Politico reports the RNC disclosed expenditures of over $150,000 for outfitting Sarah Palin and her family. On cue, the media and blogs go on their attack Sarah Palin frenzy de jour. No context, no balance, just a dysfunctional need to conjure negatives on Sarah Palin. I believe we’ve hit yet another low in politics and the bias and unfairness is undeniable. Here’s how I got there. (apologies to Glenn Beck)
First — It was RNC spending, not the McCain campaign or Palin. Why attack her? She didn’t do or violate anything
Second — Palin was thrust into the national spotlight. Neither her nor her family was prepared for this level of instant exposure. Who can ever be prepared for our presidential campaign circus? To put it in context; have you ever been stressed about an impending public situation where you didn’t have the appropriate wardrobe? Multiply that times a thousand for Sarah’s situation. The RNC prudently provided the appropriate wardrobe for a candidate and family not used to this level of exposure. One only has to look at Palin’s released tax returns to see that she and her family, likely, do not have the means to outfit themselves for national prime time events every night. Who does? Perhaps that’s why her entry into this race resonates with so many people. She is Joe the Plumber.
Third — The RNC has stated “on the record” that this was not a gift. Just as the bunting, posters, and signs are presentation stagecraft, so are Palin’s outfits. Nobody has ever questioned the cost of flag bunting. It is the RNC’s duty to put forth the best image it can just as it is the DNC’s.
Finally — This smacks of unfairness. Let’s hold everyone to the same standard. As Drudge just reported, the Obama campaign has disclosed spending of $437,144 on meals. Why not outrage here? To follow the logic that is used against Palin, shouldn’t Obama’s campaign merely have provided rice and beans for their workers? It’s nutritious, healthy and cheap. It would have clearly displayed that Obama is not an elitist. Pretty silly, huh?
I haven’t even touched the implications of bias against women. That’s a “third rail” issue. Hillary knows all about that.
Just because the media can go into the gutter, it does not mean they should. They garner no credibility if they do not assess the weight and real relevance of a story. McCain and Obama have real differences on important issues. How about reporting on that? America, wants it. But, if the media still feels the need to go tabloid, at least balance the coverage.They should to apply their own “fairness doctrine” of professional journalistic behavior. Quit dressing down Sarah Palin for nothing but sensationalism to achieve ratings. If you want to report on her, report on her stand on the issues. Something it looks like you choose not to do. What, she’s too normal for you?