After the American Century
Sarah Palin remains largely an unknown. But some disturbing questions have arisen since her nomination. She must be judged in the court of public opinion, like all other candidates. Voters have a right to know what a candidate actually stands for. All of the following statements now appear to be true, but we need further investigation by the press to be certain.
(1) Palin is a Prevaricator. She lied about her support for the Bridge to Nowhere, and actually did support it and ultimately did get the pork: $223,000,000 from the US Treasury that Alaska did not need.
(2) Palin attempted to censor the books in her town library, and to fire the town librarian without cause.
(3) Palin holds extremist views on evolution, global warming, and biological research, and would use her public office to promote her views, for example through giving large sums of money for conferences devoted not to scientific research but to promoting her views. [As governor she has given $2 million to a conference seeking to discredit the reality of global warming.]
(4) Palin has fired public officials guilty of no wrong-doing, misusing her power.
(5) Palin has little knowledge of the law, specifically the Constitution of the United States, and might not be a reliable guardian of its provisions concerning the separation of church and state.
(6) Palin and her husband have given support to a party that is working for Alaskan independence, on the grounds that its accession to statehood did not meet UN guidelines.
(7) Palin has been a member of an extremist church that holds views many other Christians would not find acceptable.
Again, these statements appear to me to be true, but the evidence is sketchy, and the candidate has not been forthcoming. To date, she has not given a press conference or a no-holds-barred interview. Such seclusion is inappropriate for a someone running for Vice-President.
For more questions rasied about Prevaricator Palin, see this piece in the New York Times. Or have a look at this editorial in the same newspaper.
Sarah Palin remains largely an unknown. But some disturbing questions have arisen since her nomination. She must be judged in the court of public opinion, like all other candidates. Voters have a right to know what a candidate actually stands for. All of the following statements now appear to be true, but we need further investigation by the press to be certain.
(1) Palin is a Prevaricator. She lied about her support for the Bridge to Nowhere, and actually did support it and ultimately did get the pork: $223,000,000 from the US Treasury that Alaska did not need.
(2) Palin attempted to censor the books in her town library, and to fire the town librarian without cause.
(3) Palin holds extremist views on evolution, global warming, and biological research, and would use her public office to promote her views, for example through giving large sums of money for conferences devoted not to scientific research but to promoting her views. [As governor she has given $2 million to a conference seeking to discredit the reality of global warming.]
(4) Palin has fired public officials guilty of no wrong-doing, misusing her power.
(5) Palin has little knowledge of the law, specifically the Constitution of the United States, and might not be a reliable guardian of its provisions concerning the separation of church and state.
(6) Palin and her husband have given support to a party that is working for Alaskan independence, on the grounds that its accession to statehood did not meet UN guidelines.
(7) Palin has been a member of an extremist church that holds views many other Christians would not find acceptable.
Again, these statements appear to me to be true, but the evidence is sketchy, and the candidate has not been forthcoming. To date, she has not given a press conference or a no-holds-barred interview. Such seclusion is inappropriate for a someone running for Vice-President.
For more questions rasied about Prevaricator Palin, see this piece in the New York Times. Or have a look at this editorial in the same newspaper.
