Since the announcement of Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice-Presidential nominee, a lot of conservatives have been very excited about her (as of this writing, the McCain campaign has raised $7 million since Friday). This is understandable. She’s got a lot of charisma and there is no doubt that she is a bona fide social conservative, which has helped to jazz up a base that wasn’t really all that thrilled with John McCain. But now that the initial buzz has died down, for a lot of conservatives who aren’t as enthusiastic about the pick, and other conservatives who had never heard of her until Friday, there are no doubt some serious questions about Palin. Not the least of which is: would she make a good conservative President should she be called to serve during her tenure as Vice-President? The answer is that while there’s a lot for conservatives to admire about Palin (her genuine efforts to root out corruption in state government, for example), her record isn’t exactly encouraging on how she would govern. Here’s five reasons why, from a conservative perspective, Sarah Palin isn’t a very good pick as the GOP vice-presidential nominee.
1. Sarah Palin Supported a Windfall Profits Tax on Oil Companies as Governor
One of Barack Obama’s worst economic policies, from both my perspective and that of most conservatives, is his plan to place a “windfall profit tax” on domestic oil companies, and then use that money to provide a $1,000 “energy rebate” to American families. This plan has, rightly, been mostly derided by economists and by most Republicans on the national stage. However, as governor, Sarah Palin pushed through a plan that looked awfully similar.
Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska’s Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry — a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared.
[...]Palin’s administration last week gained legislative approval for a special $1,200 payment to every Alaskan to help cope with gas prices, which are among the highest in the country.
This tax has already led to projects proposed by oil companies to be cancelled due to the fact that they are no longer cost-effective–a strange result from a candidate who is enthusiastically in favor of further oil exploration in Alaska.
2. As Mayor, Sarah Palin raised taxes for pet projects.
When Palin was the mayor of Wasilla, she was primarily a tax cutter–something she could afford to be because the town grew by leaps and bounds under her tenure. However, this self-described “hockey mom” did try to raise sales taxes in order to fund one of her pet projects: a new hockey complex for children in the area. Sure, that’s not an uncommon thing for a politician to do, but it is something problematic for a “conservative reformer” to do, isn’t it?
3. Sarah Palin is unfamiliar with American History
This might be construed as a cheap shot, but it’s worth pointing out. During her 2006 gubernatorial race, Sarah Palin completed a questionnaire for Alaska’s Eagle Forum–not exactly a hotbed of liberalism. Of particular interest is her answer to question 11:
11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
[Palin]: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
For those of you keeping score at home, the Pledge of Allegiance was written in the 1890’s, and the words “under God” were not added until the 1950s–well after all of the Founding Father’s were dead and buried. Her answer to the question, then, is either an example of appalling ignorance or a pathetic act of pandering. Either way, that’s not what conservatives want from their politicians, is it?
4. As a professional politician, Sarah Palin has evinced no interest in foreign policy
As far as I can tell on the research I have done, recorded evidence of Sarah Palin’s interest in foreign policy issues is pretty close to non-existent. Even on the Iraq war, the pre-eminent foreign policy issue right now, Palin has shown a rather incredible indifference. Take this interview, for example:
ABM: We’ve lost a lot of Alaska’s military members to the war in Iraq. How do you feel about sending more troops into battle, as President Bush is suggesting?
Palin: I’ve been so focused on state government, I haven’t really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe.
Given the importance of foreign policy, this just doesn’t seem like the right choice for a commander-in-chief in waiting, does it?
5. Sarah Palin flat out lied to the American People in her campaign debut
When Sarah Palin accepted the vice-presidential nomination, she gave an acceptance speech that told America a little bit about herself. That speech included this tidbit:
And I’ve championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress thanks, but no thanks, on that “bridge to nowhere.” If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we’d build it ourselves.
That sounds great, right? But here’s the problem–Sarah Palin was, in fact, all for federal funds to build the build the bridge. Indeed, in 2006, Palin actually campaigned for it.
In September, 2006, Palin showed up in Ketchikan on her gubernatorial campaign and said the bridge was essential for the town’s prosperity.
She said she could feel the town’s pain at being derided as a “nowhere” by prominent politicians, noting that her home town, Wasilla, had recently been insulted by the state Senate president, Ben Stevens.
As it turns out, Palin didn’t “pull the plug” on the Bridge until it was clear that the federal funds that were going to be provided wouldn’t be enough to build the bridge without dipping into state coffers, too. It was only at that point that Palin pulled the plug on the bridge project. However, she didn’t pull the plug on the federal funds that came anyway. No, those she used to fund other pork barrel projects. For example, her administration built an access road to the bridge that was not going to be built. Literally, a “road to nowhere,” since the bridge is pretty much dead. Under Palin’s administration, she could have returned the money to the Federal Government. Instead, her administration chose to build a useless road. That’s “reform”? That’s “standing up to Congress”?
But here’s the real thing about this: Palin lied. She did not tell Congress Alaska didn’t want the money. Indeed, Alaska got the money–it just wasn’t enough to build the bridge. So in her speech, in what amounted to her national debut, she told a lie to make her administration look better than it actually was. Does that represent the values that conservatives want our political leaders to have? I doubt it.
* * *
Although Sarah Palin has a lot of things to recommend herself to conservatives and has done some good things in rooting out corruption, the fact of the matter is that a look at her record shows that her governing history hasn’t exemplified conservative values. She’s raised taxes, spent taxpayer dollars on pet projects, has evinced little interest in foreign affairs, and told a rather large self-aggrandizing lie at her first appearance on the national stage. Despite all the enthusiasm that many conservatives have for her, her record doesn’t show her to be much of one herself.
Caught in a lie on day one. Hmmm. And her father said “She’s honest, too.” Evidently McCain and her father don’t really know her record.
We cannot afford to have someone with Zero Foreign Policy experience as our VP, this is crazy. What would she do about Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran etc… If John McCain is elected President and something happened to him and that could happen taking into account his age and that he has has 4 bouts with cancer then Palin would take over as President and that is a very scary thought and people need to really think about this.
She does not have the skill, education or experience to negotiate with leaders on a national or global level. And she certainly does not have the ability to lead this nation should McCain be elected and something happen to him. Furthermore, I question McCain’s judgment in selecting her.
I for one really like her. No one can help run a country more than a busy mom. I love the fact she was in the pTA., and She has a special needs child. We have had enough Ivy educated rich men running the country. What we need is a mom.
I can not believe that with all the international experience we could really use now that things are shifing in Pakistan and Russia he picks this woman! I am just totally floored. What is he thinking and why aren’t national defense republicans up in arms??? I know I am a northeast yankee republican but come on! I still believe that someone who has international knowledge is far more useful in the long run than this gimmick! I am mortified! We are letting abortion and gay marriage decide who’s best to lead our nation???? Yeah….Like the russians care!
[*** COMMENT REMOVED. PERSONAL ATTACKS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE COMMENT SECTION. ***]
I withdrew my support frpm McCain;I thought he will be picking Romney or Huckebee!
Her answer to the question, then, is either an example of appalling ignorance or a pathetic act of pandering. Either way, that’s not what conservatives want from their politicians, is it?
Judging by the politicians conservatives have been running for the past fourteen or so years, I’d say the answer is an unqualified “yes, of course it is”.
Either I’m missing sarcasm, or Annie Gupta is missing an education beyond grade school. A mom? Yeah, because that’s who I turn to for complex political issues, mom. This idea that you want average Joe and Jane to be in charge of the most difficult job in America is absurd. I want people smarter than me. Of course, in your case, Palin may well fit the bill.
I am floored - simply floored - at the double standard that is being applied to Sarah Pallin. Would you like me to list the number of governors with zip, zero,nada foreign policy experience we have elected as President - never mind vice-president. Why were they qualified to lead the country, and she, somehow, is not. And the Democratic ticket is running someone with no executive experience - at all, and his foreign policy experience? Give me a break. I am starting to think the American people actually listen to the media pundits and then start parroting them to sound intelligent. We cannot undo the choice that are before us. It is now our job to choose the best team for the job. That is the only say we get in the matter.
maverickmom,
Um, what has your argument to do with the argument that I provided above?
I too agree that Palin is a disaster. I’m a middle-of-the-roader and I thought McCain was a decent choice because of the arguments he made about his experience over Obamas. (We have two wars, financial crisis, etc, you don’t want someone learning on the job). But then he throws it all away by choosing a totally unexperienced veep. The first major serious decision a candidate has to make and he throws a curveball. Why did he do it? Clearly because he thought she would help him get votes (women, conservatives). This is not a case of country first — this is a case of “do anything to get elected”. I’m going with Obama-Biden.
[And no, I don't buy the argument "she's had executive experience". All of alaska has about the population of oklahoma city. If he had taken the mayor of oklahoma city as a veep what we say?]
Don’t forget the ethics violations, including the use of $95,000 in lawyer fees to defend herself (taxpayers)
And the “pork barrel” earmarks of tens of millions of federal money to pay for her pet projects, which McCain himself has derided, leaving the county in loads of debt.
It’s unclear what you mean by ‘conservative’ and if this involves personal liberties, but “book banning” and state-mandated censorship are _hopefully_ still only the tactics of Hitler and Mao, not America… but Palin sought to do this herself.
[...] finally, blessedly, ACCEPTANCE - the realization that Sarah Palin may not, in fact, have been the very best idea, especially for [...]
As a well educated “stay at home” demodratic Mom, (Oh, would that make me conservative?) I would like to know who is breastfeeeding Sarah Palins child & intending on raising her every hour that her mother is not there….???
Does the Republican Party really want to invest its future in someone that most of us had not even heard of until a week ago? Very reckless, personally I do not like to gamble with America’s Future, or the reputation of the Republican Party. I would rather give the Dems. this one and regroup for 2012 .
Since when did the GOP make it a bad thing to be from the Northeast with an Ivy League education? The party that recognized the idea that we should strive towards a meritocracy now suggests that demanding those qualifications or skills makes you a snob? Palin taxed the Oil Companies in Alaska. Why? I like my oil companies. They have done well for many stockholders including retirement funds for firefighters. Palin is big on the Union thing? Why? Since when did Unions become a GOP pro issue? And finally we have the Christians Evangelicals who have come out like rats in a fire, stating that they are only voting for McCain because of Palin.
Someone said, “Do you think that telling people in the suburbs that they aren’t real Americans because they aren’t from a “small town” and can’t field dress a moose will help McCain turn the ‘burbs red like in 2004?”
Based on McCain’s choice for VP and based on how Palin speaks over and over about “the old boys club is over”, “we are Union supporters”, “I taxed the Oil Companies in my State,” working class this, moose hunting that, farmers and fishermen unite that, “so many americans are suffering finacially” etc…McCain in his speech light gave the name of a couple who lost their home because of the mortgage crisis. What? This sounded more like a liberal agenda to me than conservative beliefs of self-reliance and personal responsibility. McCain also spoke about Education and how he wanted parents to have more options through govt opportunities afforded to them through………..my tax dollar??? These are conservative ideals…??? Highly unlikely. Reagan is rolling in his grave.
Then the icing on the cake was the green background that was displayed for a while, and I thought, “please don’t start talking about the environment and how govt can help that too.” Quickly the background changed to a house you typically see in my area and I said, “why is he showing us his house?” Only to find out it was not McCain’s house. Rather is was a public school in North Hollywood, CA. Once again, attempting to say that the Republican Party will fix and help public schools. I would have preferred the mansion. At least it says,”I am an American success story.”
Again, putting more tax dollars into the Education system is not a Conservative ideal. This is why I am very concerned about the Republican Party losing its way and becoming not much different from the Liberal Party. Perhaps then the Libertarian Party will become stronger and bigger taking with it many Conservatives who thought they would die as Registered Republicans.
One more thing. McCain also cited retraining of displaced workers, with the government picking some of the transitional costs, as the means through which people can find their way to well paying jobs the global economy can create. Brilliant. And exactly where is the money coming from? Let me be clear again, I am definitely voting for McCain because there is no other choice. He has my vote but I am not happy about it.
I am a conservative and I can find plenty of comfort with Sarah Palin’s selection as McCain’s running mate.
I find the points made in this article to be weak in many respects, as follows:
1. There is a significant difference between taxes at the state level and taxes at the federal level. Most career politicians at the state level like federal taxes and earmarks because they then can avoid the difficult decisions. All the blame can be passed up the line and all the credit they will claim. On the other hand, characterizing the state tax as a tax on ‘windfall profits’ is not the most astute action.
2. The real question should be ‘was there a lot of constituent support for the ‘pet projects’ and were they, in fact, good for the town?’.
3. Many of the founders, indeed, believed that our right to individual liberty comes from our Creator. In the absence of more information to show she actually thinks the ‘pledge’ dates to the founding the article’s implied conclusion is suspect.
4. She would not, in her elected roles at the state and local level, have had much need to be a heavy hitter in foreign policy matters.
5. It is obvious that local and state officials should vie for federal earmarks regardless of their convictions about earmarks when viewed from the federal perspective. This is sometimes called pragmatism.
Sarah Palin is a new player at the federal level and I am confident that her conservative views will develop and mature as her time at that level increases. Instincts do matter.
We do not need a vice president whose claim
to fame is being feisty. Her running-mate, like the current administration, is ready to solve any international incident using our military instead
of first attempting to reason through talks. I am
ready for real change: McCain and Bush seem to be ‘cookie-cutter’ images of one another, and the biggest difference between Palin and Chaney may be dress size.
Sarah Palin on the ticket is a ridiculous attempt to counter Obama’s “historic” appeal. The characterizations of her into this near mythological figure are insulting. The whole thing is a manipulated puppet show for the weak minded.
Real Conservatives have nothing to cheer about. It’s business as usual in Washington; BS and more BS.
There are innumerable reasons to object to the Palin selection and key among them is McCain’s recklessness. Were he to croak soon after inauguration, we would be in serious trouble. His judgement is clearly terrible and his slogan of “Campaign First” is garbage on a barge.
Check this: McCain just called Palin the most experienced person on energy in the United States Imagine the insult he has just paid to senior folks at NREL, NETL, FERC, EPRI, API and more… (however, she might be useful kicking out some toxic deadwood out of DOE and I can name names). But in fact she doesn’t know squat about renewable energy. She thinks it takes too much time to install renewable energy when in truth is new flows of fossil fuels that take the time. Wind is the fastest way to get new generation up and going.
In saying this about her, McCain on this important transition we need to make.
She’s close minded and too traditional. When Palin sees a fact she doesn’t like, she pays out state money to “educate” the voters in the direction she wants, as she’s done in AK on aerial hunting of wolves and on open pit mining uphill of the world’s richest and most profitable salmon run ( a scheme that’s been outlawed in CO and MT and many nations). She is deeply dangerous because McCain, if given the chance, will probably make her his energy czar. G.O.D. .H.E.L.P. .U.S.
Intelligent indeed to judge someone so thoroughly by a four-sentence remark. But, to be fair, you never said you were.
Palin is a disaster. I will give this one to the Dem’s and wait for 2012 to see if we get lucky then. McCain just sunk his ship with this VP pick. She seems so defensive and has no substance. She lies about her positions in ear marks the bridge troopergate ,, It’s horrible! She’s horrible!!! I just can’t vote for someone who thinks Alaska is better than any other state in the country. This woman is not ready for Washington. Some people are not going to like me saying this..but I think she is an unfit mother who is power hungry and won’t let anyone get in the way. She has the audacity to put her children through more than they can bare. I wonder if she thinks that the VP positions is a work at home job. She’s never going to have time for her family. I’m disgusted just typing about this shit. The woman is a nightmare to the republicans. I’m not afraid to say it and neither should the pundits. They claim to love her so much…how funny, they don;t even know her..she won’t even let the media vet her. I never thought I’d be saying this but boy do I wish Biden rips her a new one during the debate.
I tried…very hard…to defend Palin to myself since the convention. The debate with Biden tonight ended any interest I have in supporting McCain/Palin any further.
If we’re voting for socialists, why not go with the pros instead of the wannabes? Palin spent all evening going after “greed” on Wall Street and talking about kitchen tables and how people don’t have health insurance. Standard Democratic boilerplate.
The most disturbing part of the delightful hour-and-a-half, though, was the excursion into the Constitution and what it means for the Vice Presidency. I seem to recall from the Draft Palin website that she was supposed to be a “strict” interpreter of the Constitution. So much for that. Biden quite rightly–and justifiably forcefully–explained what the role of the Vice President really is.
What was McCain thinking? For that matter, what was anyone thinking?
[...] “conservative” record in Alaska. In it, he makes a lot of the same points that I made in my own article over a month ago. But Larison also takes the time to point out the obvious: For the record, I [...]
Governor Palin is the only one of the four that has ANY executive experience whatsoever. May I remind you folks that the Presidency/Vice Presidency is an EXECUTIVE position. Moreover, the Governor has had to be accountable for her decisions and choices unlike the other three individuals on the ticket. The Democrat choice for V.P., Joseph Biden, is a buffoon, a thief(plagiarist), and a foreign policy poseur. His dreary record in the US Senate demonstrates the latter. Bottom line, Governor Palin has focused on doing the job to which she was elected. Unlike the others, she has not used her office as a sinecure/stepping stone to higher office. That means she hasn’t taken the time to write books and make speeches (while being paid to serve as a full-time US Senator). Certainly she is the only Executive on the ticket, and she has a track record of success to boot.
Governor Palin’s record in office is a lousy one that bankrupted her town and threatens to bankrupt Alaska. She may have “experience”, but it’s all bad…
Where in the world do you get your info. Mr. Knapp? Palin absolutely did NOT bankrupt her town, nor is Alaska almost bankrupt. You’re telling a lie while writing a column calling someone else a liar? I found so many mistakes in your column that aren’t even worth correcting; it would take up too much space. I get so tired of correcting all the lies the left makes up about conservatives, esp. women. But we’ll have the last laugh in 2010 when conservatives (not RINOs either) take back Congress & we’re able to boot Obama out on his backside in 2012!
Not a fan of Sarah. But some of the points you made were pretty dumb.