All around, Obama’s negative influence is so severe that even gazillionaire Oprah Winfrey has not been immune to the “Obama Effect,” where people who were working in 2008 are either no longer employed or are concerned about what effect his continued presidency may have on job security.

Since Obama won the Democrat presidential nomination in June 2008, the employment rate has soared from 5.8% to as high as 9.8%. The President’s policies are so toxic to the workforce that a 31-year-old Ohio breakfast restaurant he touted as an “indirect beneficiary of the government’s Chrysler bailout” closed after he made a passing mention of the establishment’s success in a speech.  One word from Obama and Chet’s omelet machine began collecting dust.

When Oprah Winfrey made her famous career-changing decision to support the Senator from Chicago, the talk show queen had already enjoyed 20+ years of pre-eminent ratings.  Apparently, Winfrey had so much faith in fellow Trinity United Church of Christ ex-congregant Barack Obama that she referred to him in Biblical terms and for the first time ever was willing to “throw her brand behind – a political candidate.”

If ratings equal job security, then Winfrey too has fallen victim to job-related issues, albeit on a much grander scale than the rest of America. Although it might be conjecture, after Ms. Winfrey stuck her $500 red-soled Christian Louboutins into the political waters it does appear that her talk show ratings began plummeting.

Unlike millions of Americans, billionaire Oprah may still be employed, but there’s no denying that since endorsing Obama she is less popular than she was in the past, and probably should have just stuck with Dr. Phil.

After breathless “He is the one” preacher-like speeches, Oprah’s “favorable ratings fell from 74 to 66 percent” and “her unfavorable ratings jumped from 17 to 26 percent.” In 2008 Oprah was so caught up in Obama fever and so busy “crying her eyelashes off” at packed rallies she didn’t realize her political activism was offending some of her viewers.   From day one of the endorsement, Winfrey’s daytime audience began dwindling. From nearly “9 million at its height in 2004-05,” by 2010 just prior to her finale, Oprah’s viewership had fallen to just four million.

In tandem with a struggling job market and mirroring Obama’s freefall in the polls, two months into Oprah’s newest endeavor with the Discovery Channel, the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN), the millions of screaming fans “who usually snap up anything she blesses with her seal of approval” are now choosing Ellen DeGeneres as their new BFF and watching Judge Judy instead.

Moreover, as the President continues to lose support even amongst disenchanted liberal females, Oprah’s OWN channel audience of “135,000 consists of only about 45,000 women” in the 25-to-54 age group, which is problematic because that is precisely the demographic the channel is targeting.

There’s no denying that for some reason, Oprah Winfrey’s amazing success has taken a downturn since the President took office in 2009.  In fact, investors are worried that “OWN is a drag on Discovery’s stock” and are questioning whether Harpo Studios’ job creator, Ms. Oprah, has “lost her golden touch.”

Perhaps the reason is that Oprah’s “golden boy” isn’t so golden after all and her audience realized it well before she did.

At some point, the media mogul may have noticed the correlation between supporting the President and losing viewers and realized the last thing OWN needed was her out on the campaign trail wearing an Obama 2012 balloon hat, a fashion choice that would probably deliver yet another blow to her Discovery Channel enterprise.

With that announcement, Oprah appeared to be moving in the right direction – away from Barack Obama. Then, somewhere between April and August of this year, in a not-so-stunning turn of events, Oprah announced she’s supporting the President’s 2012 bid for reelection.

After re-evaluating her hasty decision to remain apolitical, she stepped forward on behalf of the President and said, “I supported Barack Obama in 2008 because I believed then as I do now that he is the right man for the job.”

Winfrey said, “If the campaign needs me, I’m happy to be of service. I’m in his corner for whatever he needs me to do.”

The reason for the sudden change of heart?  Either Ms. Winfrey believes OWN’s new Rosie O’Donnell Show will save the besieged channel, or her original “ear for eloquence and a tongue dipped in the unvarnished truth” endorsement so destroyed any hope for future ratings that at this point, career-wise she has nothing to lose if she endorses Obama a second time.

Either way, despite a much smaller viewing audience Oprah must have a renewed faith in her ability to resurrect the same level of fervor she generated in 2008.

Even if Obama’s reelection ushers in continued job loss for all Americans, further impacts her decades-long high approval ratings and the size of her cult-like audience, and possibly even influences the future of her shaky collaboration with the Discovery Channel, the talk show queen has clearly counted the cost.  Oprah Winfrey has decided that if it’s on behalf of Barack Obama, jumping into the political arena a second time is well worth the price.

Her resignation has been a classic example. 

First, let’s make it clear that, despite what MSNBC has implied on numerous occasions, I am NOT Governor Palin’s spokesperson, and I was not in on any official discussions about her decision to leave office (or any other of her decisions for that matter). However, I was not at all stunned by her decision. 

In fact, I had been predicting on my radio show and off (more boldly off the air because I didn’t have any direct inside knowledge and was concerned that someone “connected” to Palin making such a prediction might spark news coverage of the possibility) that something like this was going to happen. In retrospect, the only thing that should really be “shocking” about her decision is that the very same news media that’s targeted her reputation for assassination for most of the last year, was also so completely incompetent that they didn’t see the incredibly obvious signs that Palin was about to make a dramatic change in her career direction. 

My first inkling of this reality came when I screened “Media Malpractice” in Anchorage in May. There were rampant rumors there that something was up and it was obvious to me that the pressure she and her administration were under was far greater than anyone in the “lower 48″ (including someone like myself who was following events closely) could possibly comprehend. When I left Alaska I started to wonder how in the world anyone in her position could even hope to get anything done, or why, under the conditions she was facing, anyone would even bother trying. But I had come to see Sarah Palin as something of a “Superwoman” who was not bound by the limitations of mere mortal mothers of five and I figured maybe I was just being too pessimistic. 

However, when I started my new Los Angeles radio show and Palin graciously agreed to be my first guest, I did make sure to ask her point blank whether she ever considered walking away from public office because of the attacks on her family and the dastardly attempts to destroy her ability to do her job. Her response at the time startled me with its honesty (she’s the only national politician with whom I have ever had that experience). Looking back, I strongly believe her answer is important to providing the full context as to how and why she made this decision, as well as how she views her future. You can hear the remarkable interchange here: 

–

Now, I guess I can understand how the mainstream news media would miss/ignore something that happens on a conservative radio show (we all know that that “news” isn’t really “news” if it originates on conservative talk radio), but it has been truly startling that this sound bite has, to my knowledge, still not been played by even one news program even though it was made publicly available in the immediate aftermath of her resignation when the cable “news” channels were desperate for any content on this issue as well as any context for understanding what she did. In this case, I flat out blame the ineptitude rampant in today’s “news” organizations which was greatly exacerbated by the realities of a holiday weekend. 

The clip proves to me that the decision was (just as Palin said) in the works for months, which is an extremely important fact because it goes to her credibility as well as eliminating many of the bogus theories as to why she decided to step down (sudden scandal, the Vanity Fair hit piece, Letterman flap, etc.). But in case that isn’t enough proof for you, how then would you explain what happened three days later when Matt Lauer asked her on the “Today Show” about 2012? Palin very clearly said, “I don’t need a title to effect change,” a statement that slid right past Lauer and every other apparently deaf member of the news media. 

But those weren’t the only breadcrumbs Palin left in the weeks leading up to her “Independence Day.” I found it particularly amusing that when Palin said in one of her post-resignation interviews that “If I die politically, I die, so be it,” this was breathlessly reported as Palin admitting her resignation had hurt her chances of ever being President (as if she was too stupid to know that obvious reality when she made the decision). What the ignorant/lazy media hoards failed to realize is that Palin had made almost the exact same statement in a public speech in the weeks leading up to her resignation. 

In short, Palin’s resignation has been misreported and misperceived because of the horrendously biased and incomplete coverage of her over the past ten months. It’s not just that a completely phony narrative has been created by the media which makes it easy for people to think of her as stupid, incompetent, overly ambitious, diva-like, nutty and capable of massive lies (the LA Times and NY Times published rumors she faked the pregnancy of her down syndrome child!!). If possible, it is actually even worse than all of that.  

Even if they were capable of seeing through the obviously grotesquely flawed media created caricature of her, the vast majority of the public simply doesn’t have enough information to connect all the dots themselves and put her move into its proper context. (I must state here that while in a rational world this should have been taken care of by the news media, Palin and her people should have realized this was not going to be the case and made more of an effort to lay the educational foundation for the resignation to be properly interpreted.)  

For instance, how in the world can anyone fully understand why Palin took this action unless they know this is not the first time she’s done something like this? How many people are aware that in 2004 (almost exactly the same amount of time before her election as Governor as there is now before the 2012 primaries) Palin put her political career in jeopardy and resigned out of principle from a cushy government job as the chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission? My guess is very, very few. 

I’m sure most members of the news media know nothing about this basic and relevant fact from Palin’s background because I’ve done my own “poll.” Every time a media inquiry to discuss Palin’s resignation came my way I made a point of asking the reporter if they knew about this episode. So far I have yet to find even one who had a clue, and this sample includes a writer from The New York Times!!  

As maddening as this kind of incompetence is, the most insane element of the reaction to Palin’s resignation is the complete inability of the vast majority of the press — and at least some of the public — to even comprehend the possibility that she just might be telling the truth about how and why she came to this decision. 

This will evidently come as a complete shock to nearly every member of the media elite, but not everyone in public life is a manipulative and cynical liar, and not every person who has a shot at being President must live their lives to pursue that end no matter the costs to the public good, their family and their personal sanity. The Sarah Palin I know is at least one person in that position who is sufficiently well-grounded and secure enough in themselves and their values to not succumb to this illness of hyper-ambition. She is more than capable of putting something else above her own selfish, short-term political self-interest. You would think that a just society might reward that kind of person and not crucify them, but it has been long since clear that we don’t live in that kind of place.  

The bottom line is that Sarah Palin resigned simply because she was no longer allowed to do her job in a way that benefited her state and family. She saw that if she stayed on as Governor it would cost the state millions of dollars in wasted time and resources and doom it to gridlock. She knew that it would also continue to cost her family hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend against false and maliciously filed ethics complaints. And she had simply had enough of her children being fodder for inappropriate public attacks. 

That’s it. Those are the facts and I’m positive there’s nothing else. There is ABSOLUTELY no hidden scandal (or as CNN’s hack Rick Sanchez “reported,” an unplanned pregnancy) and this was NOT a poorly executed ploy to ignite a 2012 Presidential run. Sarah Palin simply came to the “remarkable” conclusion that stepping down was the right thing to do for the greater good. How sad is it that so many in media (including a whole lot of “conservatives”) can’t even begin to see this obvious reality.  

I know that whatever I say is discounted because I created a film largely about Sarah Palin, and I have made it clear that I have personal admiration for her (I guess I would be more credible if I was a liberal who didn’t know anything about her), but I have never been more confident in any public declaration I have ever made. The media-created perception of this woman is the most corruptly inaccurate I’ve ever seen, and their attacks on her and her family are the most outrageous and dangerous I’ve ever been aware of. 

Every single American, regardless of their politics, should be frightened by what’s happened to Sarah Palin. I truly believe that if they knew just how false the impression of her is they’ve been spoon fed for the sake of ratings, political agenda and, as she herself said, “blood sport,” there would be an uprising. 

There’s a lot of blame to go around for how and why this has been allowed to happen, but I want to make special mention of some my conservative media “friends” (that is just an expression, I don’t really have many friends in the media) who have once again revealed just how weak, shortsighted and willing to sell out they really are. Regardless of what you think of Sarah Palin, every single conservative who attacks her by buying into media-created falsehoods so they can curry favor with the media elite should be seen as traitors to the movement. You have been duped and used as cover for a public lynching. 

The latest to fall into this trap is CPAC’s Chairman David Keene who ripped Palin (mimicking a false claim put forward by several prominent conservative commentators) for “whining” about press coverage and declared her unfit for a Presidential run. Could someone PLEASE show me just ONE legitimate example (no one making the claim has even bothered to try) of where Palin has “whined” about something that has been said about her publicly?! Are these people saying you can’t set the record straight about lies? Are you not supposed to fight back against illegitimate attacks? Gee, that strategy worked so well for President Bush. And these are the so called leaders of the movement? No wonder we are where we are.

Along the same lines, I have been astonished that a majority of conservative media members have completely skipped over an incredibly important phase in the process of accepting that Palin is not likely to be elected President in 2012… 

Outrage. 

Are we really so numb that we jump right from shock to acceptance and even criticism of the victim without bothering to express outrage over the crime itself?!! Have conservatives really become that wussified? Can you imagine how the left/media would react if one of their stars had been taken out in such a vicious and unprecedentedly inappropriate manner??!  Michael Jackson’s funeral might have even been preempted! 

For all the left’s many flaws, you have to give them this, they play for keeps. They understand this is a war. If the apparent destruction of Sarah Palin doesn’t make conservatives wake up and realize that they’re bringing butter knives to gun fights and must start protecting their warriors, there simply won’t be anyone left standing to carry the flag. 

As for what the future holds for Sarah Palin, I honestly don’t know (and I don’t think she does either). My personal belief is, barring a catastrophe, that the only person with the potential to beat Obama in 2012 is Tiger Woods, but he’ll be doing more important things. I told Palin after my first interview with her that I hoped she held her fire until 2016 when the Messiah was no longer a factor and the media narrative would be all about her comeback. I still believe that scenario is more than viable. 

I do know that what we’ve learned about Sarah Palin over the past ten months has proven that she’s a remarkable person. It just saddens me that the real story has not been told. I wish we lived in a country where character like this was rewarded or that we even deserved a leader like her. Unfortunately, I fear we do not. 

However, I take solace in the knowledge that Sarah Palin disagrees with me on this point, and that she doesn’t need her ultimate reward to include living in the White House.