I think Sarah Palin was a smart, politically-motivated choice for John McCain. But it is funny that the anti-affirmative action party chose a vice presidential candidate not based on qualification or experience, but based on "minority" status.
Out of the little we do know of Palin is that she shares the same conservative economic vision of McCain. Unfortunately, if elected, they will continue the same "trickle-down" economic policies that eventually never work and whose proverbial chickens are coming home to roost.
The problem is simple but complicated in scope. Across the entire economic spectrum, wages have to keep up with inflation of basic goods and other costs, such as health care and fuel. If members of society cannot purchase the products it produces, or in our case, imports, it cannot sustain itself.
A similar meltdown for the same reasons occurred in the Pacific Rim in the early 2000s. Yet Washington, since Reagan, going through Bush I, then Clinton, now Bush II, has maintained the same policies of "trickle-down" economics, free trade, deregulation, lower wages and high CEO pay, known as the "Washington consensus," that eventually always fails and was the same in vogue economic philosophy that led to the Great Depression.
In the past few months, we've had food riots in 30 countries and experts wonder why there haven't been more.
Obviously, picking Palin was a lure to conservative backers of Hillary Clinton.
What's curious, though, is if McCain and Palin lose in November, will Republicans turn to her again in 2012? I predict they won't. They didn't even have a woman running in this election. Or is the conservative message, "Women are only good as support"?
hattiesburgamerican.com | Hattiesburg American