandals was released. It is called "Casino Jack and the United States of Money" and is available in full on youtube - where it only got little attention so far. 

Here it is - this is a brilliant, devastating documentary, an absolute must-see - and it not only prominently features Ralph E. Reed, but also for example the corrupt scumbag Grover Norquist, who is still around:

So this is the caliber of Sarah Palin's latest "association!" Just wonderful, isn't it?

Still, we can be comforted in the knowledge that at the very least Sarah Palin will ensure that Santa Claus and Christ won't be taken out of Christmas! That surely is a real relief, and a great service for humanity. Please give Governor PayMe a medal or something, and let her give another speech, for her $ 90,000 standard fee, pretty please! She has a lot of Christmas presents to buy (and names lists from Mr Reed  do not come cheap) so she needs the money, the poor woman!

+++

UPDATE:

Our reader "Got a life" was inspired and created this wonderful photo montage, which is just perfect for the content of our post:

+++

UPDATE 2:

Bill Moyers summarized the disgraceful "Mariana Islands episode" in an article at Huffington Post from 2012. This Mariana Islands PR-scandal is also explained in great detail in the excellent documentary film I posted above.

Excerpt from Bill Moyer's article:

As head of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Reed boasts he's building a political dynamo of five million members with a massive database, an annual budget of $100 million and full-time lobbyists in all fifty state capitals, a colossal effort aimed at putting in place a right-wing social agenda and identifying and establishing contact with what it estimates as 27 million conservative voters in America. As you can imagine, with clout like that, Reed and his coalition were in high cotton at the Tampa convention.

Which brings us to that curious Mariana Islands minimum wage plank in the Republican platform. Some years ago, our government made an effort to clean up sweatshops on the islands -- including Saipan -- that have been under the control of the United States since the end of World War II.

Chinese women were brought over to the islands to work under awful conditions -- subject to forced abortions and prostitution and paid pennies for producing garments labeled "Made in the USA."

Corrupt local officials hired the firm of infamous lobbyist Jack Abramoff -- for more than four million dollars -- to try to stop the reforms proposed back in Washington. Abramoff, in turn, hired Ralph Reed and his political direct mail company, Millennium Marketing, to conduct a phony grass roots campaign urging Alabama Christians to write their local congressman to oppose the reforms.

Of course, Reed didn't tell those Christians he was being paid to help keep running sweatshops that exploited women. Instead, he told them the reforms were a trick orchestrated by the left and organized labor. Limits on Chinese workers would keep them from being "exposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ." His company explained it was just trying to encourage "grass roots citizens to promote the propagation of the Gospel" and that many of the workers were "converted to the Christian faith and return to China with Bibles in hand."