My only comment: Disgusting.

Is that gross, or net after Palin's speaking fee and expenses?

Oops, should have read more carefully.

Mr. Disembedded (1), I don't find it disgusting at all. She brought them some of "the gold of the early sourdough's dream", as it were, and most people seem to have had a good time.

One of the ways politicians with name recognition line their pockets once out of office is to "go on tour" to rake in typically very large speaker fees. Give Ms. Palin credit. She certainly understood her potential in that regard, and that as Governor of Alaska interest in hearing her might well fade away (think Geraldine Ferraro). So despite an admittedly very thin political resume, she resigned as Governor (after a scant 2-1/2 years in office), evidently hoping to profit from the perks of being a speaker of interest. Since Cal State Stanislaus in fact netted $200K, it would appear Ms. Palin read the tea leaves correctly.

U suspect that if the event had lost money then the university would have again referred all questions to the foundation and the foundation would have declined to give the information.

I don't fault Palin for the speaking fee, although it does seem a bit excessive; nor do I fault the University for engaging her and raising 200K; but I do fault the University for not revealing the fee when asked. It's a public University - don't they have sunshine laws in California?

Is the problem some are having with this that it is Palin raising the funds or that a university raised the funds? (Duh) Would you be so upset if it were Clinton (either one) doing the fund raiser? Or any Democrat? Is it that so many people paid the money to hear her speak??

And if her political savvy helped a university foundation raise $200,000 in these economic times, what is the beef????

The problem I have with it is that Ms. Palin doesn't believe in public education. She doesn't think government or taxpayers in general should support it. But she is happy to take money from a public university. She also is famously uneducated on history, geography, science, current affairs, etc. She doesn't think a citizen or a political leader needs to know anything beyond the Bible. I don't begrudge Stanislaus their funds, even though they had to hire an opportunist and flat-earther to raise them. But what message does this send to our youth?

Good work, Gov. Palin! Good job, CSU administrators!

(If I were anything different from a self-righteous liberal professorial pseudointellectual with no appreciation for free enterprise and individualism, I would say just that.)

@ddwills

Gov. Palin is a graduate of the University of Idaho, and attended a number public institutions as an undergraduate (Hawaii-Hilo, Northern Idaho CC, and Idaho, in addition to Hawaii Pacific (Private) and Matinuska Susitna CC).

It's unfair to call her uneducated, although I suspect that continuity has to be tricky with 5 transfers. I'd also suggest that her years after college might not have been spent in study.

The thing that is most disturbing about this story is that so many people are interested in what she has to say. And, demery 1, having a college degree does not mean that you have an educated outlook. But, my antipathy to all that Palin stands for aside, it's nice that she finally contributed to higher education in some manner; she sure didn't do much as governor!

Interesting that, when I spell checked the previous message, spell-check tried to change the word "Palin" to "plain" - quite frankly I have to agree with spell-checks take on her.

There was one state senator, one Attorney General, and a few dumpster diving students with way too much unoccupied time. I wonder if Palin was ever caught cheating on an exam as was one deceased liberal lion.

I'm no fan of Sarah Palin, but she's a big draw, and you can't really begrudge the school for figuring they could make money on the deal. I doubt they would have raised $200K with Michael Palin.

Sara's fee was on the order of $100,000 according to insiders. So the event had to take in $300,000. The ticket price was $500 per person. So they had to sell 600 tickets. Is that believable?

Aside from that, the murderous felon Angela Davis spoke at UC Davis, and the campus didn't even make any money. And there were no objections to speak of. But then, Angela wasn't pretending to be qualified for the presidency, so I guess that's sort of fair.

So here we have a so-called university celebrating its 50th anniversary by inviting the most prominent anti-intellectual in America. What does that tell prospective future donors about the institution?
I can thank my lucky stars that, way back in 1968, I turned down an offer of a faculty position at Stanislaus.

The term "read the tea leaves" may be appropriate.

Many of the comments and reactions brought about all point to a tempest in a teapot.

The number given is 200k however how much will be applied to the fund? After other deductions and other purchases it is less.

The question is: how will the $200,000 be spent? On scholarships? I doubt it.

And if Hugo Chavez were invited to speak, half of these posters would be salivating to attend. I've got a little tidbit for you self-appointed (and self-important) "intellectuals" who hold such disdain for the average American's intellect: Americans see right through you. They know exactly what you stand for; they're not impressed, and they're not buying. That's why so many of you are employed in academia, and not in the private sector. Sorry.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson (I omitted the Rev. from both men because they both do not have divinity degrees) commanded much more from universities (like first-class accommodations, special drinking bottles, as many other demands....)

Chavez is quite the political operator. He got the USDA's program for farming automation killed because of the success of mechanical grape harvesting. If not for Chavez, farms today would be harvested mechanically for almost everything - including table grapes. So this academic would only attend to protest and expose him for what he is.

#23 ellenhunt:
"Chavez is quite the political operator. He got the USDA's program for farming automation killed because of the success of mechanical grape harvesting."

Could you possibly be refering to farm worker and labor leader Cesar Chavez who passed away in 1993? Hugo Chavez referenced in post #21 is the current (and living) president of Venezuela.

As someone whose politics couldn't differ more from Sarah Palin's, I have to say that I basically agree with crunchycon (#8). Would this have caused as great a hullaballoo had it been Bill Clinton giving the talk, demanding a big fee but raising $200K for the university? It's an important question to ask.

Please bear with me a moment while I seem to head in another direction, but one that I think is directly on point. Those of us who are desperately worried about global warming are dismayed that there seem to be legions of folks who ignore the science and want to line up against the evidence because they don't much like the politics of one of the major advocates for addressing global warming: Al Gore.

Sarah Palin's giving a talk at CSU-Stanislaus is not in the same league as global warming (really, it isn't), but I worry that the same phenomenon is at work: The CSU schools are in desperate financial trouble, and one of them has found a way to raise $200K by inviting a candidate for vice president from the last election to speak and collecting bucketsful of money from people willing to pay to hear her, and we'd rather CSU not address their problem because there is someone involved in the solution whose politics we don't like?