I can’t decide if the media is really over-attacking Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin or not? I can’t decide if, perhaps, they’re just picking on her because she’s a woman or, on the other hand, they’re just being good journalists and properly vetting this person as the McCain campaign should have done months ago. The newest ‘scandal’ (if you want to call it such) is that she arguably abused her gubernatorial expense account, charging tax payers for her working even when at home.
There have been several good commentaries since Palin was announced as McCain’s VP accusing the Republican party of outright sexism and, today, incorrectly-applied affirmative action. I tend to agree with both arguments. I see the choice of Palin as a way to appeal to women voters only, regardless of their party affiliation or her experience. As a woman, I’m not going to go vote for McCain just because he chose a female VP. For the same reason, if I were black, I would not vote for Obama just because he is also black. I definitely saw this choice as patronising: look at us, we’re the ‘new’ Republicans; we can pick women and minorities too.
I think, needless to say, I am not a Palin fan. I think she is inexperienced and, again, only picked because she was a woman. Regardless of that, I am beginning to question the media’s arguably zealous coverage of her. Today’s revelation that she might have abused Alaska’s expense rules seems almost petty. I think, given the opportunity, any politician in the world would (and do, in many cases) abuse their expense accounts. A London Assembly member was recently reprimanded (in other words, he got a slap on the wrist) for racking up over £4,000 in taxi fares around London in a year despite having use of a free travel card for the London Underground. Public transport is preferred, being greener, cheaper and not as elitist; but what politician actually practices what he/she preaches? I argue not one. Not even the ‘saintly’ Obama. I’m sure he’s abused an expense account or taken a gift from someone in the past. No politician is squeaky clean.
So the moral of this story is I don’t actually care if Palin charged Alaskan tax payers while she was in her home. It does anger me that she seemed to flout the laws so flagrantly (say that three times fast) but at the end of the day it is her performance in the job that matters to me and, hopefully, to other voters. The bottom line with Palin is that she has not been in any higher political office long enough to be VP. I didn’t think Mike Huckabee had enough experience to run for President and he was governor of Arkansas for ten years, five times the length of Palin’s tenure. Ironically, Huckabee was often derided for his acceptance of gifts and speaking fees while governor. Sarah Palin may have been slightly corrupt and eager to take money from the Alaskan people but I just don’t care. She’s not qualified to be VP, regardless of her leisurely use of the expense report.