Abuse of power and not knowing what a Vice President's duties are, would be matters worthy of criticism if such accusations were true. Unfortunately, some still seem to be relying far too much on the mainstream media, partisan bloggers and edited videos, who have a tendency to ignore context, run with smears without fact checking and in some cases, intentionally deceive.
Let's take the silly claim first, that Sarah Palin made remarks that indicated she was clueless regarding the activities of a Vice President. The problem is that merely considering the entire context, her meaning is quite clear and not what some edited videos try to show. As noted at Beldar Blog here:
But on watching the larger video clip for context — and especially hearing Gov. Palin's emphasis on the phrase "for me," and her deliberate pause before and after it — it's absolutely clear that she was not talking about the job responsibilities of vice presidents in general, but rather about what kind of specific duties she would be delegated in this particular administration.
Thus her references to being a productive and busy person, with an important job now, which she clearly wouldn't want to give up to be a figurehead vice president. Thus her concern that she be part of an administration in which the VPOTUS slot is actually a "fruitful position." Kudlow certainly understood her that way. Why else would he emphasize modern vice presidents like George H.W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and the "how big the veep job is these days"? She didn't argue with him, but again, quite properly, referred to the practical importance of the job she was already doing.
Be sure to read the entire post, which also links to the longer video of the interview. That some can listen to or read the entire exchange and not be moved from the view forced by small excerpts of video with text added to make sure one draws the intended conclusion, indicates a close-mindedness and unfalsifiable commitment to their confirmation bias, which misdirected them in the first place.
The matter of abuse of power is, however, a serious issue. Unfortunately, some can't even get the actual charge correct, being so far off as to say the following:
She also used her gubenatorial powers to get her brother-in-law fired from his job as revenge for him having a custody battle with her sister.
The man "fired" was actually that former brother-in-law's boss. The accusation is that he was let go because he would not fire her former brother-in-law, a state trooper. This was not over a mere custody battle. The confirmed problems with the trooper are:
- Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.
- He illegally shot a moose.
- He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.
- He told others his father-in-law [Palin's father] would "eat a f'ing lead bullet" if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.
This all began before Sarah Palin was governor. That someone with the above instances of breaking the law or dept. policy was only give a few days suspension, is something to be concerned with. The trooper's boss served in an appointed position. According to Palin, he was let go due to a lack of improvement in crime statistics and a new direction was needed. He was offered another position, but declined.
Some have made much of a tape that reveals a Palin aide talking about this matter and bringing up Sarah Palin and her family's concern that Wooten was still a state trooper. What is not said in the tape is that he should be fired and the aide has since stated that he was not doing this at the request of the governor, that he acted on his own.
I'll deal with one last criticism which is one that doesn't make Sarah Palin unfit for the office, but touches on the controversy of religion and government. But even this criticism fails, as it's not entirely accurate. The charge being that she wants creationism taught in schools. The fact is that Sarah Palin's position is not what a misleading article and title say, but much less as noted at LGF.
Looks like Palin made an off-the-cuff statement during a debate on a hot topic, didn’t really expect the criticism she’d get, and then softened her position considerably in a follow-up interview. But to quote just the first part of her statements on creationism and ignore the second is misleading; because in the clarification she’s describing a position that doesn’t cause me (a staunch anti-creationist) any discomfort.
He has the quotes and yes, he is very anti-ID, anti-creationism, etc.
So, let's focus on real issues and not be misled by the mainstream media or partisan extremists. Be aware that some in the media are lazy and or biased enough to rely on sites like the DailyKos which was the source of the smear that Sarah Palin's youngest child was actually that of her teenage daughter. The Democrat(ic) Underground is hardly any better as Ace covers here with a disturbing comment found there.
That people will disagree on abortion or gun ownership and other matters is part of the political process. Persuade with sound data and good arguments and vote as you choose on election day.
Filed under: Politics
Trackposted to: The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Rosemary's Thoughts, A Blog For All, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, NN&V, Democrat=Socialist, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Political Byline, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, A Newt One- Ronald Reagan in a skirt, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, A Newt One-McCain/Palin out front, Pirate's Cove, Beagle Scout, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.