Since I have been defending Sarah Palin against some attacks that I think are clearly wrong, I thought it only fair to provide a link to one that may well be true. It's an open letter which purports to be from a long time resident of Wasilla, the city she was mayor of. The author gives her name, and my guess, judging entirely by internal evidence, is that the letter is genuine--that although the account is in some ways biased against Palin, whom the author pretty clearly doesn't like, she is telling the truth as she sees it. It's an interesting account.
It may, of course, turn out to be entirely bogus--in which case I'm not as good at judging sources of information on internal evidence as I think I am.
It may, of course, turn out to be entirely bogus--in which case I'm not as good at judging sources of information on internal evidence as I think I am.
13 comments:
I basically judge her based on the incredible number of Sarah Palin scandals
Well, Snopes also give the letter the green light of authenticity.
There is so much Palin bashing in the media that I don't know what to believe. Where can I go on the web to find out if something is true or not? I know of fact checks, but it doesn't have much info. Another comment here says Snopes. Is Snopes reliable? As Tom Cruse said in A Few Good Men - "I want the truth!" ;o)
Interesting. Speaking as a neutral observer with no preference for either party, the Republicans seem to be doing everything wrong so far. I suspect that the choice of Palin will come to be seen as a panicky misjudgment. But then, I'm not an American and don't have the American point of view.
NPR interview with the author of the email.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94332543
My reaction is that the factual parts of the letter are probably accurate. The inferences, however, reflect the author's disappointment with Sarah Palin. We will see over the next 60 days how she fares in the public square. For today, emphasis on today, I am pursuaded by the approximate 80% approval of her fellow citizens and the two national exhibits of her poise and presence at her introduction and her acceptance of the VP nomination.
This part struck me as odd:
"Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team."
High school was 26 years ago. Long time for someone to hold a grudge, but I guess it's possible.
High school was 26 years ago. Long time for someone to hold a grudge, but I guess it's possible.
You obviously don't live in a small town.
Yeah -- now that Snopes has checked the letter, I'm taking it pretty much at face value as a biased but informed opinion about Palin's history.
Frankly, it bothers me far more than the nonsense that the media have mostly been focusing on. In particular, this and other reports seem to indicate a somewhat high-handed attitude towards power that is, frankly, reminiscent of my biggest beefs with the Bush administration.
While I care about the President's opinion on issues, I care far more about *how* he (or she) governs -- by the nature of the Executive, that's particularly important. Her record, both as Mayor and Governor, doesn't look encouraging in that regard...
I wish, for the sake of impartiality, the media looked back on Biden's and Obama's former associations with the same eagerness as they do for Palin...
I think it was a great move by McCain. Just look at how desperate the democrats are. It completely changed the dynamics of this year's elections, regardless of the final result.
PS- is there a politician (or anyone for that matter) who is an unanimity?
FWIW, the fact that the author apparently considers it self-evident that the State of Alaska should be funding alternative energy research as opposed to rebating tax money to state residents gives me reason to question his (or her, I gave up before reaching the end) judgement.
the author apparently considers it self-evident that the State of Alaska should be funding alternative energy research as opposed to rebating tax money to state residents...
Actually, I believe this isn't so much a "rebate" as a "dividend", i.e. a negative head tax. I've heard in the past that Alaska has so much oil revenue, and so few people, that it's never needed an income tax but has declared dividends instead. (I haven't checked this in recent years.)
Which raises an interesting question for libertarians: if "large" positive personal taxes are generally a bad thing, is a "large" negative personal tax better or worse than no personal tax?
"Which raises an interesting question for libertarians: if "large" positive personal taxes are generally a bad thing, is a "large" negative personal tax better or worse than no personal tax?"
A positive tax rate is preferable, at least up to the point where tax collection becomes invasive.
Post a Comment