Glenn Beck, the conservative/libertarian radio host and media entrepreneur, said Wednesday that he is officially done with the Republican Party.

"I’ve made my decision – I’m out. I’m out of the Republican Party," Beck said on his radio show. "I am not a Republican; I will not give a dime to the Republican Party. I’m out. I highly recommend – run from the Republican Party. They are not good."

Beck's apparent frustration lies with the GOP's inability to defeat President Obama's actions on healthcare and immigration, as well as the establishment wing's opposition to insurgent Senators like Mike Lee and Ted Cruz.

"They ran and they said they were doing all of these great things and they were going to stand against Obamacare and illegal immigration – they set us up," Beck said. "They set us up. Enough is enough. They’re torpedoing the constitution and they’re doing it knowingly. They’re taking on people like Mike Lee and Ted Cruz and they are torpedoing them. Knowingly."

"So I’m done with them," Beck continued. "Four years ago I was with them. Four years ago I said work from the inside: let’s change it. Let’s get new guys in there. It’s too late.”

Beck, who achieved national fame and notoriety as a Fox News host, wields a significant amount of influence among conservatives and libertarians. He launched his own news site TheBlaze, which includes television, radio and digital platforms, in 2011.

Source

Bill Clinton blasts Mitt Romney over proposed tax cut lies

8:55AM EDT October 16. 2012 - Bill Clinton is going to bat again for President Obama, cutting a video blasting Mitt Romney over his proposed tax cut.

Clinton says Romney's tax cut proposal adds up to $5 trillion, and can only add to the national debt unless they are accompanied by massive budget cuts or the elimination of tax deductions that benefit the middle class.

The tax cut issue is very likely to surface in tonight's second Obama-Romney debate.

"In the first debate," Clinton says in the video, "Governor Romney said that he wasn't really going to cut taxes on upper income people -- he only wanted to cut taxes for middle class people. That's not true."

In a statement accompanying the video, the Obama campaign says: "President Clinton explains Mitt Romney's $5 trillion tax cut and how middle class families with children will get an average tax increase of $2,000 to pay for $250,000 in tax cuts for multi -millionaires."

Romney says his proposed tax cut will not add up to $5 trillion because it will be offset by eliminating tax deductions and loopholes. He also notes that Obama wants to raise taxes by eliminating George W. Bush-era tax rates for Americans making more than $250,000 a year.

Responding to the Clinton video, Romney spokesperson Amanda Henneberg said:

"They are trying to hide the fact that President Obama is the only candidate running on a plan to increase taxes. In tonight's debate, the choice on taxes will be clear. President Obama wants to raise taxes on small businesses and job creators, which will make our recovery even more difficult. Mitt Romney will lower tax rates across the board, make our businesses more competitive, and bring a real recovery to the American people."

The Source

Bill Kills - Clinton Brilliant At Convention GOP Cries!

Clinton summarizes the GOP platform as:

"We left him a total mess, but he hasn't cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in."
and..."Their campaign pollster said, 'We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,'" Clinton said. 

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -– Bill Clinton made the nation a big promise Wednesday night, pledging to those still struggling that their economic fortunes will turn around if they reelect President Barack Obama.

“A lot of Americans are still angry and frustrated about this economy," Clinton told a spellbound audience of delegates at Time Warner Cable Arena. "If you look at the numbers, you know that employment is growing, banks are beginning to lend again, and a lot of housing prices are even beginning to pick up.

“But too many people do not feel it yet,” he said, and then vowed: “If will you renew the president's contract, you will feel it. You will feel it.”

He paused, and then added, “Folks, whether the American people believe what I just told you or not may be the whole election. I just want you to know I believe it. With all my heart I believe it.”

The rest of Clinton’s nearly hour-long speech was a detailed litigation of the main charges that Republicans have made against Obama.

But those few sentences -- an acknowledgment that the nation is still stuck in an economic slump, a promise that a second Obama term will bring better times, and a quick, sly slip into analyst mode -- were the key moments of the speech.

It was an honest, forthright appeal to the voters who will, by all accounts, decide the election -- those who voted for Obama in 2008, but who have found themselves disappointed, wanting to believe in the president they supported four years ago, but not sure they will. Strikingly, Clinton's line about the possibility that Americans may not put their faith in the president was not in his prepared remarks.

Clinton only mentioned Republican Mitt Romney a handful times, but laid out a framework that he said defines this election. “If you want a winner-take-all, you’re-on-your-own society, you should support the Republican ticket,” Clinton said. “But if you want a country of shared opportunities and shared responsibility -– a we're-all-in-this-together society -- you should vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.”

Clinton, whose mastery of the stage left him several possible ways to attack Romney, notably did not skewer the Republican's record at Bain Capital, or his other weaknesses, instead focusing his argument in general against the GOP philosophy. (Clinton worked a stint for the consulting and private equity firm Teneo Capital. Co-founder Doug Band is a close Clinton adviser. Clinton listed his income from Teneo on a recent disclosure form as greater than $1,000, though it gives no upper limit.)

Holding fire on Bain left the speech absent a zinger to sum up Romney. Instead, Clinton saved the zinger for tax cuts for the rich, warning that Romney will "double down on trickle-down."

He paraphrased Ronald Reagan: "As another president once said, 'There they go again."

In reframing last week's GOP message, he employed equal parts mockery, wonkery and plainspeak.

In short, he said, the Republicans came to Tampa to deliver a simple message about Obama: "We left him a total mess, but he hasn't cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in."

Clinton hit Paul Ryan in the same style. The GOP vice presidential candidate had attacked Obama for cutting $716 billion from Medicare, when his own budget proposal included those same cuts.

"You gotta give him one thing. It takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did," Clinton said.

He also slashed at Romney's charge that the president had undermined the work requirement in welfare reform. "Their campaign pollster said, 'We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,'" Clinton said. "Now, finally I can say that is true. I couldn't have said it better myself –- I just hope you remember that every time you see those ads."

Beyond making the broad case for Obama’s reelection, Clinton's job Wednesday night was to make Democrats forget the terrible afternoon they had just endured.

After party leaders, and eventually the president himself, decided it had been a bad idea to omit from their party platform any mention of God as well as an assertion of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, they attempted to change it quickly in a late afternoon voice vote on the convention floor.

Embarrassingly, convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa, the mayor of Los Angeles, had to ask for three voice votes, and each time the nays got louder. He eventually ruled that there was two-thirds support for the changes, despite the clear lack of such a majority.

The snafu led to a series of embarrassing TV interviews for Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who told CNN there was “no discord” during the vote, only to have Anderson Cooper mock her comments as belonging to “an alternate universe.”

Organizers also decided to move the final day of the three-day convention indoors, rather than having Obama accept his party's nomination at the 65,000-seat Bank of America outdoor football stadium. The threat of rain forced the decision, but it was another disappointment for a convention that at one point was envisioned as four-day event in four different cities, and has been beleaguered by fundraising woes and now downsized to a three-day event in the same arena.

For Clinton and for the assembled Democrats, it was a chance to relive his glory days. Clinton showed little interest in letting the moment end. And with the balloon drop canceled, there was some question whether Clinton could ever be urged off the stage.

Obama joined him onstage for a brief moment after Clinton finished speaking, causing the crowd to erupt. Clinton bowed to the current president as Obama walked out, the two men embraced, waved to the crowd, and then walked toward backstage.

But Clinton shook hands with nearly every person in sight on his way out, disappearing into the backstage tunnel once only to reemerge for one last final hug and handshake with one of his many friends. Finally, Obama simply walked through the curtain without him, and Clinton followed a few seconds later.

The Source

Mitt Romney names Paul Ryan as running mate

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney introduced Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin as his vice presidential running mate on Saturday, turning to the architect of a deeply conservative and intensely controversial long-term budget plan to remake Medicare and cut trillions in federal spending.

In the campaign to come, Republicans will present economic solutions “that are bold, specific and achievable,” Mr. Romney said as he presented his political partner to cheering supporters. “We offer our commitment to create 12 million new jobs and bring better take home pay to middle class families.”...

(And this key point)   Mr. Ryan and other supporters say the change is needed to prevent the program from financial calamity. Critics argue it would impose ever-increasing costs on seniors.

Other elements of the budget plan would cut projected spending for Medicaid, which provides health care for the poor, as well as food stamps, student loans and other social programs that Mr. Obama and Democrats have pledged to defend.

In all, it projected spending cuts of $5.3-trillion over a decade, and cut future projected deficits substantially.

Source

Romney May Have Paid No Federal Income Tax From 1999 to 2001

Bloomberg Business News and the Washington Post

are guessing that Romney may have paid near zero federal taxes in 2009 due to losses on his investments resulting from the financial crisis. They probably have the right idea, just the wrong year.

It is true that Romney suffered capital losses on his investments in 2009 that might act to shield much of his income in that year from taxes, but he would have to be a complete idiot to allow his tax planners to file a return showing no income taxes paid just as he was gearing up for a presidential run. But, then again, we are talking about someone who waited until 2010 to close his wife's Swiss bank account.

Much more likely to this writer is that Romney probably does have one or more years in his recent history where he paid near zero taxes, but the year in question is probably not 2009. Much more likely candidates are the tax years 1999 to 2001 when he supposedly left his high paying job at Bain and accepted a smaller $275,000 salary to head the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. It is reported that once the Olympics showed a profit, Romney ended up donating his salary to charities, thus further lowering his reported income for tax purposes.

His lower salary and loss of some board member compensation would mean less current income to shelter from 1999 to 2001. But, his tax shelters would have lost none of their potency. He was already utilizing IRAs and 401(k)s to shelter much of his investment income, possibly worth as much as $100 million today, from taxes. He was already making use of numerous off-shore tax havens in the Cayman Islands and other foreign locations and admits to having had a Swiss bank account in his wife's name. He admits that he had a trust established for his children to shelter as much as $100 million more of his wealth from taxation. And much of his income came from Bain Capital private equity investment funds located offshore so much of their profits could be deferred for ten years or limited to a maximum tax rate of 15 percent, a special tax provision only available to private equity and hedge fund managers.

Also, the leveraged buyout business took a big hit in 1999 and 2000 as the country entered a recession so he likely had significant capital losses to deduct. This was followed in 2001 by the dotcom collapse. As a large wealthy investor it is likely he was being put into numerous IPO's available only to the well-connected and many of these high-tech investments most likely soured in 2001 leading to further tax deductible capital losses.

Some may argue that someone who donates his salary to charity or has investment losses deserves to pay no taxes. But, they are missing the point. Romney's vast personal fortune of between $100 million and $200 million at the time was accreting at some 20 percent per year so how should he able to avoid paying taxes on the $20 to $40 million of dividends and interest income and profits and capital gains he must have been receiving on his investments? Donating a $275,000 salary to charity is chump change compared with avoiding taxation on tens of millions of profits each year.

Of course, some will argue that this is all just speculation. What else are concerned citizens to do when a candidate for president, running on a platform of being business smart and the man to fix the economy, refuses to tell us how he made his money and whether he paid his fair share of taxes along the way?

Some may argue that this is all legal. That our laws allow for the wealthiest to accumulate $400 million plus fortunes and pay little to no taxes. But, that is exactly the point. Who do you think is writing our tax laws? It is the wealthiest of our country that are lobbying our government for tax breaks and making large campaign contributions to elected officials to ensure these tax breaks not only continue, but are amplified and extended. And who is their boy, Mitt Romney.

John R. Talbott is a best-selling author and economic consultant to families whose books predicted the housing crash and the economic crisis. 

David Frum...shines a light on republicans The Party Of No

Recently, Tablet magazine ran a profile of me by Michelle Goldberg that remarked, "These days the former Bush speechwriter sounds more and more like a Democrat."

Michelle had in mind items like this blogpost, in which I enumerate the ways the GOP is wrong about the present economic crisis.

That latter post prompted a rejoinder from Scott Galupo at US News. Galupo's comment is especially noteworthy since he's a former staffer to Speaker John Boehner and a writer for the Washington Times. Galupo says of my "GOP is wrong" list:

"This is, to put it mildly, an exhaustive and damning litany. But the actual point of Frum's blog post was that former Gov. Mitt Romney kinda-maybe-sorta doesn't agree with this consensus, and therefore offers the best hope (but only a "slender" hope!) that the Republican candidate will be on the right side of the 'most urgent economic issue of the day...'

"I have to ask: Dude, why are you over there? You just more or less said you're going to vote for the guy who might agree with you and not for the guy who definitely does.

"As someone who's working through these issues myself, I'm being sincere here; I'm not playing 'gotcha.' This seems like an awfully risky bet.

"David: What's the dealbreaker for you?"

Galupo's question is one I hear a lot, both from puzzled Democrats and from annoyed Republicans.

My answer begins on this basis:

Yes I am dismayed that my party is wrong on the most urgent issue of the day. But in addition to what is most urgent, I am guided by concerns that if less immediate remain very important -- and on which I trust the GOP more than I trust the party of Barack Obama.

The Republicans are the party of American nationalism. We live in a world in which powerful economic, demographic and cultural forces are breaking down the concept of the nation altogether. But if nations don't matter, why should rich Americans care about the distress of poorer Americans -- who, after all, remain inconceivably wealthy by the standards of poor Africans? The flag-and-country themes of the GOP can be kitschy. They also are the indispensable basis of any idea of social cohesion across the vast continent.
Republican policies of lower taxes, less regulation, and restrained social spending may be poor medicine for the immediate crisis. But they remain the best formula to support the longer-term growth of the economy -- way better than the Democratic preference for high taxes and opportunistic economic interventions. The difference between the U.S. growing at an average of two per cent vs. three per cent over the next decades will determine not only the life-chances of the next generation of Americans, but the power balance of the planet between the U.S. and China.
Like the late Herb Stein, my preferred approach to federal budgeting starts with national defence. Defence and national security are the supreme priority of the state. Only after fully funding defence can you then worry about the appropriate level of spending for everything else, and the appropriate level and form of taxation to pay for that spending.
I intensely oppose any aid or subsidy to particular companies or firms except in cases of the most extreme national necessity, e.g. TARP. Solyndra is only the latest example of the zeal of Democratic administrations dating back to Jimmy Carter's to solve America's energy problems by inserting government into the business of "picking winners." Now as in 1977, I say no, no, no.
The omnipresent system of racial preferences built since the late 1960s in hope of compensating for the effects of slavery and segregation is not only a moral inequity, but also a practical disaster. The gap in wealth between white and black families -- 10 times greater than the gap in income -- has widened under affirmative action. As the Pew Foundation's research shockingly demonstrates, the children of the black middle-class experience frightening downward mobility, discrediting the most basic assumption on which the racial preference system has been built. And this system is one of the most basic political commitments of the modern Democratic party.
I remember that from Teddy Roosevelt and the national parks to George HW Bush and acid rain, real progress on the environment almost always comes under Republican presidents.
Public sector unions rank as one of the most important obstacles to the improvement of public services from education to transit. And the Democrats are the party of the public-sector unions.
Democrats were wrong on crime from the 1970s through the 1990s, and I'm still mad about it.
I believe that the elected prime minister of Israel is a better judge of Israel's national security than the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs. Democratic administrations typically seem guided by the opposite theory.
I admire business people, and the GOP is the party more sympathetic to business concerns and challenges.
Modern democracies generate a choice between one party offering more public services and higher taxes and another offering fewer services and lower taxes. Under the pressure of the current crisis -- intoxicated by anti-Obama feelings and incited by talk radio and Fox -- Republicans have staked out an extreme position on the role of government. They are expressing opinions they have never acted on in office and won't act on if returned to office. They're talking to relieve their feelings, always a big mistake. I remain convinced that the Tea Party moment is a passing infatuation, a rhetorical over-indulgence, that will fade as soon as Republicans re-encounter the responsibilities of governing -- just as the Democrats' over-heated MoveOn.org type rhetoric about the war on terror was quietly retired by President Obama in favor of continuing most of the anti-terrorism policies of the Bush years. In a more normal kind of contest between the party of less (not zero) government and the party of more and bigger government, I'm with the party of less government. Especially because I feel confident that as the passions of the current crisis fade, Republicans will return to the kinds of ideas we've been advocating at my website, FrumForum.
For three years, my political party has veered in a direction I cannot follow. And if the GOP insists on framing the 2012 election as a ballot question on fiscal and monetary austerity, or if they nominate somebody manifestly incompetent to do the job of president, they're going to lose me -- and a lot more people beside me.

But I don't believe they will do either of those things. I believe that as the election draws closer, the GOP will recover its bearings and its good sense.

Those of us who publish at FrumForum have taken a stance -- not against the Republican party, but in favor of what we regard as the party's true nature, best traditions, and highest ideals. We remain confident that the party will rediscover those ideals, and as it does so, we'll be here, waiting.


GOP jostling : Prime time : SunNews Video Gallery

Trump challenges Obama to produce birth certificate...

Trump

Donald Trump is potentially going to run for the Republican Nomination for President. Yep. Donald Trump. Host of the American version of “The Apprentice.” That’s the equivalent of Alan Sugar going for Prime Minister.

I can see no reason why he wouldn’t be a great President. I mean he recently bankrupted his own casino company. A casino. His own casino. Only a very special person could do that.

He also gets on with the common man. Recently saying in an interview:

“You know the funny thing, I don’t get along with rich people. I get along with the middle class and the poor people better than I get along with the rich people,”

He probably makes these friendships with comments like: (From the same interview) “Part of the beauty of me is that I’m very rich.”

Word of advice Trumpy. Don’t call them poor to their face and don’t bang on about how rich you are. They tend not to like that, the poor. Apart from that I’m sure you get on great.

Extra Trump

One more thing on DT. Donald the Trump has been doing interviews all over lately. My personal favourite was this one which included the opening gambit of:

“I mean this is very serious, I always take things seriously but, I’ve never taken it seriously like this, this is a very serious time in my life.”

Sound serious.

"The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists – the Taliban and Hamas this morning – in criticizing the president for receiving the Nobel Peace Prize," wrote DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse.

Is the Nobel a 'down payment'?

October 10, 2009

Mitch Potter

U.S. President Barack Obama talks on the phone in the Oval Office in Washington, Friday, Oct. 9, 2009, before speaking about winning the Nobel Peace Prize in the Rose Garden.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON–Apologies if you can't hear this. It is a bit noisy down here, what with the gales of unpleasant laughter drowning out Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize.

This White House must just hate Friday mornings. Last week, a big decision in Europe unexpectedly stripped Chicago of its Olympic dreams, exposing a red-faced Team Obama to a braying backlash.

And now, one Friday later, a big decision in Europe places the Nobel unexpectedly in the U.S. president's hands, exposing him to another fevered wave of domestic derision. Mocked for losing, mocked for winning – such is the incredible lightness of being Barack Obama, nine months along.

Don't get me wrong: As one who spent most of the Bush years boomeranging between Jerusalem, Baghdad, Kandahar and London, I can appreciate better than most the global motivations behind what amounts to the He's Not George Prize.

But as a resident of Washington today, I can't help but wonder whether a well-intentioned world realizes just how badly the domestic American worm is turning against this president.

And how unhelpful this latest global hug may prove, coming not simply prematurely but also from Europe, where this hopeful new era is not about to translate into so much as a smidgen of help for Obama where he needs it most – Afghanistan.

Obama's true believers will love this bauble. But it is everyone else the White House now is worried about, from those crucial swing voters waiting for the president to turn up his doing dial and make reality of lofty rhetoric, to the ferociously conservative noise machine determined to brand the president's every move an act of anti-Americanism.

Those are the votes that will count come next year's midterm elections, which will amount to a de facto referendum on Obama rule. And Europe, and the rest of us, will have no say.

Obama did about the only thing he could yesterday, downplaying the Nobel with I'm-not-worthy aplomb, pledging the $1.4 million windfall to charity.

"To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honoured by this prize,'' Obama said.

"But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women and all Americans want to build, a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honour specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.

"And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action."

The Norwegian Nobel Committee stunned the world, including the White House, by awarding Obama the peace prize, citing global optimism fostered by his calls for peace and cooperation.

The committee also praised Obama's pledges to reduce the world's cache of nuclear arms, ease American conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen the U.S. role in combating climate change.

The selection sparked a furious political debate.

Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh said the world elites were urging Obama, "to not do the surge in Afghanistan, not take action against Iran and its nuclear program and to basically continue his intentions to emasculate the United States ... They love a weakened, neutered U.S. and this is their way of promoting that concept," he told Politico via email.

The Democratic National Committee responded by saying the Republicans would "put politics above patriotism at every turn."

"The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists – the Taliban and Hamas this morning – in criticizing the president for receiving the Nobel Peace Prize," wrote DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse.

Some Washington analysts interpreted the Nobel as a "down payment" on great expectations. But it will also serve to elevate expectations the White House has been working hard to manage downward, given the paucity of results.

From Afghanistan, where the administration's most pressing foreign crisis festers with a series of grim options likely to involve more, not fewer, soldiers, to Jerusalem, where Obama's lead envoy ended his ninth attempt at shuttle-diplomacy Friday empty-handed.

Closer to home, Obama's vow to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay by January appears now to be wishful thinking.

Only on the question of Iran's nuclear ambitions is Team Obama's determined bid for broader engagement with international allies showing early results. But rapprochement remains fragile and the hardest work is still to come.

Non-Americans wedded to the Obama doctrine of soft power might want to withhold applause for their Nobel cause, mindful that what plays so well in Oslo or Toronto or beyond is a much harder sell stateside. Think of this Nobel as a massive Wall Street bonus for a performance still to come.

---

'IT'S EXTREMELY WELL DESERVED'

"Some people say, and I understand it, isn't it premature? Too early? Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now. It is now that we have the opportunity to respond – all of us."
–Thorbjoern Jagland, Nobel committee chairman

"The real question Americans are asking is, 'What has President Obama actually accomplished?' It is unfortunate the president's star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights."
– Michael Steele, Republican National Committee chairman

"I think it's extremely well deserved ... I think it will take some time before people put together all the different moves that linked his speech at the UN on the abolishing of nuclear weapons, his shift on the missile defence program in Eastern Europe ... to joining the international consensus that confronted Iran to abide by the non-proliferation treaty."
– Former U.S. vice-president Al Gore (above) and 2007 Nobel winner

"Such a prize augments his capacity and reputation around the world, and that will help us accomplish things for all of humanity."
– Prime Minister Stephen Harper

"Amazingly enough, the Pulitzer Prize for Literature went to Sarah Palin for her stated intention 'to read a book someday.' "
– Richard Cohen, Washington Post

Palin Blasts Away at OBama + The Wednesday Scope

Leo (July 23 — Aug. 22)

Your energy is being drained by some development you did not ask for. It will be easier to capitulate than to fight, so follow the flow and let things take their natural course.

Palin blasts away at Obama TheStar.com - World - Palin blasts away at Obama

September 03, 2008

TIM HARPER
WASHINGTON BUREAU

ST. PAUL, Minn.–Sarah Palin, the unknown Alaska governor suddenly thrust into the national spotlight, took direct aim at her Democratic opponent and media critics last night in one of the most-anticipated political speeches in recent U.S. history.

After four days of silence, while the Republican vice-presidential candidate was buffeted by a string of revelations on issues both personal and political, the 44-year-old Palin launched a wave of feisty attacks at Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

In a coming out speech interrupted time and again by cheering, placard-waving Republican delegates here, Palin mixed ridicule and venom in portraying Obama as an elitist who has accomplished nothing and is more interested in promoting himself than his country.

She presented her own, sanitized resume, telling the country she had risen from self-described hockey mom, to PTA member, to small town mayor to state governor.

"I guess a small town mayor is sort of like a community organizer,'' she said in a reference to Obama's early experience in Chicago, "except that you have actual responsibilities."

She also painted herself as the consummate Washington outsider, prepared to do battle with the national media.

"Here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators," she said.

"I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country."

Last night's speech had been billed as one of the most pivotal addresses to a U.S. political convention in modern times, generating unprecedented interest in a vice-presidential nominee.

U.S. broadcast networks expected a huge audience, perhaps a record viewership for a vice-presidential acceptance speech, part of the audience built simply because of the drip, drip, drip of detail – salacious, sensational and surprising – about a working mother of five with family troubles that mirror those of many Americans.

Palin is only the second female vice-presidential nominee in U.S. history, a risky choice with scant experience, whose appeal will rest on her reputation as a reformer who is the antithesis of the slick politician.

Much of the coverage of the first three days of this Republican convention focused on Palin's revelation that her 17-year-old daughter Bristol is five months pregnant.

As the nominee spoke, Bristol Palin sat in the VIP box, holding hands with her boyfriend, 18-year-old Levi Johnston.

Then the entire Palin family joined her on stage after her speech — Palin holding her newborn Trig, who has Down syndrome — followed by presumptive nominee John McCain.

"Don't you think we made the right choice for the next vice-president of the United States?'' McCain said.

Palin never referred to her daughter's pregnancy, but she said her family shares the challenges of many American families and she referred specifically to the April birth of her son.

If there was a surprise in last night's speech, it was the intensity in which she went after Obama.

She fired away at his comment about small town Americans who bitterly cling to their religion and guns, adding, "we tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.''

She said Obama had authored two memoirs, but not a single major law, and accused him of waging a vanity campaign.

"In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers,'' she said.

"And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.

"They're the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals.''

As supporters waved signs reading "Palin Power'' and "Hockey Moms for Palin,'' the first-term governor even adlibbed a joke.

"What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull?'' she asked.

""Lipstick.''

The Obama campaign immediately responded, saying the Palin speech, penned by a former George W. Bush speechwriter, consisted of "the same divisive, partisan attacks we've heard from George Bush for the last eight years.''

As many as 20,000 were on hand to hear her speech here - more than double the size of the largest venue in Alaska.

She had been cloistered in a room at a downtown Minneapolis hotel since Sunday night, working with McCain staff on her speech, being schooled on the nuances of McCain foreign policy, being briefed on national politics – and keeping her head down.

Not even a conservative pro-life organization, expecting her in person at a previously-scheduled appearance Tuesday, was allowed to give her a porcelain baby as her award for her anti-abortion leadership.

Her speech was written by former Bush speechwriter Matthew Scully.

The two first met in Ohio the night before McCain's announced her as his running mate pick, and he had initially been working on a speech for a male vice-presidential candidate.

She had run through her speech repeatedly in front of at least three senior McCain strategists and a former Bush adviser, Tucker Eskew, has agreed to act as Palin's "counsellor."

Palin is also on the cover of two of the most widely read U.S. magazines this week, winning a favourable piece in People, which was given access to her, warranting a slap in US Weekly, which was not given access.

In the hours before the speech, the McCain campaign started a massive pushback against the coverage of Palin, accusing the media of sexism and smears, releasing a television ad and talking points saying Palin, who has been Alaska governor for less than two years, has more executive experience than Obama.

Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO and senior McCain spokesperson, said she been told by many Democrats that they were disappointed in the sexism aimed at Hillary Clinton during her presidential run.

"The Republican party will not stand by while Sarah Palin is subjected to sexist attacks," Fiorina said.

"Hillary Clinton's run highly tuned women's ears to offensive and sexist attacks."

Rosario Marin, a former U.S. treasurer, who, like Palin, had given birth to a Down syndrome baby, said she was "absolutely outraged'' at commentary questioning whether the Alaska governor should be campaigning with an infant at home.

"No one has ever questioned why Barack Obama is running for president when he has two young children at home," Marin said.

"To the media, the bloggers and the other side, shame on them, shame on all of them."

Shortly after the press conference, the McCain campaign unveiled a new button in the Xcel Centre, touting Palin, "The Hottest VP."

The McCain campaign also said the controversy over its vetting of Palin was a media creation.

"This vetting controversy is a faux media scandal designed to destroy the first female Republican nominee for vice-president of the United States who has never been a part of the old boys' network that has come to dominate the news establishment in this country," said McCain senior adviser Steve Schmidt.