Setting Records Straight on Palin

So, maybe you remember this issue.  After Sarah Palin didn’t get elected vice president there was this breaking story where the press claimed she wasn’t the hockey-mom she pretended to be.  Rather, she was this woman who was an unreasonable Diva who bought over $130K on clothing at the expense of election donations?  As far as I ever heard in the news, she didn’t have a good response to that and people ended up feeling like it was one more reason to not trust her.

If you know me then you know that this article isn't really about Sarah Palin or Divas, but about broken Politics and press that sells.  Check this out!  If you were like me, then the story ended with the word "Diva!" Well, there is more story, but somehow the record still doesn't get set straight no matter the facts:

New York Times (surprisingly) sets the record straight: Political Stylist from RNC sets the record straight on Palin Diva Clothing Scandal

Here is a video review of basically the same thing: Just the Facts Ma'am Palin Wardrobe Scandal

It sure seems like a person could be a hockey-mom, down to earth and accomplished (I don’t see those things as competing) all at the same time.  So if this was where the Diva argument comes from, and she isn’t a Diva on these points, then the next biggest complaint was simply that she wasn’t knowledgeable enough to be a real candidate for VP or otherwise, right?

Now, don’t get me wrong.  If she were about to run for president my first question would be “What other conservatives are running?” and the next question would be, “Who would she be running against?”  I think, in an attempt to be reasonable I was surprised to read the type of stuff she is writing and saying at the moment.  Check this stuff out (not just the writing style, but the content and reasoning):

Wall Street Journal Op-Ed on Health Care Reform

Wasington Post Op-Ed on Climate Change Legislation

And finally, Palin talking to a conference about US-China relations for an hour without a teleprompter (President Obama, take notice)

On a sliding scale of reason, I am not certain that anyone unwilling to listen to her for themselves will be persuaded by someone like me saying “Maybe the press was wrong and more importantly maybe they were working pretty hard to make Sarah Palin look like a non-candidate?” But the more I listen, and read, the more the press seems like a broken record, playing old tracks that have since been disproved (she was put through the wringer on over 20 different ethics charges for her time as the Alaskan Governor and vindicated on all counts to date, yet the press keeps bringing it up.) It would be my dream if people would take 5 minutes and research their position before regurgitating the next trite popular spin on a story ("But Steve, isn't she a hypocrit and really thinking of posing for playboy?" Ah, no! That was an unfounded rumor started by comedian Sarah Silverman on Larry King).

Maybe people remain bothered by the fact that she resigned from her post as governor of Alaska and proof of her continued lack of qualification? The people who say that seem to forget how long Obama was a senator from Illinois before he hit the road campaigning for president (He did one year as a senator and started campaigning for president in 2006 according to public record). Does that disqualify Obama.  Clearly, the public wouldn't say that someone with minimal experience is disqualified, right? Obama has broken through that "glass ceiling".

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of turning traditional experience on it's ear. The business world seems to be doing a lot of this right now during these fiscally conservative times.  Rather than re-hire the bloated cats that sat in big offices and built empires benieth them, companies are hiring raw tallent with broad but real productive experience. Executive experience today seems to imply the luxeries of the executive life.  Companies seem to want people who can get the job done but who aren't tainted by a demand for massive golden parachutes and fringe benefits.  I think this is how I will be voting in the next election.  I want to find the lean and mean productive and conservative candidate that isn't tainted by years of closed-door dealings. I want a clear thinker who won't campaign on change and then later explain away shifty dealings, explaining to me that "this is how Washington works."

I am sick of how Washington works and I will take my chance with someone who, like both Obama and Palin, is savvy but who has less Washington experience. If Palin (or Obama) can convince me that they share my values, goals and won't simply become the next expert at "how Washington works" then they will be closer to having my vote.  If they don't then I will look elsewhere.