The John Ziegler We Know

Just reading Ziegler extensively will convince you who this guy really is
*
Serial self-promoter John Ziegler is out with another Daily Caller BS piece claiming that no one had refudiated his article from last week. According to the naysayer, that means his predictions are solid gold or something. Obviously, Ziegler hasn't been paying attention, because we've seen several good retorts to his arguments. Here are some excerpts from a lengthy riposte by Abie Rubin at The Thinking Voter:

John Ziegler’s current article did not come as a total shock to me because I saw something amiss in his article last week on the DC in which he wrote about “The Undefeated.” He applauded the new movie but claimed he can’t possibly see it accomplishing anything for Palin on the political scene. What caught my eye was the following sentence in the beginning of the article when he was still full of praise.

"In fact, I had suggested a similar concept to the Palins back in late 2009."

Oh yeah? Then why did he suggest a similar concept less than two years ago if [he's] so skeptical now? Additionally, who said it won’t be heavily advertised? Steven K. Bannon invested lots of money in this project and has tons of experience in this field, and those that have already gotten to see it have doubled over backwards in awe over the magnificent job he’s done. I feel bad for Ziegler that his terrific documentary hasn’t received more attention; however the timing of the current movie is perfect, the buzz surrounding it is deafening, and it is therefore promising to attract tons of viewers.

Ziegler wrote on 4/25/11 in the DC in regard to the E! Network documentary on Palin in which he participated but had barely received any attention because Trump had taken center stage at that time;

"…should Palin decide to run for president (I still think it is 60/40 that she will), this show targets the exact demographic with whom she will need to get a second chance in order to have a legitimate shot at beating President Obama: women who are not news junkies."

So Ziegler believed two years ago, as well as less than two months ago, that with a compelling widely viewed documentary on Palin, many with unfavorable opinions or no opinion on her will recognize the truth about Sarah and support her. However, less than two months later, he made a complete about face.

[More]

Poll Insider also answered Ziegler last week, which prompted a response from the self-absorbed Palin-doubter, which Poll Insider promptly answered. More excerpts:

“This is John Ziegler. Could you please explain to me where you got the insane idea that I wrote the article you are responding to for money? I made it clear at the new website that I was not paid and since it would be great for my movie, there is probbaly not a person on the planet with a greater incentive to promote an Obama/Palin matchup than me. Do you even care about the facts?”

First, note that Ziegler doesn’t respond to anything relating to my main argument, only at some assertion that I claim he only wrote the article for money (possibly by being paid by The Daily Caller) when I clearly stated “I’m not sure what Ziegler’s beef is – Money, Publicity, Palin ignored him…” First, I never suggested that he was paid by The Daily Caller. Second, it’s kind of silly for Ziegler to suggest the move wasn’t intended to pick up at least some sales because, most obviously, the website of “thesarahpaliniknow.com” has links to purchase Media Malpractice by John Ziegler; The Path to 9/11 by John Ziegler; The Death of Free Speech by John Ziegler. If you are mainly just a truth teller, why post links for people to buy your stuff on a newly created website that you know is about to get a huge spike in hits? And according to Alexa.com, your website johnziegler.com went from insignificant to a decent boom (with thesarahpaliniknow.com). Plus, by keeping your toe half-in and half-out of the water, I could see why many people would be interested in Media Malpractice even today. I thought it was fantastic and I have quoted it several times on this website. (And I still think Media Malpractice is relevant today and worth a watch, plus how moronic are those Obamavoters?)

Second, just because you release a pre-emptive response to what you know you will be criticized for, it doesn’t mean that those criticisms are not true, or that even your pre-emptive responses are true.

[More]

John Nolte has also shot down Ziegler's argument that Gov. Palin is not electable here, and John Hawkins described Ziegler's betrayal as "a no-class move from a flake who probably wasn’t motivated by anything more than a desire to keep his name in the news" here. Dan Riehl noted Ziegler's curious timing here. Cornell Law School Associate Clinical Professor William A. Jacobson's rebuttal (here) of Ziegler is, we believe, definitive.

The bottom line is that Ziegler's long-winded knife-turning on Sarah Palin offers no "proof" to begin with, so his claim that his rant hasn't been "disproven" is based on a fallacy. How can one disprove that which has not been proven? The illogical never fail to demand that the logical prove the wrong. But with Ziegler, it was never about proof or logic. As always, it's all about him.

- JP

Dan Riehl flays Erick Erickson for defending the indefensible

"Redstate is a DC and establishment-centric blog and always has been"
*
In a Monday post at Riehl World View, Dan Riehl woodsheds Erick Erickson for defending the indefensible:

Unfortunately, Redstate editor Erick Erickson made a woefully misguided post in defense of John Ziegler after Ziegler posted yet another one of his manifestos, this one aimed at the Palins and published by the Daily Caller. I'm assuming the Stalker Weekly rejected it first and DC picked it up. They're always trolling for a negative Palin story to drum up traffic. From Ziegler's pre-criticism rebuttal, I suspect we learn his true motivations. There's a documented history of his turning on people while claiming he isn't whenever he has been met with rejection.

(Ziegler) -- I sent them an e-mail saying that I no longer thought me working for them was a good idea. I did make a proposal of various things I could do for them in late 2009 (including a new movie similar to the one about to be released) but I am not even 100% sure they got that and after she later decided to work for Fox News those options were no longer viable or interesting to me.

Ironic that this comes out just as "The Undefeated" is released, wouldn't you say?

It's doubly unfortunate that Erick felt the need to attack many honest conservatives in his weak and poorly thought out defense of Ziegler, compounded by some Tweets. Intelligent and insightful observers always knew the day would come when Ziegler turned: it's his MO. Erick sure has some strange friends given the title of his post.

On John Ziegler: How Easy We Trash Our Friends

I’m ... titling this post over the angst of those coming in via twitter and email about John Ziegler’s work. We should be better than that and ... maybe consider his sincerity instead of descending with lefty like(sic) relish directly into attacks on his motives. The reaction to his work has way too much a resemblance to how the Soviets treated the Trotsky supporters. I’m sure some are busy in their basements tonight digitally photoshopping Ziegler out of their photos.

Heavens! "We should be better than that" given the facts? Actually, Erick should have been better than that and did some thinking, and, or his homework, before posting. This is the second time in a week he's demonstrated a lack of one or the other, if not both...

[More]

By way of disclaimer, your editor has crossed swords with both Dan Riehl and John Ziegler in the past, ironically bother on matters related to CPAC, but for different reasons. On the other hand I had a good working relationship with Erick while a front page contributor at RedState a couple of years back and left on good terms.

That doesn't alter the fact that I agree with Dan here. Even though Erick is one of the good guys, he has made a bad decision without gathering all the required information. Plus, the entire premise of Erick's argument that we shouldn't "trash our friends" is a fallacy. In order for it to work, a friend has to be a real friend. Ziegler's only friend is Ziegler, and he stabbed Sarah Palin in the back just as he has stabbed so many of his former associates in the back. He would do the same to Erick if it suited his purposes.

Erick, who are you going to believe about Sarah Palin -- Mark Levin (whose credentials and judgment speak for themselves) or John Ziegler and the nest of PDS cases you should have kicked off of RedState (or at least fairly applied your own website's standards to) years ago? You're still one of the good guys -- one of the best, in fact -- which makes it all that more of a shame that someone is giving you bad advice.

Related: John Nolte knocks down Ziegler's arguments, one by one. Ed Morrissey challenges Ziegler's argument on his electability point and has an online poll up where you can vote your opinion.

- JP

Morrissey: Will Palin be treated fairly on 'True Hollywood Story'?

"The producer told me I would be pleased with the results"
*
John Ziegler tells Ed Morrissey in a Hot Air interview that the E! Entertainment Channel has licensed his documentary film Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted for a planned “True Hollywood Story” focused on Gov. Palin. Ziegler says that Palin supporters may find the result to be a pleasant surprise. Here are some excerpts from the interview:

Q: You documented terrible media bias against Sarah Palin in your documentary Media Malpractice…How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted, and that involved the major news organizations. Now you say E! is doing a “True Hollywood Story” on Sarah Palin which will air April 20th. That sounds like a media-bias nightmare. Should Palin supporters “be afraid — be very afraid”?

A: I totally agree that on paper this would seem to be a disaster waiting to happen. After all, Hollywood tends to be at least as politically biased as the news media, but I have a feeling Palin supporters might be pleasantly surprised.

[...]

Q: They have licensed parts of your documentary for use in their program. What do believe the focus will be, based on your interactions with them?

A: They licensed my interview with Sarah Palin for the film in a way that indicates that they intend to use a decent chunk of it. I know for sure that they intended to use her reactions to the condescending Charlie Gibson interview. I hope they address half of the misconceptions about the 2008 campaign that I discussed in my interview with them. I know that even the technical people (which always seems to happen in such interviews) were very interested to hear that the real Palin was very different than the one they have been told about by the media.

[...]

Q: If Palin wants to run for President, she will have to address the narrative that the mainstream media have built over the last three years. Is this an opportunity to do that?

A: Assuming the show is as fair as I think it will be, it certainly could be. This show will be shown numerous times on a network whose demographic is full of women who are not political junkies. This is exactly the demo that Palin would have to get a second chance with if she has a chance to beat President Obama.

Obviously she and I have both been burned before by media outlets, but I have my fingers crossed on this.

[More]

We agree with Morrissey that it would be ironic if Gov. Palin gets more fair and balanced treatment from the entertainment media than she has received from the "traditional news organization that claims objectivity." Like Capt. Ed, we're most curious to see what E!'s take will be.

- JP

Quote of the Day (February 26, 2011)

Why Kathleen Parker Was Doomed At CNN
*
John Ziegler at Mediaite:

"There are many reasons why Parker’s short stint on CNN didn’t work... But the primary reason why the program couldn’t work is also the very reason Parker got the gig in the first place. She was clearly hired because she was perceived as a 'conservative' who was willing to vigorously attack Palin, while not holding any particularly strong conservative opinions which might offend the largely liberal CNN audience... There is also an interesting secondary element to Parker’s demise which might make media pundits a little more hesitant to attack Sarah Palin. Since the 2008 election, many of her biggest media critics have found themselves out of a job. Keith Olbermann, Rick Sanchez, David Shuster, Alan Colmes, Campbell Brown, John Roberts, Larry King, Harry Smith and Parker are all prominently mentioned in my documentary and all of them have been let go from TV jobs since Obama got elected. Coincidence? Perhaps... Regardless, if Chris Matthews is smart, he might want to be careful."

- JP

John Ziegler changes his mind on a Palin presidential bid

"She came closer than ever before to declaring that she will be a candidate"
*
Documentary film maker John Ziegler has always been a strong defender of Gov. Palin, but he has often expressed the opinion that she should not and would not run for the White House in 2012. Ziegler has argued that she should challenge Democrat Mark Begich for his Senate seat in 2014 and then make her presidential bid in 2016. But that would have her running for president after serving only one third of a term in the U.S. Senate. If John thinks she was pounded unmercifully for resigning as Governor of Alaska, we wonder what he would think her political enemies would try to do to her for conducting a presidential campaign before finishing a full six-year Senate term?

No matter. The man behind the outstanding film "Media Malpractice" has had an epiphany of sorts. After digesting the appearance of the leader of the Grizzly pack on last night's "Hannity," Ziegler says he has had a "rather strong epiphany" and although he doesn't think any Republican can beat Obama in 2012, he now believes not only that she will run, but that she should run:

If Palin really has been playing a game in order just to keep her profile high (an article of faith among Palin critics), the insane reaction to this tragedy and the irrational implication of her in it would have provided her with the perfect out. After all, not even her most fervent supporter could possibly begrudge her the right to beg off a presidential run in the name of protecting her family from all of the lunacy (and potentially worse) which will be sure to come their way if they are all subjected to another campaign. But even after being given an opening to “go there” larger than FNC’s rating dominance over its competitors, Palin would have none of it.

Instead, she came closer than ever before to declaring that she will be a candidate, defiantly stating that, while she has no announcement to make right now, she is not going to sit down, and will not be told to shut up.

[...]

This leads me to my second change of heart. Ever since I witnessed her 2008 convention speech in person, I have had admiration for Sarah Palin, but I had also (almost out of a desire to not see her and her family unnecessarily harassed) come to the conclusion that it was not a good idea for her to run for president in 2012. I figured that, thanks largely to the same media who has targeted her for over two years, Obama was unlikely to lose to anyone and that blowing her one chance to run wouldn’t be good for her or her cause. But now I not only think she will run, but I really hope she does.

I still believe baring a disaster Obama will be reelected, but I now see nothing to lose and lots to gain by a Palin candidacy. She is the only candidate who has the ultimate freedom of having already faced her political death head on. As Winston Churchill famously said, “There is nothing more exhilarating than being shot without result,” and while thankfully Palin only knows this truth metaphorically, all that she has endured gives her incredible independence. Everyone else will inevitably melt (like even grizzled veteran John McCain did) when they get close to the blast furnace that will be going up against the Obama juggernaut. Far more than anyone else in conservative history, Palin has been forced to prove just how fireproof her convictions are and how deep her resolve is.

Quite simply, no one else in the potential Republican field will be as trustworthy to conservatives on the issues, and less likely to back down, than Sarah Palin. She has shown beyond any doubt that she can literally handle anything that the pressure of running for president could possibly present.

[More]

Now all we have to do is disabuse John of the notion that Obama is a cinch for reelection. It all depends on the economy, and we don't see it improving significantly before the 2012 election. Obamanomics almost guarantees a grim long term outlook, and even if we experience some degree of economic growth before the next election day, it's not likely that a corresponding growth in jobs will accompany it. We believe that significant job growth can on be spurred by ramping up domestic oil and natural gas production, and no matter how far Obama tacks to the center, he won't go that far lest the enviromaniacs desert him.

As Gov. Palin has emphatically stated, she will only get in it to win it. So a Palin candidacy in 2012 would be more than just an effort to marshal forces for 2016 and beyond, as Brother Ziegler seems to see it. It would be a serious go for the gold. Yes, it's about the future, but the future begins right now. Nevertheless, if, as Chinese philosopher Lao-tzu said, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, John Ziegler's journey back to constructively supporting Sarah Palin again has begun. He's a talented communicator, and his help would be invaluable.

- JP

NewsBusters Interview: John Ziegler

All bets are off when it comes to attacking Gov. Palin
*
NewsBusters associate editor Noel Sheppard recently interviewed film maker John Ziegler on the release of an expanded version of his documentary Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin was Targeted. Here is an excerpt:

NB: You've added 45 minutes of new footage from the original film. What can viewers expect?

JZ: We took a lot of the episodes that occurred in relation to the film after its original release and I provide commentary of what really happened behind the scenes. We show clips and I tell some great stories involving Matt Lauer, Barbara Walters, Joy Behar, Norah O'Donnell among others. We also tell the real story of what happened when I was arrested at the USC journalism award ceremony where Katie Couric was honored for her bogus Sarah Palin interview.

NB: You had an interesting interview with Kathleen Parker and Eliot Spitzer last week. Tell us about that.

JZ: Very bizarre. I called Parker out on her "endorsing" Obama and she flat out lied and claimed she never did so. That kind of shocked me, but not as much as what happened when I also called her out on being part of the "assassination" of Palin 1.0 as I refer to her pre-Fox persona. She was so off guard that I think she panicked and made the really strange statement that she "led" the assassination of Palin. She practically bragged about it, which is stunning considering she is supposedly the only full-time "conservative" on CNN, which says more about the inherent bias in the media than just about anything else.

NB: How do you think the coverage of Sarah Palin has changed since the 2008 elections?

JZ: Well, among certain circles, mostly on MSNBC and in the entertainment world, it has actually gotten worse as the dam has totally broken and it has become accepted that all bets are off when it comes to attacking her.

But the most important change is that Palin and the media now have a weirdly symbiotic relationship wherein they need each other. If the entire media complex decided tomorrow to stop covering her, she would have greatly reduced impact, but they would never do that because she is so good for their ratings.

I also think the success of Bristol on Dancing with the Stars has changed things a bit, once again to her advantage, as millions of nonpolitical people get to see the Palins in a mostly positive light.

[More]

- JP

Gov. Palin: Media's refusal to vet Obama 'coming home to roost' (Updated)

*
Gov. Palin, in one of her frequent appearances on the "Bob and Mark" morning program on Anchorage FM station KHWL, criticized the media for not vetting Barack Obama before the 2008 election and said there are important lessons to be learned in John Ziegler’s documentary Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin was Targeted:

"We know that Obama wasn’t vetted through the campaign, and now, you know, some things are coming home to roost, if you will, which is inexperience, his associations, and that ultimately harms our republic when a candidate isn’t — isn’t vetted by the media, that cornerstone of our democracy. So, you’re right, it’s not about me and whether you like my politics or not. You can push all that aside, and just pay attention to what that message is in this documentary, and that is that things have got to change for the better in the state of journalism. Otherwise, you know, it could be part of a demise of our democracy if that cornerstone erodes."

h/t: Ed Morrissey

Update: The full Bob and Mark interview with Bristol and Sarah Palin is here.

- JP

Ziegler: The real story behind Kathleen Parker’s bizarre Palin boast

*
In a Daily Caller opinion piece, documentary filmmaker and author John Ziegler tells the story behind his recent appearance on CNN's ratings-challenged "Parker Spitzer" program in which he managed to get faux conservative Kathleen Parker to boast that she "led" the media assassination of Sarah Palin:

The only reason anyone cared that I went on the show was that, for some inexplicable reason, I was apparently the first person to ever confront Kathleen Parker, who is billed as a “conservative” on the show, about how and why she could have possibly endorsed Barack Obama for president while also allowing herself to be used by the left-wing media to help destroy the VP candidacy of Sarah Palin. This in itself is truly stunning to me and an indication that conservatives do an incredibly lousy job of enforcing even a meager amount of accountability on those who betray the cause for no substantive reason and with the obvious motive of augmenting their elite television and dinner party invitations.

Frankly, the only reason I agreed to even do the appearance was to get the chance to finally confront Parker about her obvious sell out.

[...]

Most of the focus has been on Parker responding to my attempts to get her to admit the treason she committed in 2008 by going in the other direction (in what I perceived at the time as a knee-jerk “fight or flight” response) and actually bragging that she “led” the “assassination” of Sarah Palin 1.0 (which is a term I have used to describe Palin’s pre-Fox News persona, which I see as fundamentally different than the one she was forced to create due to the media’s unfair targeting of her).

[...]

While Parker’s admission about “leading” the “assassination” of Palin (1.0) was both bizarre and shocking (and elicited a rather perfect tweet from Palin herself), almost totally lost in that skirmish is that Parker blatantly lied when she denied ever endorsing Obama as a presidential candidate. A simple look at Charles Krauthammer’s evisceration of Parker’s Obama folly reveals that this was really the most remarkable revelation of my appearance.

[More]

Ed Morrissey points out that Parker attempted to walk back her braggadocio only 24 hours after Ziegler pushed her "truth" button:

After asserting that she “led” the charge againstSarah Palin in 2008 the day before, Kathleen Parker revisited her comments and the greater media bias against Palin last night, adding a few revisions. For one, she didn’t really lead the charge against Palin– “the liberal media” did– and did treat Palin, in some instances, “cruelly, and partly because she’s a woman.” She and co-host Eliot Spitzer further explored the relationship between Palin and the media with Mediaite founder Dan Abrams.

Parker modified her earlier statement about “leading” the assassination, toning it down to being the first on the right after Palin’s damning interview with Katie Couric to question her qualifications.

Can that actually be walked back? After proclaiming oneself to be the leader of a media assassination movement, can one credibly backtrack to a position of sadness over its success? I’d say that either Parker realized that she had crossed a line — or CNN did. John’s point is validated in this retreat.

Too late, Ms. Parker. You've already demonstrated to the entire world that you're a jealous harpy, a Vichy Republican and not by any stretch of the imagination a "conservative."

- JP

Ziegler: Journolist list scandal proves media bias

*
John Ziegler is feeling vindicated these days:

After having spent over a year of my life and most of my savings trying to spread the truth that the news media single-handedly elected Barack Obama and went on a search and destroy mission to target Sarah Palin (via my feature documentary “Media Malpractice”), I have pretty much stopped even bothering to chronicle this obvious media reality which continues to impact news coverage to this day. Since citing anti-Palin media bias is now roughly like continuing to build the case that O.J. was guilty, I have actually gotten kind of bored with it and left the duty of being outraged to many others more than willing to fill that void.

However, when something is revealed which particularly vindicates my film and where I can shed further light on the historical record, I feel a compulsion to come forward. Such is the case with the Daily Caller’s series last week on the treasure trove of “Journolist” e-mail that was recently uncovered.

While I took great interest in the evidence that liberal “journalists” had conspired to spike the numerous bombshells regarding Rev. Jeremiah Wright during the 2008 presidential primaries (my film goes into greater detail on that subject than any other I am aware of, but I can assure you my investigation indicates the entire story there has yet to be fully told), I was most intrigued by part three of the series which dealt directly with the targeting of then Governor Sarah Palin.

Specifically, I felt an “Ah Ha!” moment when the details about the role of Time magazine’s liberal writer Joe Klein were exposed.

I have always had a special suspicion of Joe Klein... So when I read about his special efforts to galvanize his media friends against the V.P. candidacy of Sarah Palin, a giant bell went off in my brain.

Read Ziegler's full op-ed at The Daily Caller.

- JP

Zeigler and RedState Get It Wrong

*
As we like to point out from time to time, nearly everyone who is a contributing writer on political websites considers himself or herself a consultant. Fortunately, their advice is free, because that's precisely what it's worth. That's not to say that there isn't some good advice mixed in with the bad, but smart politicians tend to eschew the suggestions of the keyboard consultancies, preferring instead to pay good money for the advice of professionals. Even the latter course is not always a safe bet, as Bob Shrum has repeatedly demonstrated with his perfect, but losing, record in presidential elections.

We have also said many times here that Sarah Palin is a smart politician. Her political instincts, which have been praised by both her friends and foes, have served her well. That most of the free advice being dished out on the Web is aimed at Gov. Palin is an indicator that the freeware consultancies refuse to give the governor her due. Oh, but they mean well, as they will be the first to insist they want to see Sarah succeed, which she will do, they say, if only she would heed their advice.

Two of the latest armchair advisors to tell the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee what she should or shouldn't do are documentary film maker John Ziegler (Why Palin shouldn’t run in 2012) and our friend and former colleague at RedState.com, E Pluribus Unum (Palin should not run in 2012).

EPU's arguments are essentially Ziegler's, refocused to scold those pesky Palin supporters who are foolish enough to post anything positive about the Governor on RedState.com, where a hit squad of usual suspects will pound them with derogatory comments which sometimes descend into ad hominem attacks with no reprisals from the site's moderators. There are a select few at the top of the RS regular contributor pyramid who are allowed to praise Palin unmolested, but those who dwell on the pyramid's lower levels (down in the diaries) can't get away with it.

EPU/Ziegler's first argument is that Sarah Palin is "playing exclusively to the home crowd." They cite her decision to take a position as a Fox News contributor as evidence of this. It would be a great argument if only hard core conservatives made up the viewership of Fox News. But according to a survey by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center, fully 39 percent of Fox News' viewers describe themselves as Democrats or independents who lean Democrat. Take the "leaners" out of the mix, and the Fox News audience is 39 percent Republican, 33 percent Democrat and 22 percent independent. So much for the argument that appearing on FNC plays exclusively to her base. Bad assumptions nearly always lead to faulty conclusions.

EPU cites Ziegler's point that "It would be extremely easy for Palin to get a part-time gig on one of the big broadcast networks," which he says would allow her to reach "the persuadable center," calling it a "lost opportunity." Yet neither EPU nor Ziegler offer any evidence that she could have landed a job with the alphabet networks. Ziegler even goes so far as to state:

"You can’t tell me ABC’s 'This Week' with a new host wouldn’t have killed to have Palin join them as weekly commentator."

And therein lies the problem. You can't tell John Ziegler anything that he doesn't want to hear (we know; we've tried). What is ABC going to do, fire George Will and give Sarah Palin the token conservative chair at the "This Week" roundtable? We don't think so. But if Ziegler has any inside information about any firm job offers ABC, CBS or NBC tendered to Gov. Palin, now's the time to share it with us.

Ziegler and EPU also assume that by identifying with the Tea Party movement, Gov. Palin is playing strictly to her base. This is another assumption which has no basis in fact. Research conducted by Rasmussen Reports in February tends to contradict the assumption:

Seventy-five percent (75%) of voters now say they are at least somewhat angry at the government’s current policies, up four points from late November and up nine points since September. The overall figures include 45% who are Very Angry, also a nine-point increase since September. Part of the frustration is likely due to the belief of 60% of voters that neither Republican political leaders nor Democratic political leaders have a good understanding of what is needed today.

The same survey found that a plurality of forty-one percent of unaffiliated voters view the Tea Party movement favorably, so the argument that Sarah Palin is only preaching to the choir with her involvement in the Tea Party movement is clearly a weak one.

Actually, Sarah Palin is making use of means other than Fox News and the Tea Party movement to reach out to independents. Her Going Rogue memoir was a big step in that direction, and appearances with Oprah, Barbara Walters, Conan O'Brien and Jay Leno -- just to name a few -- were chosen by Gov. Palin to demonstrate to a larger American audience that she is not what her detractors have worked for eighteen months to define her as. The first step for Gov. Palin to win over independents is to "undemonize" herself, and that is exactly what she is doing. But it's not something that can be magically accomplished overnight, and she is the first to realize this. Her second book and the proposed documentary series on Alaska she is working on will be other steps in the process.

The second major Ziegler/EPU argument is that Obama’s negatives would be Sarah Palin's negatives:

Think of it this way, if things are truly that desperate in 2012, is America really going to dump a guy who at least has four years of Presidential experience for a person who has none, who “quit” her job as Governor of a small state, and who they have been told over and over is not very bright?

What Ziegler and EPU are overlooking here is that four years of mistakes will hardly be considered worthwhile "Presidential experience" by voters. And poll after poll tell us that most Americans believe that Obama is screwing up royally. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, has an actual list of accomplishments she can point to, not the least of which is sound financial stewardship of Alaska on her watch. She also has a long list of policy statements on her Facebook page which demonstrate that she understands the issues. The list gets even longer with each passing week. Furthermore, resigning her position as governor has never been a major issue for the majority of Americans, although her political enemies have tried to make hay out of it. They are left with nothing but straw men.

The next Ziegler/EPU talking point is "The leftist media would love to set her up to battle Obama, then crush her." Can anyone name any other potential Republican candidate the media wouldn't love to do the same thing to? They did it to McCain, and they would do it to Mitt Romeny, Tim Pawlenty or whomever the GOP chooses as its presidential candidate. So where's the beef in the argument if it applies to any and all potential Republican candidates? There's no there there.

The final Ziegler/EPU argument isn't actually an argument, but a prescription for Sarah Palin to forgo 2012 and make a run in 2016 or 2020 when she will have accumulated more familiarity with issues, more political capital, etc. Then they go on to say that she may well take this route anyway. We've observed that this indeed may be her plan, but we learned some time ago not to presume to tell the governor what she should or shouldn't do when we suggested that she hire Fred Thompson as a policy advisor and Jeri Thompson as a media consultant. Fortunately, we came to the realization that undocumented political consultants just aren't that much in demand in the present shrinking job market. We hope that other would-be advisors will learn the same lesson, especially when their arguments, like those made by Ziegler and EPU, are less than convincing. Whatever Gov. Palin decides to do, we will support her because we trust her. She has a servant's heart, and she will not betray it.

Joshua Livestro further deconstructs Ziegler and EPU here.

- JP

Ziegler reflects on the year since "Media Malpractice" release

*
A year ago John Ziegler released his documentary film “Media Malpractice… How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted.” Tuesday in an opinion piece for The Daily Caller, he reflects on the events which have transpired over the past year:

While I am not nearly delusional enough to think that the film or my efforts are primarily responsible, there is no doubt that there has been a substantial (and for conservatives, rare) victory in this realm. The evidence, both scientific and anecdotal, is now overwhelming that the majority of Americans rightly now believe that the media coverage of Obama has been far too favorable and downright unfair to Palin.

As for Palin, while she was bizarrely attacked from all sides for having the gall to do an interview for the film which boldly and accurately corrected the record about a Presidential election, it is my belief that this story ended up helping her by far more than simply providing the sometimes vastly overrated value of telling the truth. Weirdly, since it was her first interview after returning to “normal life” in Alaska, the coverage of that episode set the precedent that any time Palin speaks it is considered a media event. This phenomenon became so ingrained in the media matrix that still today even sometimes rather innocuous postings on her Facebook page often make major news.

In a bit of poetic justice, the wrongly crucified Palin has benefited greatly from the right’s understandable and nearly primal instinct to intuitively gravitate to whichever conservative the news media attacks the most. She has become a master at riding this wind at her back to defy all predictions of her inevitable political irrelevance to become by far the most powerful and exciting force in Republican politics.

While my view of her politically is far more nuanced than perceived by the public and the media, it is by the most satisfying result of the last year that Palin has not only survived but personally prospered through all of this (for the record, she “endorsed” the film and I am still occasionally in touch with her, but, for many reasons, I have no official role in anything she does).

While Sarah Palin’s life and career appear to be much better off than they were a year ago, Ziegler laments that the same can not be said for him. Read his full op-ed at The DC.

- JP

John Ziegler's Review Of Going Rogue

Though his famous interviews (or attempts to get them) sometimes go overboard to the point where they resemble publicity stunts, there's no denying that John Ziegler is one of Sarah Palin's strongest defenders. One would expect his review of Going Rogue to be a very positive one, and one will not be surprised:

"I was simply blown away by Going Rogue on almost every level. For many reasons, this is by far the best book and greatest literary achievement by a political figure in my lifetime."

Lest the casual observer dimiss this as pure hyperbole, bear in mind that Rush Limbaugh called former Governor Palin's memoir "truly one of the most substantive policy books I've read."

Continuing with the review...

"Among other things, we discover that Sarah Palin has a ridiculously good memory."

Again, this judgment by Ziegler has backup. Elaine Lafferty, a Democrat who was a consultant for the McCain campaign, wrote of the 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate, " I'd heard rumors around the campaign of her photographic memory and, frankly, I watched it in action."

A few more excerpts from Ziegler's review:

As impressive as the details of the storytelling are, the real strength of Going Rogue is its brutal honesty. Quite simply, there has never been a memoir by someone with potential Presidential viability that has been nearly as open about what has really happened in his or her life and career.

[...]

Going Rogue is actually several books in one. It is a compelling biography, a gripping campaign tell-all, an expose on the sad state of our news media, a substantive outline of a political philosophy and even a comprehensive refutation of juicy tabloid rumors (Andrew Sullivan, among others, will have a lot of explaining to do).

[...]

I strongly believe that if every Republican primary voter reads this book, Sarah Palin will win the 2012 nomination in a landslide, whether she wants it or not.

Read John Ziegler's full review of Going Rogue here.

- JP

Quote of the Day (November 12, 2009)

*
John Ziegler:

"Even grading on the 'Palin Scale' of media bias, the AP’s synopsis is a joke."

- JP

Ziegler overplays his hand

After reading John Ziegler's defense of his interview with ACU chairman David Keene and watching the videos, we are of the opinion that the documentary film maker, former talk show host and shameless self-promoter blew it.

Well before Keene got up and started to walk away, it became painfully obvious that Ziegler doesn't know to quit while he's ahead. As an interviewer, once you've asked the same question several times in a row and your subject hasn't answered it, you have made your point. To continue asking the question gives the appearance that you are badgering, and that's what happened when Keene walked into the hall. Ziegler should have wrapped up his interview well before that point, but instead he chose to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. By following Keene into the hallway and continuing to press him, Ziegler stomped all over his own effectiveness.

We believe that Keene is a fraud, but by running what should have been a five-minute interview into the nearly half-hour farce which resulted, Ziegler's fiasco had the effect of actually generating sympathy for Keene in some quarters, and it did Sarah Palin no favors. The Western CPAC dustup was a missed opportunity and a doggone shame.

Ziegler was extremely effective in making a point (several of them, in fact) with his excellent documentary "Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted" which was a great help to Sarah Palin in making her case that the media had taken sides in the 2008 presidential campaign and was shamelessly smearing her family. Perhaps John should stick to making films and promoting them, two things which he's very good at. But he has a long way to go to master the art of the interview. Though by his words he insists he is trying to effect change in the corrupt "conservative" leadership, Ziegler has forgotten what is a cardinal rule whether one is practicing medicine or trying to change hearts and minds: First, do no harm.

Updates: Morrissey, Riehl and Freire all weight in, each with a unique perspective. Our question about Ziegler's pursuit of Keene is the same one we try to remember to ask ourselves before we post anything on this blog -- in the long run, does this help Sarah Palin or hurt her?

- JP

Ziegler confronts Keene over Palin remarks; told to leave Western CPAC

John Ziegler asked American Conservative Union chairman David Keene about his remarks dissing Sarah Palin and his support for liberal Arlen Specter over conservative Pat Toomey in 2004. For his trouble, Ziegler got kicked out of Western CPAC by an angry and foul-mouthed Keene:



h/t: Gateway Pundit 

Update: Ziegler elaborates on what happened between Keene and himself at WCPAC and provides additional video.

- JP

Stapleton: 'Someone is misleading Andrea' Mitchell

On his radio talk show today, John Ziegler talked with Gov. Palin's personal spokesperson Meg Stapleton about the decision to resign. Ziegler asked Stapleton about a report by NBC's Andrea Mitchell Friday that Gov. Palin was "through with politics, period." Stapleton told Ziegler, "Someone is misleading Andrea."

Listen here.

- JP

Mike Allen radio appearance FAIL

Allah says:

"I don’t know what Mike Allen thought he was getting himself into here, but after this he’d be well advised not to go throwing stones at anyone else for coming off badly in interviews."

Allen, one of Politico's top writers, was unable to defend on Ziegler's show what he had said earlier in the day on MSDNC's "Morning Joe" program.

Hear it here.

- JP

PMSDNC cuts Ziegler's microphone

MSNBC, a proud member of the government-controlled media, invited John Ziegler on to talk about Deve Lecherman and Gov. Sarah Palin. But the cable network shows that it isn't interested in airing both sides of an argument. Sub host Contessa Brewer tells the audio technician to cut Ziegler's microphone when he speaks truth to the Obamedia lies.

Flopping Aces has the video and the background on the Obama Channel's embarrasing moment here. More from NewsBusters.org here. Rush's take on it here.

- JP

Palin: Letterman 'pathetic'; nutroots 'buffoons'

From Politico, Governor Sarah Palin, in a guest appearance on John Ziegler’s KGIL radio show today, called David Letterman pathetic after the vicious See-BS Late Show host cracked what was evidently supposed to be a joke about her "slutty flight attendant look." The governor also said that reporters and bloggers in the state-controlled media who accused her of plagiarism are "buffoons":



High-quality audio of Ziegler's entire Tuesday show is posted here. Click on John Ziegler, Tuesday, June 9, 2009 - 12:00 PM. The segment with Gov. Palin starts at about 3:45 in.

Update 1: Moe Lane lances the boil that is David Letterman.

Update 2: The Great One evicerates what remains Moe left of Letterman.

- JP

'Oh wow. They really mangled you up, didn't they?'

Just as he said he would do, John went to USC, where Katie Couric was being presented with the Walter Cronkite journalism award for her interview of Sarah Palin. He intended to also give away copies of his film.

But watch what happened to him when he tried.

Update: He talked about it on Greta's show tonight.

- JP