Quote:
Originally Posted by drgoodtrips
If this story gets national play, it strikes me that a McCain/Palin ticket could lose some of the female support that it's ostensibly gotten a boost from (assuming that it has, in fact).
I'm as much for trimming out unnecessary shit for the taxpayers to pay for, but I would put collecting evidence and representing victims squarely inside my (relatively small) take on "provide for the common good".
|
Agreed, which is additionally why these series of events bug me. Despite some falsehoods, exaggerations and speculations said about her on some other subjects, what is known to be true is that she has a pretty bad pork record despite her claims to the contrary. For example, she backed the Bridge to Nowhere when running for governor and when Congress killed it given public outrage, she kept and diverted the funds. She hired lobbyists when mayor of Wasilla to get millions in earmarks from Washington for Wasilla, etc. Heck, also reported today, McCain criticised Palin in Wasilla himself back in 2001 for wasteful pork being sent her way:
The CNN Wire: Latest updates on top stories Blog Archive - McCain criticized Wasilla earmarks in 2001 « - Blogs from CNN.com
We're talking megamillions here, much of it already shown to be wasteful spending. But yet, taxpayer frugality was cited for charging rape victims, which would have only cost between 5,000 to 14,000 per year. The megamillion cash differential and sense of priorities on how, where and how much taxpayer money is spent really irks me on this matter.