Palin Needs To Answer

Some Questions

To the Editor:

Many labels have been thrown around to describe Sarah Palin since she was first thrust onto the national stage almost two weeks ago. Some are true, some are false, and some we just don’t know enough about to draw any conclusion. What bothers me with the whole issue though is the McCain campaign’s insistence that the questions stop. As a voter, I find it offensive that they believe we don’t have a right to know more about the person who could be one 72-year-old heart beat away from being the next President. What I care about is knowing Sarah Palin’s record, values, and how she will govern.

In her own words, from the Republican National Convention, she is a pit bull with lipstick. Her record seems to agree with that. Could you imagine Joe Borst firing every town department head who didn’t support his campaign for first selectman? That’s exactly what she did upon being elected mayor of a town one-third the size of Newtown. I guess that’s partisan politics on the local level.

What I find really disturbing though is her repeated claims of being a reformer; particularly when it comes to earmark spending. The facts just don’t support that. As mayor of Wasilla, she hired lobbyists to help her town receive over $27 million in federal earmarks. But her biggest claim of stopping wasteful government “pork barrel” spending surrounds the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” This is where the irony and hypocrisy reach a new level. For starters, Sarah Palin supported the Bridge to Nowhere when she campaigned for Governor of Alaska. (“Where They Stand,” Anchorage Daily News, 10/22/2006).

Republicans typically call that “flip-flopping.” As it turns out, Sarah Palin had a huge financial incentive to change her mind on the issue. While she may have refused to eat the “pork,” she did keep the pig!

That’s right, despite not building the bridge, the State of Alaska actually kept the $233 million dollars that had already been budgeted and approved for the bridge. (“‘Bridge to Nowhere’ abandoned,” CNN.com, 11/22/2007). That’s not the type of “reform” I want in Washington.

As for her character, a January radio appearance in Alaska gives me further cause for concern. She actually laughs repeatedly when her hosts berate an opponent, Alaska State Senator Lyda Green, as a “bitch” and “a cancer” among other rude insults (www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5HSbjAgnTY). This type of discourse is below the decorum we expect from someone who aspires to be vice president of the United States.

The real tragedy in John McCain’s pick for vice president is that we are supposed to believe this is the most qualified person available! When the shine of Sarah Palin wears off and she stands still long enough to actually answer the media’s questions, she will not be able to run from her record.

And if she won’t answer questions when she’s running for the White House, why should we expect she will answer our questions after they get there?

Peter Sandler

4 Far Horizon Drive, Sandy Hook                         September 9, 2008