At 6:52 a.m. EST this morning, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin posted a 1,141-word Facebook post with an accompanying eight-minute video responding to the Tucson shootings at length on the same day President Obama is scheduled to travel to Tucson to speak. The response comes as a reply to critics who have said that her political action committee’s map, showing Democratic representatives in GOP-leaning districts who voted for the health care law in gunsights, contributed to a charged climate in American politics before the shooting.

“There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated?” she said.

This statement was Palin’s first response to the tragedy, except for a very short post the day of the shootings and an e-mail exchange with Glenn Beck, of Fox News. Her spokesman preposterously said the gunsights were intended to be “surveyor’s symbols,” in an interview on the Palin-friendly Tammy Bruce Show.

“As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, ‘We know violence isn’t the answer.’ When we ‘take up our arms’, we’re talking about our vote,” she said.

As usual, Palin targeted the media in her post. “But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible,” she said, apparently accusing the media of inciting violence following the Tucson shootings.

The phrase “blood libel” has drawn the most controversy so far in the speech, since it refers to the historical anti-Semitic canard that Jews sacrifice Christian children. The phrase was used most recently when Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled, “The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel.” (It’s very likely that Palin or one of her advisers read this op-ed.)

Another odd phrase was the mention of September 11, 2001. “Recall how the events of 9/11 challenged our values, and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security,” she said, without any specifics to what freedoms have been traded.

The speech’s optics were as notable as its content. She spoke with an American flag and fireplace in the background, mimicking a presidential speech. The speech — in contrast to say, her rambling resignation (as governor of Alaska) speech — seemed well-prepared. Also, releasing the speech thirteen hours before the president speaks in Tucson guarantees the two will be compared. The content, however, was not much different from her previous speeches and posts — frequent references to the founding fathers, attacking the media, Reagan quotes and platitudes about the positive aspects of the American system of government.

She closed with a long platitude about what to do next:

“We will come out of this stronger and more united in our desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, to respectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner, and to unite in the knowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for a better future for our country.”

Sarah Palin: “America’s Enduring Strength” from Sarah Palin on Vimeo.

Socially conservative voters, who have at times felt marginalized by the strong libertarian streak within the tea party movement, came out in force to the conference, and many of them implicitly criticized fiscally minded conservatives like Indiana governor and 2012 presidential hopeful Mitch Daniels (R):

Though no speaker mentioned him…Mitch Daniels is a source of this consternation. The next president “would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues,” he told The Weekly Standard. Even so, the vast majority of the GOP — including Daniels himself, who is still pro-life and favors reinstating [the] “Mexico City Policy” — remains conservative on social issues.

Daniels is exactly the kind of sober guy who could translate the country’s ongoing economic woes, if they persist, into a GOP victory in 2012, but he’s also the least likely to get socially conservative voters excited about his candidacy. This poses a big problem for the GOP, which seems poised to choose someone who riles up the base — like Sarah Palin, or maybe former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.) — but turns off the non-evangelical portions of the country. For further evidence of this problem, check out the Values Voters straw poll:

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), chair of the House GOP conference, also gave a barnstorming speech, connecting stem-cell research, abortion and marriage to fiscal issues. (“You want to find savings? Let’s cut funding to research that destroys human embryos in the name of science and let’s deny any and all funding to Planned Parenthood.”)

On the wings of this speech, Pence won the conference’s 2012 Presidential Straw Poll, beating out Huckabee by 11 votes, 170-159. The win will no doubt encourage speculation of a presidential run for Pence. However, it remains extremely difficult to win a nomination, let alone the presidency, from the House of Representatives, partly given to a low familiarity level among a general electorate. The only sitting House member to ever win the White House was James Garfield in 1880.

They might not be in the media spotlight as much these days, but socially conservative voters are still a big part of the GOP base and a potentially crucial member of any coalition for a Republican candidate hoping to represent the party in 2012.

O’Donnell was added after her victory and spoke for about 20 minutes.

“The stimulus spent a trillion dollars on a Keynesian fantasy,” she said. “Then they started talking about Obamacare and the bailouts, bailing out one industry after another,” the social conservative activist said.

“The conservative movement was told to curl up in a fetal position for eight years … well how things have changed,” she said. Her rhetoric was often against the “elite”: “The elite don’t get us — they call us wacky, they call us wingnuts, but we call us ‘we the people’!” She continued later, “the ruling elites may try to be our master … but we say, ‘You’re not the boss of me!’”

She had some one-liners that the crowd loved: “They [government] will buy your teenage daughter an abortion, but not a sugary soda in a school’s vending machine.” Or, she mentioned the “green police” in Alexandria, Va., putting “cameras in your recycling bins.”

She compared her movement to the “chosen people of Israel” and added, “it is almost like we’re in constitutional repentance.” She also opposed extending unemployment benefits, mocking the current Congress: “They say the best way to job is to endlessly extend unemployment benefits!”

The number of reporters in the press area approximately doubled before she spoke at about 3:20 p.m. After her speech, international and national anchors from FOX and ABC like Greta Van Susteren and Jake Tapper (and dozens of other reporters) waited for a chance to talk to her outside the ballroom, but she never appeared. The master of ceremonies asked for a prayer for Christine O’Donnell to protect her from “whatever you see” in the media, who will “attack” her. Or, as she said in her speech, “will they attack us … smear our records … is it worth it? Yes!”

The instant celebrity and conservatism of O’Donnell beg comparisons to the woman who robocalled for her, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. (Indeed, it was rumored that Palin might be the surprise guest of the afternoon — however, she was in Iowa.)

But does it translate to votes? The polls say no, with her trailing New Castle County Executive Chris Coons by 11 to 16 points. That didn’t matter to most of the speakers. Tea party organizer Amy Kremer said, “She’s not a good ol’ boy — she can beat Chris Coons.” Rick Santorum, when asked by a reporter whether she could win, said, “Of course she can. Have you seen the polls?”

But polls didn’t matter today. The results of the election are six weeks away. It was all celebrity and enthusiasm. In the words of O’Donnell, “We will be resisted and we must resist!”

This post originally appeared in The American Independent.

This week, the Iowa Democratic Party launched a new volunteering drive on its website just days before former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin headlines the Ronald Reagan Dinner — the Republican Party of Iowa’s largest fall fundraiser.

Invoking both her image and strong rhetoric against the tea party favorite, the IDP is calling on Iowans to pledge a total 945 volunteer hours – one hour for every day she served as governor of Alaska– before Friday’s event.

In addition to using Palin and her impending appearance in Iowa to drum up funds and volunteer hours in their appeals, Democrats also invoked her name more than once at the Harkin Steak Fry on Sunday, prompting speculation that she’s replacing Bush as the most effective boogeyman at the party’s disposal.

The complaint — which The Atlantic’s Chris Good links to in full here — makes two claims, one of which is basic, the other a bit more complex. First, it argues that Tea Party Express and the O’Donnell campaign have engaged in message coordination over the outside group’s advertising. This is your basic “you can’t share strategy, messaging, or resources, etc.” kind of allegation.

Second, however, the complaint argues that Tea Party Express solicited donations that were specifically earmarked to support the O’Donnell race, and that such fundraising is illegal. The Delaware GOP is making this case by arguing that federal campaign law considers earmarked funds to be the same thing as contributions to a candidate, and that Tea Party Express therefore solicited individual contributions to the O’Donnell campaign that were in excess of contribution limits.

Because the Tea Party Express didn’t actually donate its earmarked funds to O’Donnell, my guess is that the FEC, especially in its current riven state, probably won’t agree with the Delaware GOP on this one. But if it does, Good notes that it’ll have a major impact on a number of outside groups, not just Tea Party Express, that engage in the same fundraising practices.

From somewhere in cyberspace on Monday, perhaps over lunch at her desk, Sarah Palin typed a few words in praise of Karen Handel and hit the “share” button on her Facebook page.

Within hours, the GOP’s polite race for governor of Georgia cracked wide open. [...]

Last week, Handel’s three main rivals — state Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine, former congressman Nathan Deal, and former state senator Eric Johnson — could ignore her attempts to become known as a champion of ethics, at their expense.

But within six hours of Palin’s endorsement, state Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine climbed down from his front-runner pedestal and leveled a TV ad at Handel that dubbed her a big spender, a funder of Planned Parenthood and a friend to gay couples.

As to the charge that she’s a moderate Republican who supports domestic partnership legislation, Handel quickly went about setting the record straight. Yesterday she told a local TV reporter that she’d likely support a ban on gay adoption, prompting the Journal-Constitution’s Jay Bookman to bemoan her transformation from “telling gay voters that she supports domestic partnership legislation and even joining the Log Cabin Republicans — she claims otherwise, but the record is clear — to endorsing a ban on gay adoption, perhaps the most extreme anti-gay position a politician can take in today’s environment.”

Yes, the Obama waffles, which were pulled from the Value Voters Summit after sparking controversy back in September. “They’re hard to find,” said Enten. “If you’ve got one, hold onto it!” Fortunately, the waffle-makers are still online and have added Sarah Palin mooseburger helper to their catalog.

The governor’s office wouldn’t say this week how much she owes in back taxes for meal money, or whether she intends to continue to receive the per diem allowance. As of December, she was still charging the state for meals and incidentals.

“The amount of taxes owed is a private matter,” Sharon Leighow, Palin’s spokeswoman, said in an e-mail. “If the governor collects future per diem, those documents would be a matter of public record.”

We’ve actually known about this since last October. Here’s an opportunity for conservatives to wind the anti-Daschle and anti-Geithner cases into one big case for tax simplification, but based on a quick scan of the blogs it seems like they’re ignoring it.

The Palin moment … exposed the vulnerability of the Left to a challenge to its most cherished claims—as the sole representative of the interests of the working class and the only legitimate path to political power for an ambitious woman.

Yes, of course. Four months before he chose Palin as his running mate, Sen. John McCain voted against extending the statute of limitations for pay discrimination complaints. Two months after the election, McCain voted against it again. But McCain elevated a rather mediocre politician that most women will never meet onto a losing presidential ticket. I don’t know how the Left can compete with this.

Bristol Palin, the 18-year-old daughter of former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, gave birth on Saturday to a healthy 7 lb., 7 oz., baby boy in Palmer, Alaska.

“We think it’s wonderful,” said Colleen Jones, the sister of Bristol’s grandmother Sally Heath, who confirmed the news. “The baby is fine and Bristol is doing well. Everyone is excited.”

Bristol Palin’s pregnancy became an issue when it was revealed during the presidential campaign, shortly after Sen. John McCain named Sarah Palin as his running mate in August. Bristol and the baby’s father, Levi Johnston, plan to wed next year, according to People.com.

And the baby’s name?

In keeping with the apparent Palin family tradition of giving boys unusual names that begin with “Tr,” such as Bristol’s older brother Track and younger brother Trig, the newborn will be known as Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston.

(Via Playbook)