The Savaging of Sarah Palin
In the aftermath of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's announcement last weekend that she plans to resign from office, pundits have been scrambling for an explanation. Personally, the whole matter has left me feeling a little like I did at the end of seventh grade, after a year spent passively watching bullies ostracize and pick on one of the only black girls in the school: sick, and embarrassed for all of us.
Whatever your passionate opinions, whatever your disagreements with her views, this woman and her family were savaged in a manner that went beyond any reasonable standard. She is a public figure, but her husband and children are not. That did not stop certain members of the media and blogosphere from ridiculing them in vicious fashion, even long after the election was decided. President Obama, to his credit, spoke out against it. Would that more of his supporters had shown the same level of decency.
Instead, we got ridiculing of Mrs. Palin's appearance, of her decades-old participation in a beauty pageant, and even of her children, which was especially cruel. Self-proclaimed "feminists" made a blood sport of hating and dehumanizing her. Personally, I do not agree with all of Governor Palin's views, such as her absolutist pro-life position. But such vicious hatred, on the part of self-described feminists, was an embarrassment.
The Governor's announcement, in which she offered her reasons for leaving her office, has, not surprisingly, been greeted with near-universal skepticism. But I am inclined to believe what she says. Essentially, she has been slapped with a slew of ethics complaints that have been dismissed as baseless. But, due to the nature of Alaska's laws, her family has been required to pay legal bills to the tune of $500,000 to defend her good name.
The Palins are not wealthy, and they want to be able to afford college tuition for their children. It would appear the Governor cannot afford to hold a modestly paid position while facing such ongoing harassment from her political enemies without potentially facing personal bankruptcy. Not to mention that, although these complaints have thus far been found baseless, the time and energy required to respond to them is apparently reducing her effectiveness as Governor.
Then there is the matter of how the media treated Mrs. Palin's family, especially her children. How sad that normal people may no longer wish to run for or hold public office due to this horrific sort of exposure, including abuse of their children.
It's true that American politics have often been spirited, at times even vicious. During the Civil War, for instance, President Lincoln was burned in effigy in the South, and during the campaign of 1828, newspapers favorable to the National Republican Party falsely accused Democrat Andrew Jackson of having beaten up another man to steal his wife, to cite just a couple examples from history. But am I alone in feeling that ridicule of a disabled infant, and rape threats, represent a new low? How intensely cruel and hypocritical this behavior was, often coming from "feminists" and "progressives" who probably don't realize how many conservatives they are helping to create, as anyone with a moral compass is likely to figure that, if that's how liberals argue, maybe they'll consider conservative ideas, thanks.
To a lesser extent, established media have embarrassed themselves and lost credibility. Since when do established feminists, for instance, dispatch with one of our nation's only female Governors by disparaging her looks ("Caribou Barbie").
Last month, the Governor's husband Todd erupted angrily over David Letterman's lewd sexual joke about one of the Palin's teenage daughters. Clearly, Mr. Palin was angry. Placing one's marriage ahead of one's career ambitions may be an unthinkable in the realm of "progressive" media, but perhaps that is what Mrs. Palin is doing.
For the record, the media did not cease its savage dehumanization after the election. In the August issue of Vanity Fair magazine, a lengthy article by Todd S. Purdum entitled (italics added) "It Came from Wasilla" cites the opinions of several unnamed Alaskans that Governor Palin suffers from "narcissistic personality disorder." Perhaps Mr. Purdum, who in a stunning feat of journalistic objectivity also asserts of Governor Palin that "no political principle or personal relationship is more sacred than her own ambition," should be reminded of a psychological mechanism known as projection.
Is it possible her critics are projecting onto Governor Palin some of their own grasping motives?
Now that their scapegoat has simply wandered off, they are left to analyze her departure through the prism of themselves. And they don't know what to think.
Hence, perhaps, they're theorizing that this hyper-ambitious, moronic-yet-calculating, misogynist Lady Macbeth must be hiding something evil.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
thank you for writing this here where some of the worst of the Obot haterz hang out. I am a liberal feminist democrat and always have been. Last year for the first time, because of the mob mentality of the Obama campaign (and please do not think that Obama didn't fan the flames before he spoke out for Palin...that is his MO and has been for years), including the Obama media, voted republican. I will do it again anytime a woman runs on a republican ticket and not on the democratic ticket.
Palin, who BTW is NOT as doctrinaire anti-choice as you think, went in to the election with more executive credentials than Obama. But that is not why I voted for her and McCain. I did so because 1. I think they both have more character than the brand of phony thugs in the whitehouse. But most importantly, there was just one too many idiotic sexist emails laughing at her from my sort of brother in law.
Exactly!!
Teresa I too am a liberal feminist democrat. I wrote in Dennis Kucinch because of how Obama ran his campaign and the DNC rigging the nomination. I spoke out against the republicans rigging elections and could do no less when the democrats did it. There is so much hatred on this board for a honest, hardworking, intelligent women. Her only real crime was she ran against Obama, the wall street candidate. The candidate who received more money from wall street than any other candidate in our history. The man who voted for Cheney's energy policy, who said he would have voted for George Bush's war, the man who said he admired Ronald Ragean and his policies and who did some arm twisting to help get George Bush's TARP bill passed. I guess if this is what your candidate stands for, it is easier to smear and lie about the other candidate than to face what you are supporting.
.
Teresa I have to agree. Thanks for telling the truth. I tried a few comments tonight telling facts about obama but can't get them posted. I guess when the truth is told about Obama -
that the people who hate Sarah Palin project on her Obama's actions - they can't handle it. It is their blog and if they don't care about the truth you can't make them. Integrity and ethics have no meaning for some people.
Poor Sarah! She could dish it out but couldn't take it! Give me a break!
exactly what did she dish out?
And yet no mention of the "blood-sport" of hating against Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and the way Chelsea Clinton and Amy Carter were viciously ridiculed by the right. I rarely have much good to say about Bush, but he had to put up with his daughters being late night jokes, and he and his wife had enough sense not to whine about it.
The idea that Sarah Palin has received anything worse than any other politician, male OR female, just isn't borne out by the facts. It comes with the territory. If she can't handle it, I don't blame her, but then don't try to make her case as something unique. It's not. The Clintons had to spend millions to defend themselves over ethics charges that came to nothing, and Obama has spent hundreds of thousands because of the nonsensical birth certificate lawsuits. All of them have had to put up with relentless and vile attacks from the right.
Palin's bid for martyrdom is what is truly embarrassing.
You are entirely misled. Obama has spent nothing on birth certificate law suits and if he had it would have been easier and cheaper to just bring forth the BC.
Hillary Clinton was similarly attacked by the Obama campaign and the Obots and even though she was the overwhelming choice of democrats in the primaries ...games at the DNC denied the people her nomination.
Any woman who decides to run is savage and what Palin endured is much worse than any man has put up with. Get your partisanship out of your eyes and realize this hurts you too.
6) I'll agree with you that established media has embarrassed itself -- by giving Sarah Palin a "pass" when she vilified Barack Obama so evilly during the Presidential campaign, and continues to do so, from her peculiarly limited, factual and knowledge-challenged point of view. They continue to give Palin a "pass" by not asking her any investigative re-direct questions when she blathers her talking points and easily debunked statements.
Your last two one-sentence paragraphs may be the only logical statements of your entire diatribe; although I don't think Palin has "wandered off" or will ever disappear from the media or political landscape. Folks can only parse out what she means by her words or actions according to what they know, not what she says or does. Because she doesn't make sense, i.e., Sarah Palin = nonsense.
Back to my point #6, yes, it may well be that there is evil in the heart of Sarah Palin. I believe there's evil in wishing for the End-Times to be so exclusionary, to be careless of nature and resources and peace among nations, to mistreat critics and minority groups with threats or to create laws and regulations that punish them -- these are actions by her, or outright clear statements by her. She has made no secret of her feelings towards First Peoples, or endangered species, or destroying the environment for the sake of "development" of resources (profit).
Barack Obama deserves to be challenged upon any subject that he sets his hand to - that is true of any president - but he is not. The media is not the least bit interested in examining him, questioning his positions and policies, etc. They are fully and demonstrably (in their own words and deeds, mind you) in the tank for him. They lifted him up, exhaled him, put him forth as their approved candidate, sullied his opponents. People like you bought it hook, line and sinker. Time will eventually prove me right, but unfortunately there is so little that can be done to stop him from implementing his desires that I seriously wonder if there will be something to resurrect. I'll quote your nemesis - "We told you so".
I for one, hope that Sarah comes to the lower 48 and lowers the boom on this atrocity that is occurring in Washington, not only by Obama, not only by Democrats but by Republicans, too. Its way past time to send these people and their statists attitudes packing - right along with their staffs, the lobbyists, the journalists - all of them. Get out. That is our capitol, not your playhouse to enrich yourselves at our expense and at the expense of our Constitution.
Amen
I see, it seems that religious bigotry motivates your opinions about Palin. Do you realize that the democratic party is mostly Christian just like the republican party......including Obama who is hardly liberal in his religious ideals.
4) The Palins are not wealthy? By what stretch of the imagination are they not wealthy? They have a net worth of $2M, at least. Palin has been accruing per-diem paid by the state for 2-1/2 years for living in her own home, even when there is no State business to be done that requires her to be in Anchorage, let alone the state capital of Juneau (where she has a Gov. Mansion she can live in). Her husband has a lucrative fishing business, a lucrative job with BP Oil, and a lucrative sponsorship with Arctic Cat. Palin herself just landed a lucrative book deal. She's been featured half a dozen times in the past year in PEOPLE Magazine, which pays for pictures, interviews, etc.
5) The child alleged by Sarah Palin to be her 5th, Trig Palin, is not as you claim "disabled". Ask any adult DS person if they think they're disabled. Unless they're nearly comatose or catatonic, they know their limitations, and strive to reach their upper limits so as to be as independent as possible. They're "challenged", and thus need therapeutic help to reach goals, but I sure wouldn't pander to the people who want to limit them and separate them from the mainstream by calling them "disabled". Shame on you.
Let's say for the sake of argument that the Palins are, as you say, have a net worth of $2M. How much of that is liquid? How much of that is tied up in businesses, real estate? How is that any of our business? How is it the purview of you or I or the people filing bogus ethical complaints against Palin to decide if they should surrender any assets they may have in order to defend themselves? I know that I would take particular offense to that and if the same were to happen to you, I think you'd probably sing the same tune. The Palin's assets are theirs to enjoy as they see fit, not ours to attack. If they have had financial success in their endeavors, good for them. I wish them much more... same goes for me, I wish myself much success.
Not disabled? Are you quite sure what disabled means? I think it is fair to say that Trig will not be enrolling at Harvard, but I will wager that he will be full of a humanity that kids of his age will only dream of. As far as your thinly veiled assertion that Trig is not Sarah son, you must be referring to the claim of a certain blogger that cannot count to nine. Talk about disabled...
This Heather Robinson Palin-apologist screed is just so much BS.
1) Palin herself put out in the public eye most of the pictures of herself -- as pregnant with her firstborn, the pageant pictures, her sports reporter stint, the picture of her reading a John Birch Society pamphlet at her Wasilla mayoral desk, and so on.
Stop complaining about how "cruel" it was to bring these pictures to national attention when she became a national figure in the Presidential campaign.
2) Palin herself brought 3 (?) and sometimes all 4 (?) offspring (?) on the ENTIRE CAMPAIGN TRAIL for 2 months. She put them in the national spotlight -- I'm sure they didn't ASK to get dragged out of school for 2 months. No one hates her for that -- but she deserves a hearty helping of scorn.
Stop complaining about "how sad" media attention to her unwed-pregnant daughter was, when Palin cynically pushed the poor kid out onto the stage at the Republican National Convention. That was parental abuse -- why aren't you acknowledging that?
3) Most of the ethics complaints were not baseless, as you call them.
They highlighted certain ethical end-arounds Palin has done throughout her self-aborted gubernatorial career. The deciding body for all but one of the ethics complaints was a 3-person panel, her Personnel Board, hand-picked/approved by Palin herself-- i.e. not an impartial, independent commission.
Really?
Is it not unavoidable for a politician to be in the public eye? Those photographs that you speak of (including the nonsensical allusion to her being a bircher - go ahead, chapter and verse, please) could not possibly be adjudged a the time they were taken to be coldly calculated for maximum effect in a presidential election by any sane observer.
As to them being termed "cruel", again stop with the projection and come up with some chapter and verse.
What kind of mother would NOT bring her children with her to campaign events? What an incredible opportunity to learn about American civics right in the front row as it happens? I know for certain that I would absolutely want to be with my mom on the campaign trail. How can that not be the most natural reaction that a kid would have?
Its not that the mention of Bristol's pregnancy was in the news, it was the salaciousness and tawdriness of the coverage that was so utterly unprofessional. From the nonsense about Trig actually being Bristol's son to questions about Levi sleeping with Bristol under Sarah's nose - all beneath contempt for an ethical journalist.
If the ethical complaints were not baseless why were they dismissed again? Because Palin controlled the board. That's rich. I am still waiting for someone to make that point and refile the complaints, which they have not. The complaints themselves are laughable. A snowmobile (oops, sorry, snowmachine) manufacturer's logo on a jacket? Imbecilic.
> this woman and her family were savaged in a manner that went beyond any reasonable standard.
No. She was given the attention that she, as a self-caricature, earned.
> The Palins are not wealthy,
I believe they earn about 5x the average yearly salary of Americans, overlooking kickbacks like their McMansion on the lake.
> certain members of the media and blogosphere
The "blogosphere," is mostly just a bunch of people with computers. There's a lady here in my town with a blog extolling how things would be better if women would just do whatever their fathers/pastors/husbands told them to do. But she's just a lady with a computer. People have *always* shot their mouth off. To extrapolate more out of it seems to be kinda weak tea.
In general, "the media" is an empty phrase, like "liberal elite" -- just a red flag to wave to garner an emotional response.
> in which she offered her reasons for leaving her office,
She offered gibberish *in the space of time where reasons would normally be proffered* and *easily disproven fibs and exaggerations* re: the cost of the ethics complaints filed against her.
> legal bills to the tune of $500,000
This bill was mostly caused by her filing a complaint against herself, in order to a) obfuscate the findings of the first Troopergate investigation; b) delay; and c) get the charges under the jurisdiction of the Personnel Board of which...she is the boss.
OK. First, according to THIS WEBSITE, Sarah's ethics complaints are handled by the Governor's office attorneys, who are paid by the state regardless of what they're working on. She doesn't HAVE huge legal debts. Second, I don't recall the Governor's CHILDREN (plural) being savaged by the media, only the one daughter who after giving birth STILL promotes herself, and is PAID by Candee's, as an Abstinence Advocate. Standing there with a baby on your hip saying you promote abstinence IS ridiculous and SHOULD be ridiculed. It's not abstinence, abstaining form sex, that she promotes; it's BIRTH CONTROL-NOT GETTING PREGNANT, which both she and her Mother publicly condemn. The obvious irony of that begs ridicule. Sarah is quitting her position for lucrative speaking and book fees. This is fine; it's a free country. But to suggest that she was reluctantly DRIVEN to abandon her office is disingenous and unfair, particularly given Sarah's own propensity for slander and innuendo.
You forgot about straight lies
Robinson's article must have a great deal of truth to it given the outraged comments to her article by those trying to defend the media's actions against her.
Why does the nation seem so incredibly concerned that Alaska, with nearly the smallest populated state in the country, will have a new governor? Why does everyone care so much? Could it be for the reasons Robinson points out?
Yes, Democrats don't particularly want a female version of Pat Robertson in the White House.
Yet, for reasons more difficult to identify, many Republicans are attacking her as well when they idealized her a mere 7 months ago.
Palin has lost the 2008 election and has resigned from being governor. Fine. Must she be utterly destroyed? How can the over the top attacks against her be justified at this point that she is moving out of public life completely?
Below is a Huffington article re: Palin flaying on Fox News via Liz Trotta:
__________
Frankly, "the woman is inarticulate, undereducated," Trotta said, arguing that for once liberal criticism was "well-deserved."
"I think all the liberal stylists ... really have a case. She just begs for adjectives like flaky and wacky." When pressed, she added, "We're talking about somebody who, right from the get-go, has been a flashy person who gets into a lot of trouble and really has no credentials for any job." "
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/06/fox-news-contributor-rips_n_226370.html
>Robinson's article must have a great deal of truth to it given the outraged comments to her article by those trying to defend the media's actions against her.
That's a nonsensical on the face of it, to assert that a statement must be valid because people object to it. If I walk into a physics department and crow that gravity is caused by the belchings of the Ur-Dragon underneath Katmandu, or stagger into a Geology department and spout nonsense about the world being 6000 years old, does my statement have any greater validity based on the numbers of scientists that go into apoplectic shock?
I think not.
Tangentially, I find in reading self-avowed conservative comments in various places, that a great many of them determine what to think by how many liberals they assume they anger. The value of what they say has no meaning to them other than as a tool of instigation.
--The value of what they say has no meaning to them other than as a tool of instigation.
Well said.
Dear Heather Robinson,
Thank you...
Your article is "healing", and was a refreshing breeze of truth and honesty.
This past election has led me to believe that we're in a civil war, only that no shots have been fired as of yet. Reading most of the comments only confirms that feeling.
But reading your article gives me hope that it is still possible for us to be together even when we think differently.
The viciousness of attacks in this past election, and not just against Palin. But also against Joe the Plumber. The vitriole and hate I see all over the place. It's frightening.
And while I do believe that vitriole and hate gets tossed both ways from blogs and talk commentators. I usually only see it being tossed one way from mainstream media. For example, it dawned on me today that I have often read in mainstream news articles criticisms of "partisan politics". But I do not think I have ever read that phrase in reference to anyone but a Republican and conservative.
How do you think such makes one like myself feel? To be honest, your article is perhaps the first one I have seen to address this issue.
Sadly, from a quick perusal of the comments. I note that it has garnered you quite a bit of vitriole as well.
So let me say...."Thank You!"
Poor media-victims Palin and Joe the Plumber!!
such sadness... oh the humanity. Why can't Sarah Palin and John McCain and Joe the sometime American taxpayer be free to race-bait and incite hatred as our Constitution should guarantee them!?
Why can't good Republican family men like Mark Sanford be free to run with the wolves and pursue their true soulmates?
I, as a liberal, feel their pain. It's not blogs that kill: it's the blogosphere.
You're hear no defense from me regarding Sanford. As for Joe the Plumber's taxes, even the tax collector came to his defense and stated that it was a recent notice, and that he had probably not even received it as of yet.
We're talking $1,000...but tell me this, why the which hunt into Joe? Merely because he asked a question his entire life was taken apart. How many people in Congress (Democrat or Republican) have failed to pay their taxes. How many of those are in the cabinet? and other high positions.
You may be right regarding the last few years, but all you have to do is go back to 2000 to see the way the media savaged Gore while giving Dubya, a pass on everything to see that the media is neither right nor left, they are just propping up the candidate their masters have told them to prop up in any given election season.
I am going to bet that you might have some misconceptions about Gore, things he supposedly said and positions he supposedly took.
Oh please. You consider your defense of Sarah Palin a credible blog? She has gotten everything she has deserved.and she deserves much worse. She brought it on herself. And as for her family, if she hadn't continued to parade them for everyone to view, I would imagine it wouldn't have been an issue, either.
And while the people of Alaska suffered through food shortages and lack of fuel to heat their homes in one of the coldest winters, she signed a mutli-million dollar book deal, while neglecting her job.. Palin should pay Alaska back for using her time as governor to promote herself. That's $125,000 per year to the state. She also lied about why she was resigning.
For my money, I would be happy to see her in jail. Then maybe we could get a little peace and quiet and get this pathetic woman to go away forever.
To the media: Keep doing what you're doing. Your job is to report the truth and that's what you have been doing!
I find not one single true statement in your comment. Do you have any idea how much you have bought in to the mob mentality that first savaged Clinton then when after Palin?
Oh, please Ms. Robinson. Attacks on Sarah Palin more "savage" than those still being directed against Barack Obama and his wife? Didn't someone just refer to Michelle as related to an ape?
What have they said about Sarah? That she was a beauty pageant contestant? That happens to be true.
Every time the woman opens her mouth she betrays an appaling ignorance of how government functions at the national level ("Dept. of Law?"). If she were a man, she would have already been banished from the national stage as a know-nothing.
The woman paraded her family around the country when running for Vice-President. She made sure she had that baby in her arms any time she got off a plane and there were cameras around.
The joke that Letterman told was in bad taste but aimed at a young woman who is 18-years old and has appeared on the cover of People Magazine and accepted a role as a public spokesperson for an orgnaziation. If she wants a public life, then opening yourself up to comments from late night comics comes with the territory.
The altered picture of Trig was not a slam against Trig, but a slam against a right wing talk show host and his cozy relationship with Ms. Pailn. It's called "satire."
Ms. Pailn is not like the young black child at your school. Rather, she is a classic bully: She can dish it out, but she can't take it.
See Heather Robinson's Profile
Hello! BillinFla, is it possible that the reason S.P. had "that baby" in her arms so much is she loves him? Also, I do see your astute point re: satire, but I still think the cartoon was cruel.
Re: the comparison to my schoolmate, I meant it in one narrow sense: this type of dehumanization often involves a group/pack mentality and sometimes participants can't see themselves.
Re: S. P. as a bully, to me this seems a distortion, but even if hypothetically she were, how would that justify attacks on her kids? Our President had it right: let's leave people's kids alone.
CJWebber, I actually do remember attacks on Chelsea. As a teenage girl at the time, my heart went out to her. I thought Hillary got a lot of *&^%, too.
Hammerofthor and turfmann, thanks for making my day:), and thanks for all the comments.
You're welcome and thanks for noticing.
For goodness sake, Palin is a conservative. You'd think that would be more than enough grist for liberals to make a case against her without delving into the realm of fictitious muckraking.
I mean, there can't be that many dumpsters in Wasilla...
I have a challenging exercise for my liberal friends. Construct an affirmative argument in favor of a Palin presidency. Use her words and public positions. I've done it for Obama (trust me, I am 100% against his positions and policies). It isn't easy to fully understand your opponent's political positions but I base my opinion upon a thorough review of what Obama himself puts forth compared and contrasted with my conservative principles.
I understand where you're coming from. I'm not saying their aren't rough attacks on Gov. Palin.
I'm saying that she was fine with attacking people herself. She seemed to revel in the crowds that she whipped into a frenzy as they shouted "traitor" and "kill him." If you want to be a "pitbull in lipstick" than you should expect to get back as good as you give.
I am also saying the attacks on Palin are no more vicious than the attacks that have been leveled against the Clintons, the Kennedys, and the Obamas from the right.
Her children should be out of bounds - unless, as Bristol has done, one or more of them puts themselves forward as public figures. Bristol is over 18 and has chosen to participate in the public arena. Hence, she is not off limits. (It still doesn't excuse Letterman's comments.)
I don't view the doctored photo of Sarah & Trig as an attack on Trig at all. The photo said or implied nothing bad about Trig. And satire, if it's good anyway, should be a little vicious. It is an attack, after all. Non-offensive satire would be a contradiction in terms.
Before she got ANY criticism, she said "bring it on." She called herself a pitbull with lipstick. She said she was tough, that she was going to dish it out and that she could handle the critics. By the way, she called Obama a lot of names and insinuated a lot of things about him and his wife ("I've always been proud of my country") before anyone attacked her. Now she's claiming victim status? Ridiculous. Her debate performance, and every single interview, all show a person who is woefully underqualified for even the position she has, much less that of VP. The reason that she is being slammed so hard is because the GOP put her up as an example, and she took on that role.
If you can't stand the heat, I guess Alaska's a pretty good place to chill.
The thing is, when you love a child, you do what is best for the child and not for you.
Airplane travel is not advised for infants, especially special needs infants, because
of the changes in air pressure among other things. Hauling a baby along on the campaign trail was in miss sarah's best interest but not the baby's.
Anyone who saw miss sarah sailing down the airplane steps onto the tarmac in high heels while clutching Trig with one hand and waving with the other, then immediately handing Trig off to someone else (usually Piper) at the bottom of the steps when the cameras stopped running, has to think 'photo op' before they think 'maternal love'.
Believe me, there are many alaskans besides me who are horrified at how this woman
has misrepresented our beloved state ("Drill, baby, drill") to the nation and are further
horrified at what we may have unwittingly unleashed into the political arena.
Good article, Mrs Robinson. Sense, not snark, is what separates you from Dowdy Maureen.
Surely you jest. Attack after attack by the GOP on Obama and Michelle, and before that Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton etc...the "attacks' on Palin are mild by any comparison.
Selective amnesia, indeed.
Key Reason Palin Gave For Quitting May Be False
One of the chief reasons Sarah Palin has given for resigning as Governor of Alaska is that her state’s taxpayers are being forced to spend money defending her government against ethics complaints that would otherwise fund teachers, cops, and road repair.
But David Murrow, a spokesperson for the Governor, said in an interview that much of this money was budgeted to the lawyers in advance and would have gone to them anyway, even if state lawyers hadn’t been defending against these ethics complaints.
In response to our questions, the Governor’s office provided us with a detailed breakdown of the millions Palin has claimed has gone to defending against ethics complaints. It does list roughly $1.9 million in expenditures.
But Murrow, the spokesperson, acknowledged to our reporter, Amanda Erickson, that this total was arrived at by adding up attorney hours spent on fending off complaints — based on the fixed salaries of lawyers in the governor’s office and the Department of Law. The money would have gone to the lawyers no matter what they were doing. The complaints are “just distracting them from other duties,” Murrow said.
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/republican-party/key-reason-palin-gave-for-quitting-appears-to-be-false/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/08/palin-reason-for-quitting_n_228099.html
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
