Late last night, I wrote about my personal reactions to Sarah Palin’s speech — gut feelings about her that had very little relationship to politics. She really is a very different candidate, and yes, she does change the dynamics of this election cycle.
I like her. I admire her spunk, and I think she has enormous potential.
But… before she can hope to realize that potential, she’s going to have to stop telling lies.
Even allowing for spin geared toward the target audience, her truth-stretching — about her own record, and also about Obama’s — put her in a very bad position. The bit about how she killed “The Bridge to Nowhere”, in particular, is quite a whopper, and claiming the high ground on earmarks was a real thigh-slapper. The MSM is going to eat her lunch with it.
In fact, they’ve already started:
PALIN: “I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere.”
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a “bridge to nowhere.”
High time the press remembered what it is they’re supposed to be doing. (Is that what happens when you’ve decided the press is your enemy? Too bad that’s what it takes, if so.)
One more thought: the attacks on Barack Obama were exactly in line with her role as a Vice-Presidential nominee. The common term here is “attack dog” — and she herself defined the breed. It surprises me that some people seemed to expect her to somehow be “kind and gentle”.
And an exit question: Are we still allowed to use “attack dog”, when the role’s being filled by a woman? (Does anybody but me think we’re about to hear a WHOLE lot about sexism and terminology?)
I would believe as a Governor of a state, you would try to get the tax dollars of your people put back in your state and back into the hands of the interests of those taxpayers. i believe Palin is the type of person we need in Washington. A reformer that can say enough is enough.
While I am not exactly why McCain picked Palin, from my perspective, she is the only person on any ticket that is not a Washington insider / do nothing loser. We need more like her.
And as a mother how can she do it. Just like all the movie stars and every other politician does it. With help from family and a nanny. Has anyone asked if Obama would add to the father not involved in the African American household statistic? Oh sorry that was racist. Not if you are African American.
Ok so how about the facts? When will this start? Obama has given zero to date. Obama has changed his stance on many of his issues.
As far as Governors having the experience to lead. How about the last few Governor/Presdients Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush.
I see Palin as someone not looking to please the media. Someone interested is what is most important in America. The people working and paying taxes. Not those with their hands out for another freebie.
Palin in a landslide and will move on to be our first female President. Palin in 2016.
Palin in a landslide? Umm…. You realize that she’s not actually the head of the GOP ticket. Right?
The “sexism” comments are already beginning; I heard it suggested tonight that Obama was sexist for suggesting that Palin should be treated like the rest of the guys–apparently, the use of the word guys to…you know…accurately describe the rest of the current playing field is sexist.