Sarah Palin's Speaking Contract: Pre-Screened Questions, First Class Travel

Update: The California Attorney General is launchng an investigation.
The attorney general's office pledged to get to the bottom of the situation, saying its expanded inquiry will seek to determine whether the university foundation, which has assets of more than $20 million, is spending its money to benefit the campus, as it promises donors, the university and the public. "We are taking this action to make sure that the money raised goes toward the intended educational purposes and not a dollar is wasted or misspent," Brown said. "Prudent financial stewardship is crucial at a time in which universities face vastly decreased funding and increased student fees."

ABC News has a copy of an addendum toSarah Palin's speaking contract with the Washington Speaker's Bureau for a speech she contracted to give at a California University. Huffington Post has a pictoral break-down.

The details of Palin's contract with the California State University, Stanislaus Foundation were contained in five pages of the document retrieved from a campus trash bin by students who heard administrators might be shredding documents related to the speech.

It begins by saying the extra provisions are necessary because of her "high profile" and "professional endeavors." It requires first class airfare for two, non-restricted coach for two more people (or a private jet), SUV's on the ground a Luxury hotels. [More...]

On the questions she can be asked: See the "Satellite Provision" -- they are to be pre-screened and asked by a member of the Speaker's bureau.

It has everything but the kitchen sink. If I were a California taxpayer whose money goes to fund state universities, I'd be angry this contract was approved.

< Misunderstanding "Pols are Pols. . ." | Good News: Aspen Undersheriff Enters Sheriff's Race >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    First class airfare?! My God, (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by tigercourse on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 06:49:24 PM EST

    Palin Rider's actually routine, incl. bendy straws (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:14:14 PM EST
    ... for anyone as in-demand, doing a drive-by media appearance and getting a quick fluff'n'buff in makeup. (You want bendies if you're hydrating while a facade crew works their magic.)

    Carping about it in the hopes of drumming up a "Hairgate" type controversy, as several librul sites have done, won't get off the blocks.

    Sure, the Rethugs did it too, but better because of the Dem cave-factor and slow pushback where it really counted: in the mainstream. Also, when they did their schtick, it would swiftly become an amplified GOP talking point amongst a bunch of actual elected officials.

    I mean no dis to you here, but until a bunch of high profile Dems hang together and joke about these Palin gotchaz within a news cycle of the AHA!, it's lefty bloggers playing circular hackey-sack.

    Help me out here: (none / 0) (#14)
    by brodie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:53:07 PM EST
    Was "Hairgate" the bogus Bill Clinton pseudo scandal on the tarmac, or are you referring to the I'm So Pretty Edwards video or still yet to his one or two $400 haircuts?

    As for the Repubs, yes, okay.  They do media management and messaging much better than Dems.  They ought to.  After all, they own and operate most of the mainstream media.  We have 25% of Msnbc, a now-defunct talk radio outfit, and a few lefty bloggers on the innertubes.

    But this nifty dumpster find by the folks at Stanislaus today has been eclipsed by the nifty find about Palin's $12 mill haul since that rambling sudden exit speech of hers from mid-term last year.  That 'un 'll do, thank you.  

    Btw, "Palin Rider" -- I caught that one, and approve.  Give it a trot around the track every once in a while, but don't enter every race.


    I don't see the AHA! in the Palin $12 mil, either (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:12:42 PM EST
    Where's the gotcha?

    (a) Woman [lefties don't like] writes bestseller, rakes in massive dough at signings and speaking engagements in full public view. (I doubt the throngs that bought the book and go hear her will be shocked.)

    (b) $12 mil is nothing compared to what Obama raked in from 'Audacity' after he quit 1/3 into his term as Senator. Also, he sold campaign crapola that the worshipful normally get for free.

    Not much meat on these bones.


    I'd amend that to (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:22:47 PM EST
    to hard-right pol, chosen for gender appeal and cover, who lefties dont like..

    I will take that edit and dang well like it! (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:46:34 PM EST
    Also (in a bandwidth preserving non sequitur to brodie upstream) I suspect the GOP zombie fixation on Hairgate(s) has more to do with the excess attention they have to devote to their own snap-on hair.

    You must mean McCain? (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by ZtoA on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:50:15 PM EST
    He "chose" her. Alaska did not. They elected her and probably not for her "gender appeal". Her publisher "chose" her because there was $$ to be made.

    So what does "cover" mean? If you mean that because she is a woman she has been treated respectfully by the left? If you mean that I think you are mistaken.

    But if all you mean is that McCain chose her as a running mate for jaded political reasons, I would agree! Pols will be pols. (not to be confused with pols are pols)


    See Obama Quit (none / 0) (#20)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 10:18:29 PM EST
    because he couldn't legally be a member of the Senate and President of the United States where as Palin quit because she wanted to host a reality show and rake in the dollars. Sorry, but the two are in no way comparable.

    (I'd also point out that while Audacity of Hope was a campaign book, it was Obama's second book- the first written long before he was on anyone's radar).


    Ohhhhh, so that promise to do a full Senate term (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 11:07:56 PM EST
    ... before considering a run for the White House was something he was FORCED to break by law.

    Wow. I just thought he was "bored".


    Wait (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 11:12:19 PM EST
    you seriously, think quiting a job because you were elected President is the same thing as quiting a job because the work was too hard and you wanted to make more money? I mean seriously? The comparison is laughable on its face- Obama quit in the same way Bill Clinton quit being Governor of Arkansas and Carter governor of Georgia, and JFK a Senator from Massachusetts- Palin quit in the same way Nixon did- she just had a better post-public service career plan.

    It's what Obama actually said, not my assumption (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 11:30:15 PM EST
    Obama seemed especially exasperated when asked if he would pledge to fulfill his term [as Senator] before looking to the White House.

    "I am not running for president in 2008," Obama said. "I mean, come on guys. The only reason I'm being definitive is because until I'm definitive you will keep asking me this question, but it's a silly question." (Chicago Sun-Times 2004)

    What I DO think is that what he actually SAID sounded pretty definitive to me.


    I agree with Ellie (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 09:01:02 AM EST
    Most people don't start looking for a new job unless they've decided to quit the one they have.

    Don't worry I'll break down the (none / 0) (#21)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 10:23:49 PM EST
    difference between the two-

    Obama- left the US Senate as required by law after being elected to the Presidency

    Palin- Quit because she couldn't legally rack in the really big bucks as a governor and the job actually requires you to work. I honestly can't think of Democratic analogue to Palin- maybe John Edwards (though I believe he served a full-term in the US Senate).  


    Palin quit (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by robert72 on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 09:14:26 AM EST
    because the job actually required her to work??
    When McCain chose her she had an 80% approval in Alaska - the highest of any governor. Because she didn't do any work?
    Now, if you want reality - Obama is the one who didn't do any work as senator - his name was always being attached to bills after others did all the work just to give him a resume.
    Just sayin'.

    this isn't about Obama or McCain (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 09:39:19 AM EST
    you can take your Palin love elsewhere or at least stay on topic. It's the contract.

    Let's be honest (none / 0) (#32)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 06:56:30 AM EST
    None of the presidential candidates did much work from 2007 on- which is why going into the end of the primary season Obama and McCain had missed the most votes.  Of course, spread out over the total votes taken over their respective tenures makes Obamas percentage of voting look much worse.  Then, of course, there's the whole sub-committee he chaired that didn't hold a single hearing....

    But, in reading the original article from AP, even the group who dug through the garbage to get part of this contract said it had nothing to do with Palin - they also wanted to look at how other speakers and programs were paid for by this foundation.

    This is just a good headline to get more screeching about Palin.


    If it's true (none / 0) (#34)
    by Natal on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 08:31:55 AM EST
    that it's not referring to Palin's request then we should be hearing real soon her screaming bloody murder about media attacks on her facebook page.  So far her spokesperson has said no comment.  

    Correction: My previous comment (none / 0) (#35)
    by Natal on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 08:33:29 AM EST
    should be "if it refers to Palin".

    Pardon me (none / 0) (#36)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 08:52:06 AM EST
    It was AG Jerry Brown who said this wasn't about Palin - not the students who went hunting for the documents.

    I think the reason she bugs (none / 0) (#22)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 10:29:20 PM EST
    people on the left are the Republican Firebrand thing but more than that the presumption- I mean it does bug me that we're supposed to treat her as a serious presidential canidate, when she couldn't even serve her term as governor without quiting. After last summer I just don't see why anyone should view her as a credible politician rather than a grifter- she left public office in search of cash, I can respect her ability to work the con and get the dough without buying into the whole "could actually be president in something other than a movie" thing- I mean Jerry Springer used to be Mayor of Cincinnati it doesn't mean I view him as the next possible governor of Ohio.

    I think it will be time to worry (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by ZtoA on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:23:12 PM EST
    when she insists on watching an Edward's sex tape in flight.

    Real Americans (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Natal on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:27:48 PM EST
    don't live that way.

    A university foundation is not the same (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by Joan in VA on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:32:27 PM EST
    as the University. Such foundations usually act as fundraisers for the university. Apparently, they feel that they can give her what she wants and still make money from ticket sales. The taxpayer isn't paying for her perks.

    the California Atty General (none / 0) (#37)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 08:53:36 AM EST
    disagrees with you and is launching an investigation.

    Good lord, you mean CA AG Jerry Brown? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 11:56:42 AM EST
    The life-long politician and Democrat running for Governor (again) in Nov?



    I don't (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by mymy on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 10:53:04 PM EST
    get why everyone is so angry Palin makes a lot of money.So does Bill Clinton ,so does Al Gore.I wish someone would pay me to ramble on for hour.

    Sarah Palin (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by IndiDemGirl on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 09:01:57 AM EST
    is a complete idiot and hypocrite whilst Clinton and Gore are intelligent men who have actually done things in their lives and didn't quit just to rake in the cash.

    This is all so much sour grapes (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Upstart Crow on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 12:52:38 AM EST
    She was hectored out of office by spurious and anonymous charges that led to unending "investigations" -- racking up her legal bills and making her political dynamite.

    So she chucked it all and wrote a book and went on tv -- which everyone at the time seemed to find a more fitting role for an attractive woman, rather than politics, anyway.

    Those who hated her hoped it was the end of her.

    Instead she's raking in the bucks. She draws huge crowds and has people who adore her.

    Good for her. She's got 5 kids.  Beats temping.

    So what?

    Has she figured out (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by IndiDemGirl on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 09:05:49 AM EST
    what magazines and newspapers she reads?  

    And the crowds that line up to see her?  Proof that there really is a sucker born every minute.


    PDS. (4.20 / 5) (#2)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 06:14:07 PM EST

    I liked (none / 0) (#1)
    by Jen M on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 06:13:24 PM EST
    the bendy straws

    Different? (none / 0) (#3)
    by waldenpond on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 06:41:31 PM EST
    Different from any other speaker contracts how?

    Simple (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:05:51 PM EST
    The difference:
    She is Sarah Palin
    She is HATED

    You also have to ask how is she different from any other celebrity.  


    TIS2, I'll give you one (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by brodie on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:02:37 PM EST
    celeb, and a Dem to boot.

    Lyndon as prez had become quite self-conscious about his lackluster speaking style, and so to partially compensate had his own special TX-sized podium made, which he couldn't function without.  It had hidden mics and some other unusual and oversized features including large padded sound-sensitive arms of some sort -- so big and smothering that the reporters all referred to it as "Mother".

    And, yes, there was the time when some (soon to be ex) aide left it back on AF1, and frantic Johnson staffers had to scramble to find a preacher's podium which they managed to somehow quickly cut and shape for a reasonable facsimile.


    She's a WOMAN (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by robert72 on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 09:17:29 AM EST
    and an attractive one, to boot.
    And she says unkind things about Obama. Like putting a target on her back.

    Hilarious (none / 0) (#44)
    by squeaky on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 10:06:29 AM EST
    If you think that the target on her back is because she is saying unkind things about Obama, you are deluded, or a teabagger..

    The reason she has placed a target on her back is to stir up her base of all sizes and shapes of wingnuts..


    Attractive? Not so much. (none / 0) (#47)
    by IndiDemGirl on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 06:20:45 PM EST
    I don't get all these "she's so attractive" comments.

    First of all I don't judge women politicians by the "hot or not" standard.

    Second, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it.

    Actually, I look way hotter than her, plus I can talk about what newspapers and magazines I read, AND I can name Supreme Court decicions I disagree with.  Maybe I should run.


    If she were only a celebrity (none / 0) (#12)
    by MKS on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:38:15 PM EST
    But she suggests that she will run--perhaps if only to increase her ability to land good speaking contracts.....

    She is being treated like Glenn Beck....with disdain...and yet she still was ahead of Pawlenty in the most recent straw poll.....

    She is the perfect fusion of right wing politics and FOX entertainment.....


    Glenn Beck (none / 0) (#23)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 10:30:53 PM EST
    is a good comparison- he seems to be Palin's roadmap for the future.

    But Beck is smarter (none / 0) (#46)
    by MKS on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 12:21:34 PM EST
    not that that is saying much.....Beck is a quack....

    Probably mainly by people (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:42:04 PM EST
    who hate our freedoms. And Joe the Plumber's theories about the socialist menace..

    The other difference is that she's still being promoted by many as being a deeply informed, capable administrator with leadership potential, who should be taken seriously as a political thinker and policy analyst -- even though she hasnt taken an unscripted, non-stagemanaged trip to the lady's room, since she became a walking political reality show two years ago.    


    Odd (none / 0) (#4)
    by WS on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 06:43:25 PM EST
    a speech by her would be interesting and guaranteed to bring press attention but with all those diva demands?  What a waste of money and time.  

    Palin is laughing all the way to the bank (none / 0) (#6)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 06:51:45 PM EST
    Palin Rakes In $12 Million-Plus Since Quitting Governorship

    Don't agree with her on any issue and definitely wouldn't go to hear her speak but she evidently has been raking in the cash.

    A pol is a pol. And pols care about making money. (none / 0) (#25)
    by Dan the Man on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 10:53:30 PM EST
    How many of us would stay at a job when you could make 100 times more at a differnt one?  The current controversy about her completely rational economic choice to make 100 times more money is completely ridiculous.

    Well that depends (none / 0) (#26)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 11:05:14 PM EST
    do I actually want to serve the people and possibly be President or do I want to cash in- she made her decision, and I can respect that, for her to pretend she still wants to serve the public though is funny.

    Pols are pols. Pols don't care about serving (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dan the Man on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 11:17:13 PM EST
    people.  Nothing wrong with her pretending to want to serve the public - because that's what pols do.  If people are naive enough to fall for this trick, hopefully they will have learned a lesson from it.

    You expect this crap... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 08:03:02 AM EST
    from the private sector when they hire celebrity speakers for a little starf*cker fawning session...the outrage is tax dollars, and high tuition, are footing the bill...regardless of who the gasbag celebrity is.

    Though in this case in particular, there is more knowledge to be gained asking the local wino to do a q&a....and he/she would speak for a bottle of booze and a couple hot dogs.