The antithesis of a feminist candidate.

I break with most feminists on some key issues, but I'm still a feminist.

I've been baffled at the choice of Palin. Her experience consists of being mayor of a town of 9,000 and governor of a state that has fewer residents than many cities (at 670,000 Alaska's entire population is little more than the population of Seattle).

Obviously she's just on the ticket because she's a woman -- but why her?

I looked on Wikipedia and there are certainly female Republican senators. There's Kay Bailey Hutchison who according to Peggy Noonan (former speech writer for Reagan and conservative commentator) was one of the top contenders. There are women Republicans in the House. Palin is certainly a conservative, but as rabidfan mentioned, there are plenty conservative women out there. Yes, true.

They picked Palin for her looks, sure, because she's young. They want to get rid of the "old wrinkly guy" label McCain got saddled with among young voters after Paris Hilton's reply to his campaign ad ("then that old wrinkly guy used me in his campaign ad, so I guess I'm running for president!").

But I've come to the conclusion they picked Palin because of her lack of Washington experience: she's a symbol, a throwaway. After the election, she will be a total newbie, dependent on them for her political contacts.

They won't have to contend with a (Republican) woman with real power, with her own agenda, and her own constituency.

They want a woman they can put away in bubblewrap when the election is over.



ETA: Making Light is taking apart Palin's "community organizers" crack. Yeah, I bet she doesn't like the community organizers since they almost got her recalled by the city council for firing the librarian who refused to ban books as Palin wanted. Community organizers. Because heaven forfend that we have a democracy.

Sarah Palin: Not Just Inexperienced -- Fiscally Incompetent

Sarah Palin: Not Just Inexperienced -- Fiscally Incompetent

This was emailed to me this morning, but the author originally didn't want it posted on the web. Some blogs started posting it anyway. I didn't.

Finally, someone contacted the author of the email. She's given permission for it to be posted there. I note that the basic facts presented are confirmed by the New York Times.

What emerges is a picture of Sarah Palin as a petty, vindictive woman who abuses her authority for personal revenge. She narrowly avoided a recall after public outcry over the firing of two city employees, one of whom was the city librarian who had refused to ban books at Palin's behest. Recently, Palin repeated the same offense as governor when she fired Alaska's "top cop" for not terminating her former brother-in-law, a state trooper, who had divorced her sister.*

As mayor of tiny Wassila, Palin was fiscally incompetent, focused largely on the glorification of herself at the expense of the taxpayers -- leaving the formerly solvent city $22 million dollars in debt. That's lot for a city of 5,000 (back then) that needed a sewer system and got a sports arena instead. By the way, the arena was built on land the city technically didn't own and has been embroiled in litigation.

And she had City Hall redecorated. Twice. Instead of responsibly funding roads out of the city budget, she supported -- yes -- still more borrowing.

A tax-and-spend Republican, Palin increased expenditures by 33%, while increasing taxes 38%. She reduced property taxes, which benefitted the wealthy, and increased sales taxes (including taxing food) that hurt the poor. Her tax cuts benefitted corporations.

She has been disloyal and ruthless. The people who supported her were the first fired once she became mayor, replaced with obscure new staff politically dependent upon her.

She has a long history of earmarks (government pork). Her reputation for "reform" is thin, based on two things:

1) She quit as chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, turning in a member for ethics violations. With her firings Palin's own history of ethics is shaky, and she has a long history of "praying for pipelines" and supporting big oil (British Petroleum funded her inauguration). This person who knows her says Palin complained about her job and didn't like the commute, so took a chance and solved that problem by finding a reason to quit.
2) She ignored government budgets and then grandstanded with line item vetoes after the fact. The items were restored after a public outcry.

"Public outcry" comes up a lot in Sarah Palin's brief political history.

( Claim vs. Fact )

Conclusion: Sarah Palin is a low-level, small town politico who couldn't balance the budget of a town of 5,000, yet has recast her incompetence as "progress." Palin is all about Palin and will happily bite the hand that feeds her if it'll help her today. Her Christianity (of the extreme right variety) is rabid enough that she wouldn't support her pro-choice mother-in-law's run for mayor after her. Yet, a few quotes from Palin unhappy about her brother's embarrassing appearance on a dating game -- she'd hoped it would boost votes -- suggests that she uses everything to get elected. It's all about appearances.

I wouldn't let her near a credit card, let alone the struggling US economy.



* Note that the McCain campaign is on the spot with the damage control: They claim that the trooper was violent. However, the Washington Post notes that Sarah Palin, although she witnessed the dangerous incident, simply walked away and left her sister there with him. Was Palin callous? Or is the danger now being exaggerated after the fact for political convenience?