The latest issue of the Atlantic has a really interesting article on Sarah Palin. In it the author cuts through the hype to look at her accomplishments during her brief tenure as Alaska governor. It's actually impressive. She worked against corrupt oil company interests and with Alaska Dems to ram through two initiatives, a gas pipeline and an increase in the oil company tax, that have undoubtedly helped out the state. He further argues that had she actually embraced her reformist past, she could have been a much different figure in American politics. But, beginning with her RNC speech she made a distinct shift into rabidly conservative attack politics (which baffled many in Alaska).
Don't get me wrong, he definitely looks at her limitations (mainly her penchant for personalizing politics and pursuing everything like it's a vendetta) but rather than tearing after her he sort of shakes his head in disbelief. Why did she decide to go all out ultra-conservative populist when her record was more good government reformer?
To me, it just highlights why she's such a scary, horrifying politician. She could be just blowing where the political wind takes her but I think the conservatism on display now is truer to her actual beliefs. Maybe she was a reformer in Alaska because she actually understood the issues at stake, which would make her apparent refusal to study national issues a little more troubling. Or, perhaps she looked at Barack and all he stood for and it set of some ultra-conservative sense of aggrievedness that set her on her ugly, populist course. Whatever her true motivations, I find her disturbing.
2 comments:
ooh, fascinating. once i have some time to read this i'll respond in more depth. but i find this really interesting, it's always nice to see a reporting delving beneath the MSM narrative and presenting a different, more fuller perspective.
Ilsa, you meant "LSM". Lame Stream Media. Get with the program.
Post a Comment