WRAPPING UP SARAH'S VISIT

     SEEKING PERSPECTIVE-- By standing back and trying to view the story of the Sarah Palin visit in context, I think we can reach some clear and fairly definite conclusions.
     For one thing, we must consider that her visit in fact involved something not generally realized by the local populace--that is, it involved more than just one speech in Vancouver. That's right, she wasn't here only for the date we all heard about several weeks in advance, namely the $500-per-ticket speech she made to a posh gathering at the Vancouver Club, an event organized by the Bon Mot Book Club.
     That second speech, in fact, might explain something to people (like me) who have been wondering why she'd give an American-style campaign speech outside her own country (in Vancouver) in the middle of a heated, crucial U.S. Congressional contest.
     I know, the Bon Mot speech would have meant only a day or so off her native campaign trail, yet it might have been precious time lost for her beloved Tea Party, some of whose candidates are reportedly involved in tight races.
     Her first speech, the Bon Mot one, was delivered on Wednesday evening, Oct. 13. And that second speech was made on the morning of Oct. 14--it was the keynote speech for the 2010 National Hardwood Lumber Association's Annual Convention and Exhibit Showcase at the Hyatt. I could not find any report on this event in the mainstream Vancouver dailies.
     Now, while the hardwood association has some Canadian members, that "national" in the group's name means, on the whole, the nation of the United States of America. As with more than a few "national" business and industrial organizations, Canada kind of piggy-backs onto the membership rolls. Thus it's probable that a good majority of the hardwood membership would be American. Behind this conclusion is the fact that while Canada is a big producer of softwood lumber, it is not a significant producer of hardwood. On the other hand, the U.S. produces huge amounts of hardwood, much of which Canada imports.
     My point is that Ms. Palin would be quite confident that in delivering her speech to the hardwood association, she would be heard by plenty of American ears among convention delegates, thus making her visit to Vancouver quite worthwhile in terms of U.S. electioneering.

     THAT SPEECH WOULD ALSO HELP HER BANK ACCOUNT.  Ms. Palin was paid $75,000 for the Bon Mot appearance, even though she was not just speaking but also promoting sales, to her profit, of her book, Going Rogue. (Talk about making money with both hands!)
     Now, if the same speaking fee applied to the Hardwood Lumber speech, then in the space of two days in Vancouver she would have collected $150,000.
     But wait--she was scheduled to jet out of here after her lumber speech on Oct. 14 to San Jose, California, where she made yet another speech that very day to the Liberty & Freedom Foundation. The word is that, while her speaking fee rate for the Bon Mot affair was $75,000, that fee was arranged some time ago, and her fee is now $100,000 per, because she has become such a big draw.
     So, conceivably, in those two days, the 13th and 14th of October, she could have picked up a quarter of a million dollars for making three American campaign-style speeches. And there's even more--she also was scheduled to make a speech on Oct. 15 in Sacramento to "Perspectives, the Chamber of Commerce Speakers Forum."
     All right, I hear some voices saying, but maybe the Sacramento thing was a true campaign event, where the politicians speak for free, being in self-and-party promotion mode. We then should not draw too many sweeping conclusions about precisely how much money she may make from her speeches. One, however, must remember as well that her speaking contracts require all expenses, from luxury hotels to super-deluxe air travel, plus lots of little perks, including even bottled water with bendable straws in her hotel suites.
     But just from her Vancouver appearances, and the San Jose one, I think we can fairly conclude that this lady has one great serial gig going. We therefore have to address the question: How is it that  Ms. Palin got a reputation for being some kind of airhead?

     IT APPEARS SHE HAS BEEN UNDERRATED. Politically, she has certainly displayed flaws, and some bad ones, but one thing you have to give her is that she is bent on her objectives with a determination and a personal organizational ability to be envied, including how to make big bucks while the sun shines.
     This is quite a turnaround for a politician whose entry on the big political stage became something of an embarrassment and failure for her party. Specifically, her stumbles as vice-presidential candidate, especially on international matters, proved an embarrassment to Republican candidate John McCain's 2008 presidential bid.
     History records that Sarah Palin became the butt of humor for the late-night comics, and McCain lost that election badly. It would be hard to deny that he was hurt by his lack of judgment in selecting as running mate one who was not ready for the big leagues.
     He might have lost anyway, given the burden he had to bear after eight years of Bush, Jr., but Ms. Palin and her failings probably did help add to the Obama landslide. And, so, McCain's political rise was over.
     Ms. Palin's current fame comes, of course, from her move to the right of the usual conservative right, after the electoral debacle of 2008, and from her fervent embrace of the Tea Party. The thing is, America now seems ripe for a revival of the right, including the far right. And when the Congressional vote is held on Nov. 2, expectations are that her brand of Republicanism is going to be quite successful.
     The meaning of that vote result will be a continued presence of, and growing fame for, Sarah Palin, as she continues her relentless bid for the Republican presidential nomination for the 2012 presidential contest. In the meantime, her speaking fees probably will inflate as she continues to show how true it can be that, when handed a lemon, one simply goes ahead and makes lemonade.

     FINALLY, I MUST RETURN TO THE ONLY VANCOUVER SPEECH  by Ms. Palin for which there has been made a record, because I have had requests to put something on this blog's record about it.
     The Bon Mot speech was given little or no coverage by the two main Vancouver dailies. The Globe & Mail of Toronto, a sponsor of the Bon Mot club, was the only press allowed into the Oct. 13 event, which no doubt upset the two main Vancouver dailies, The Sun and The Province. The Globe had this favored position, one can only conclude, because it, as a corporation, happens to be a sponsor of the Bon Mot club. It may even have paid $500 for a ticket, something newspapers normally do not care to do--that is, pay to get in to cover any event.
     The report in the B.C. edition of The Globe appeared on Oct. 15. A separate report was prepared for the 14th, but it did not appear in the B.C. edition of that date, although it was available online.
     As far as the two Vancouver dailies were concerned, The Province had no record that I could find of Ms. Palin even being here on the 13th and 14th, and The Sun had no news story as such.

     PERHAPS THE ONLY ONE AT THE SUN with the news sense to say something about the Palin speech, three days after it was delivered, was Malcolm Parry, whose lead item in his Town Talk column of Oct. 15 was a good eight-paragraph summary of the speech. He also ran a picture of a glowing Ms. Palin, flanked by the Bon Mot club founder, Leah Costello, and by one of the 180 attendees at the event, merchant banker David Rowntree.
     The Sun and The Province may have decided to shun the event, news-wise, in light of The Globe's corporate "in" with the Bon Mot club, and in light of knowledge of Ms. Palin's own aversion to and avoidance of the press.
     I am one, however, who would view such a decision as a news judgment error. In my experience, it is unusual to see a newspaper turn its back on an event just because a competitor may have a coverage advantage, especially when someone as famous, and as pivotal in U.S. politics as Sarah Palin comes into your circulation area.
     When something like that happens, you try to show your readers and your competition, and the reluctant politician, that you are on the job. You show that even though the event tried to freeze you out, you got the story anyway, including the news favoritism part. In other words, you turn the tables.

     THERE'S ANOTHER ANGLE AS WELL:  What if the famous visiting politician falls ill, or is hurt in an accident? What if she says something really newsworthy? What if, in this case, another gaffe is made? Don't you as a newspaper want to be in the forefront of covering such things when they happen in your own territory? These would be the kind of stories that gain worldwide notice. The questions, I think, answer themselves.
     Now back to a review of that speech. And because The Globe seems to have accepted the role of official news outlet for the event, I feel free to quote liberally from its reports, thank you.
     The Globe report on the 14th, the one I found online, said Ms. Palin did deliver an American campaign-style speech. In it, said the paper, Ms. Palin spent most of the evening denouncing what she called the free-spending ways of the Obama administration. The paper's reporter, the very well-experienced Gary Mason, also quoted her as saying President Obama's current platform represented the "failed policies of a leftist politician."
     What the U.S. government needed, she suggested, was a lot of budget slashing--and she would cut personal and corporate taxes at the same time. She spoke highly of the corporation-supportive policies of the late Ronald Reagan when he was in power, saying she'd do the same as he did; she'd let job-creation be the duty of business, which she held was better at it than government.
     In a feature-ish type of followup story two days after the event, Mason gave a generally favorable review of Ms. Palin's appearance, declaring her to be more politically savvy and mature, showing none of the inclination to stumble and lack of preparedness she had displayed in her days of national political baptism.
     Over all, said Mason, "Ms. Palin's speaking skills have greatly improved. In an hour on the stage there wasn't one 'you betcha.' She seemed like someone preparing for another campaign, one that will be waged on her terms this time." Meaning, not on McCain's terms.

     PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT at all about her determination to go for the big nomination. It only remains for her to announce it. That likely will come some time after the Tea Party and other Republicans show significant gains on Nov. 2. As I suggested earlier, she'll ride those gains to more and more book promotions, more and more speaking contracts, and more and more extensive politicking.
     Right now, my own view is that she probably will not get that presidential nomination. In the end, the real Republican conservatives won't have her.
     But Ms. Palin is likely to remain a force in the Republican party--and might even be a candidate for a cabinet post in any future Republican administration. Yes, I'd say that, barring some major unforeseen development (such as a big Tea Party setback in the Nov. 2  U.S. elections), Sarah Palin will be around for quite a long time.