As the shock wave that is Sarah Palin resonates across America, truth, hype, history, and bad are being sifted out. Supporters of Palin love her–she is a historic champion. The perfect VP pick, and a breath of fresh air for the G.O.P. Her critics point to the huge debt she left Wasilla, and the ethics scandal she’s currently being investigated for.
I’m going to be up front. Reading my past posts will reveal this. I’m not a supporter of Sarah Palin.
I remember the day after McCain announced Palin. A friend of mine pulled up the Anchorage daily news, and the top headlines were as follows: “Palin touts stance on ‘Bridge to Nowere,’ doesn’t note flip-flop.”
I was concerned by the bias in that statement, as well as in the article. This isn’t what I look for in a newspaper. Regardless, though, I still have faith in a professional newspaper to keep its facts straight. Palin initially supported the bridge.
Which makes me sad that she’s been flaunting her rejection of the bridge as an example of her excellent economic reform, and ability to cut wasteful spending.
CNN has recently looked into the economic success the G.O.P is so proud of. Governor Palin kept the citizen’s taxes down, and put a surplus of 5 billion dollars into Alaska. The reason Palin gave for this was her aggressive cuts in wasteful spending.
Which isn’t true. Spending went up under her administration.
She taxed the oil companies. This is how she did it.
Is this a bad thing? A lot of people I know would applaud that strategy. Oil is a big business with a bad reputation, and I doubt many people will shed a tear if America starts re-distributing a portion of their profits.
The question that needs to be asked, though, is if this deserves the level of respect and adoration Palin has received? Could America dig itself out of debt by taxing big businesses, and selling jets on Ebay?
Isn’t this a less elegant version of Obama’s plan?
