Tag Archives: 2009

Sarah Palin, former vice presidential candidate, and now author of a new book, “Going Rogue”, was interviewed by Rush Limbaugh today, Tuesday, November 17, 2009.

Here are some exerpts from the transcripts:

“RUSH: We are going to open this hour with a rare personal interview, a rare guest.  It doesn’t happen much on this program, but we are happy to have with us former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, whose book, Going Rogue, hits the shelves today and it’s already headed for I think a record in sales.  Governor Palin, thanks for making time.  It’s great to talk to you again.  We spoke last Thursday in an interview for the Limbaugh Letter, but it’s great to have you here on the radio.
GOV. PALIN:  Hey, thank you so much, and dittos from an Alaskan.
RUSH:  Where are you, by the way?  Where are we speaking to you from? 
GOV. PALIN:  In a hotel room in New York City.  I’m going to do a couple of interviews after that and then head to Grand Rapids for the kickoff of the book tour.
RUSH:  This is going to be exciting.  Are you looking forward to that? 
GOV. PALIN:  I am so looking forward to this.  I cannot wait to meet some of these good Americans all across this country.  It’s going to be a blast.
RUSH:  They can’t wait to meet you, judging by the reception you got during the campaign.  Now, ladies and gentlemen, Governor Palin, when we spoke last Thursday I spoke to her a lot about the things in her book regarding the campaign.  That stuff you’ll read in the Limbaugh Letter, and I predicted to Governor Palin then that much of her book would be ignored in light of the dirt that she was supposedly dishing from the campaign.  So Governor Palin what I’d like to do here is go some different directions from what we did in the newsletter interview and start with the economy.  We have 10.2% unemployment.  We see no end in sight.  The administration and others are suggesting next year could be just as bad with unemployment going up to 11%.  What would you do differently than is being done now?
GOV. PALIN:  It’s over 10%, and in fact it could be closer to 17 or 18 when you consider those who have kind of given up and are not applying for unemployment benefits. So it’s bad, it’s really bad and then of course Fed Chair Bernanke announced that there are still weak job prospects for the very short term and probably long term, and that’s an uncomfortable place for our country to be.  What we need to do is shift gears and really head in another direction because what we’re doing right now with the Fed, it’s not working. We need to cut taxes on the job creators.  This is all about jobs, creating jobs.  We have to ramp up industry here in America, and of course reduce the federal debt, quit piling on and growing more.  But those commonsense solutions there, especially with the cutting taxes on the job creators, that’s not even being discussed.  In fact, increased taxes is the direction it sounds like Obama wants to go.
RUSH:  You mean that you don’t even hear it being discussed on the Republican side or within the administration?
GOV. PALIN:  Within the administration, and as it is discussed on the Republican side, Republicans need to be bolder about it.  Independents need to be bolder about that solution that has got to be considered and plugged in.  This is the only solution that will be successful.  We need to rehash some history that proves its success.  Let’s go back to what Reagan did in the early eighties and stay committed to those commonsense free market principles that worked.  He faced a tougher recession than what we’re facing today.  He cut those taxes, ramped up industry, and we pulled out of that recession.  We need to revisit that.
RUSH:  Why do you think this administration is ignoring that blueprint?  What is their ultimate objective here?  They’re sitting in the middle of abject failure of their number-one stated goal, and that’s job creation.  So what are they really trying to do here do you think?
GOV. PALIN:  Well, you wonder, you wonder because history proves what will work and you wonder if they’re realizing that and if it’s just perhaps a stubbornness at this point that they are so committed to going down this road of growing government and interjecting the Feds’ control in the private sector more and more, which will prove to be more failure.  I don’t know if it’s obstinate thinking that they’re engaged in right now or if they truly just do not believe what the free market, free enterprise economic solutions are that built up this country.
RUSH:  Do you think this is going to be a major issue in the congressional elections in 2010, and if so, how would you advise Republicans to pursue it?
GOV. PALIN:  It better be a major issue, absolutely.  Of course, national security will be, too, and hopefully we’ll talk a little bit about some of the decisions being made in that arena that cause so many of us concern but, yeah, the economy, that’s what it’s going to be because it’s all about jobs, it’s all about Americans who are hurting right now and what those solutions are that are so obvious, so commonsense that need to be plugged in.  And those are Republican, they’re commonsense conservative principles that we just need to apply.
RUSH:  New York-23 is being portrayed as a race in which you and I — because we supposedly went up there — handpicked Doug Hoffman, he supposedly lost, even though that race, they still haven’t finished counting the votes.  It’s two weeks!  This is not Chicago.  They haven’t finished counting the votes.  He says he wishes he could un-concede now.  But they’re trying to diminish conservatism, and I think in the process intimidate the Republican Party from going in that direction.  What’s your read on New York-23?
GOV. PALIN:  I think this is exciting.  It’s encouraging.  No matter the outcome even with his recount of some of those, well, uncounted ballots, it’s exciting that the race is going to be even closer, and it’s a clearer and clearer picture that what Americans are seeking, even in a district there in New York, they are seeking commonsense, conservative solutions to all the challenges that we’re facing.  I’m glad to see this.
RUSH:  So the positive thing there is that the Republican Party was rebuffed in nominating essentially a RINO, a liberal?

GOV. PALIN:  Well, I think what you saw there is — and of course it’s not just the Republican machine, it’s the Democrat machine, too.  You know, if you’re not the anointed one within the machine, sometimes you have a much tougher row to hoe and that’s what Hoffman faced. He was the underdog.  I think great timing for him, though, to stand strong on his conservative credentials and essentially come out of nowhere and prove that an American without that resume, without that machine backing can truly make a difference in an election like this.

RUSH:  Well, now, you used the term, “If you’re not the anointed one by the party machine, you’re the underdog and you have a tough row to hoe.”  Based on things that I read, the Republican establishment would not anoint you to be a nominee of their party should you choose to go that way.  I’m not asking you the question because I know you’re not going to answer and give away what your plans are in 2012.

GOV. PALIN: (chuckles)

RUSH: Do you consider yourself one of these unanointed ones within your own party?

GOV. PALIN:  Well, to some in both parties, politics is more of a business.  It’s not so much a commitment to an agenda or a person or values or issues.  It’s more of a business — and, no, I’m not a part of that.  So if they’re going to keep using that way of thinking in their decisions on who they anoint, who they will support or not then, no. I’ll never be a part of that. But hopefully we’re going to see a shift with independents, with the Republican Party and the Democrat Party, and we’re going to get back to what the issues are, what really matters, and then hopefully we’re going to go from there, which will be much fairer to the electorate.

RUSH:  All right, independents, slash, third party.  A lot of people — mistakenly, in my view — are looking at New York-23 as evidence that, see, a third party could actually do well. But that’s not a good example because there was no primary there.  As you said, the party bosses chose Dede Scozzafava on the Republican side and a Democrat.  Had there been a primary, New York-23 would not have been constituted as it was.  So what are your thoughts now on the viability of a third party if the Republican Party can’t be brought around?

GOV. PALIN:  You know, to be brutally honest, I think that it’s a bit naive when you talk about the pragmatism that has to be applied in America’s political system. And we are a two-party system. Ideally, sure, a third party or an independent party would be able to soar and thrive and put candidates forth and have them elected, but I don’t think America is ready for that.  I think that it is… Granted it’s quite conventional and traditional, but in a good way that we have our two parties, and I think that that’s what will remain. And I say that, though, acknowledging that I’m not an obsessive panther, I understand why people — good people like my own husband — refuse to register in a party. Todd’s not a Republican and yet he’s got more commonsense conservatism than a whole lot of Republicans that I know because he is one who sees the idiosyncrasies of the characters within the machine and it frustrates him along with a whole lot of other Americans who choose to be independent.  But in answer to your question, I don’t think that the third party movement will be what’s necessary to usher in some commonsense conservative ideals.”

Read more:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_111709/content/01125120.guest.html