On Enough! (Sarah Palin)

I'm not afraid of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

So, to buck The Flyer's esteemed editorial board, which is concerned that Palin is the "most macho candidate on a presidential ticket since Teddy Roosevelt saddled up with William McKinley in 1900," let her be her own woman. After all, this is America.

Yet, let her be so on her own time, not ours, for now.

Hear me out.

If Barack Obama should lose, then it's curtains for him the same way it was for Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry. Losers at the top of the ticket don't get second chances. But if John McCain loses, well, it simply opens the door for Palin in 2012.

So, yes, I fully expect her to see her again, which is why I'm not worried about $150,000 in RNC-purchased clothing or the fact that her makeup artist earned the most money on her staff in October. Those are trivial issues. Evidence of a double standard, though? No, not really.

Here's why: Palin gave her FIRST major policy speech TODAY, less than two weeks before the general election.

And not only that, she focused on a plan to help special needs children, which is cool if one might imagine Barack Obama outlining a plan specifically for African Americans to gain reparations, which he hasn't and that's the hypocrisy of Palin's double-standard claims. It's somehow OK for her to advocate (i.e. panderer) because of her child whereas it is politically suicidal for Obama to do so for his race.

But more importantly, there's this from the Chicago Tribune:

Q: The federal government promised in 1975 to pay 40 percent of the cost of educating children with special needs. Are you nervous about making good on that commitment given how expensive it would be?

SP: "We have a $3 trillion federal budget and we're looking at a miniscule amount of money in the grand scheme of things here. And it is a matter of prioritizing the dollars that are already there. Not necessarily asking for more funding, but re-prioritizing dollars that are existing in federal budgets today, and then allowing some of that to trickle down to our states and allow the states to prioritize also according to the needs in our individual states and how they feel best to, to provide services to special needs children.

Q: So, are you saying other things might not be funded in order to fund this.

SP: "Out of $3 trillion I'm sure there are efficiencies we can find all over the place and allow that reprioritization that I believe needs to take place. And it needs to take place again so we can make manifest that commitment that we have to provide opportunities to special needs children and special needs adults also. That is what I want to usher into Washington, DC, that spirit of inclusion in our society and recognizing that these children are not a problem, they're a priority. Ushering in that good heart of America. One way to do that is by prioritizing budget.

"But it's not all about the money, it's not all about budgets, it's about that spirit of acceptance and embracing that diversity that is in the world with children who are special, they're a little bit different from the norm, and that diversity is good and for us it's exciting and it's a joyful challenge."

What's maddening about this is the sheer lack of specifics and nuance in Palin's response. She doesn't lay out a clear strategy or framework. She just speaks in emotional lingo and generalities that journalists fail to ask her clarify. People wouldn't be so trivial about her if she had enough substance to demand their attention elsewhere. But I digress.

She's new. Maybe, she can't detail everything. That's fine.

Then, let her be an advocate for special needs children by starting a foundation, becoming a national spokesperson, but she's not ready to take the stage as vice president or, God forbid, president. After all, this is America!!

I'm just sayin, take the next four years to read and learn, Sarah. She'll have the same access to the best minds like Obama had when he entered the U.S. Senate and look at the wonders that has done for him. I'm just sayin, folks are now flocking to Obama because of his command of the issues, not his rhetoric.

But back to Palin. Let her be her own woman--not in the Senate, though. Nooo, she has enough of a national following that she can come back in four years, run for president, lose--and then we'll be done with her for sure.

*Flyer: The soap opera.
*CA: High voter turnout.
*EyeNews: Tricky.