- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Hmmm. The mess in the financial sector is going to cost the tax payers $700 billion dollars. Salon's headline piece is: Sarah Palin's political enemies don't think highly of her?! Gasp! Stop the presses!
If Salon doesn't like the whisper campaign against the previous mayor of Wasilla, then it obviously opposed Hillary Clinton's run, I assume? Or have we forgotten Clinton's campaign sending out emails in Iowa saying Obama was really a Muslim, her surrogates suggesting he might have dealt drugs (in South Carolina, iirc), the business with leaking the photo of him in Somali garb, etc, etc. At least she clarified that Obama's really a Christian...as far as she knows.
Palin's camp suggested that Stein and his wife might not have been technically married. Now that's crossing the line.
Basically the article mostly complains that Palin joined the establishment and started disposing of wrong-doers because it was politically expedient to cultivate a reputation of clean government. The curiosity of this article is that it doesn't actually try to defend the people Palin "betrayed" but merely questions Palin's motives for doing so.
Um, what's the alternative? To join the system and go along with the corruption? When did it become such a mortal sin to join the system and fight corruption from the inside? Is it better to complain from the outside and effect nothing of consequence?
I've said this a dozen times; I don't think a McCain administration would be good for the country given their policy stances. However, this constant drumbeat of hit-pieces on Palin diverts from the substantive issues that I'd like to get debated. Moreover, it invites a backfire and helps solidifies her support.
What is wrong with this site?!
