Sarah Palin wants to lower your taxes- at any cost. Really. Lower taxes. At any cost. In fact, I'm sure the more evangelical base of Republicans may not disagree with this practice at all! The reason Sarah Palin's politics, in particular, are being featured in this blog are because a) of their novelty and b) they are hypocritical. We already know other politicans are hypocrites because they've been around long enough to have acquainted us to their tactics.
Being the new kid on the block, so to speak, Governor Palin's record (which, incidentally, is shorter than a high schooler's resume), is being uncovered as quickly as it's not being offered for public consumption. And, the more I read, the more I know why. As you probably know by now, Mrs. Palin is pro-life. Well, this isn’t exactly true: she is pro-fetus and anti-mother. This is an ironic realization once you find out that Mrs. Palin has five children and her teenage daughter is carrying her first grand-child. Even as she is forcing marriage on the publicly pregnant 17 year-old Bristol, Sarah Palin really feels no remorse over the straight-jacketing she does of her state’s women and girls. Pulling a pregnant teenager out of high school and citing “mono” as the cause to avoid shame does not exactly seem like the best choice for Bristol’s life. Coercing the teenage potential father of her baby into marrying her does not counteract the fact that she will be an uneducated, teenage parent.
Essentially, Sarah Palin is pushing Bristol into a life of low-wage living, constant paycheck-to-paycheck struggles and dependency on the father- should he stay around. For someone who is “pro-life”, she certainly doesn’t seem to leave women or girls in Bristol’s situation with much of one. Religiously-based actions, though they may be, do nothing to account for the life of Bristol or many other pregnant teenagers or low-wage women. It’s not to say that those women who are older or earning more should be stripped of choices, but to consider the life of a fetus in-uteri over the type of life of that child and its mother would experience without options is absurd. Certainly no one is “pro” abortion and advocates for their use at every bend and turn.
But, how can we be anti the choice? How can we, as a nation produced, literally, by women, tell women it is their fault they were raped or victims of incest or simply victims of a bad choice and need to live with it? Why don’t we hold men to the same standards of having to re-experience their horrible mistakes over and over? When does pro-life start to mean that we want to give women a CHANCE at a life? Bristol Palin certainly won’t have much of one save for her family’s money. But, all of the “pro-life”/”pro-choice” debate crumbles when evidence is presented that, rather than simply being pro-life, Sarah Palin is ANTI-WOMAN.
If the woman is willing to turn her daughter’s life into a political point, it’s not as shocking to know that as Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska from 1996 to 2002, Sarah Palin billed the victims of sexual assault for their own rape kits. I’ll let you pause and re-read that last sentence again: Mayor Palin charged rape victims for their own examinations! .continue reading.... As reported by Alaskan rag “The Frontiersman” (and several other news sources) in 2000, “Gov. Tony Knowles recently signed legislation protecting victims of sexual assault from being billed for tests to collect evidence of the crime, but one local police chief said the new law will further burden taxpayers. The governor signed House Bill 270, sponsored by Rep. Eric Croft, D-Anchorage, outside the Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) exam room at Alaska Regional Hospital. In attendance at the signing were members of victims advocate groups, law enforcement agencies and legislators. The new law makes it illegal for any law enforcement agency to bill victims or victims insurance companies for the costs of examinations that take place to collect evidence of a sexual assault or determine if a sexual assault did occur.... While the Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece, the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests.
Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.” So, there you have it: marginalize and enfranchise rape victims for lower taxes. What a stimulating economic plan! As appalling and outrageous as this news is, what I want to know is how a town of 7,000 people- the size of about 2.5 medium-sized high schools- could cost tax-payers upwards of $14,000 in sexual assault processing expenses? Just how pervasive was/is rape in Wasilla? And, if the sexual assault rates were so alarmingly high as to cost each citizen $2,000 a year to investigate, why did Mayor Sarah Palin or any other official do anything to combat the problem???
As a mother of three daughters, you would think that Sarah Palin would be terrified to let her daughters out of a bunker in these conditions. I mean, not only do they stand an astronomically high chance of being assaulted, according to the figures, but she would have to hand over a great chunk of her salary to locate the rapist- which I would assume she’d want to do. I mean, after all, if a rapist knocked her daughter up, she’d definitely want to make sure she found him so they could be married and raise their family. Extreme point of view? Not anymore than telling women that any sexual violence is their fault, bankrupting them to seek justice and forcing them to live with any repercussions including permanent STDs and/or a resulting child. When you take away choice it doesn’t matter if you’re forcing marriage to the victim’s rapist or forcing a victim, financially, to shoulder the burden of her rape, the options are still gone. The state has, essentially, taken control over that woman’s life by pre-determining her choices.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t exactly want to live under government officials, especially one who is a mother with several young daughters, who think that the only choice I should get in life is whether I want to keep my mouth shut for appearances. How humiliating to think that such an outspoken woman as Sarah Palin is actively working to silence women everywhere she goes. As a woman, it makes me ill to think that I could live in a country that values the all-mighty dollar over any semblance of safety, life or livelihood I may ever have.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: .the new republican economic plan?..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/9243
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
"Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.” So, there you have it: marginalize and enfranchise rape victims for lower taxes."
One problem with this, the citizens of Wasilla are already paying virtually no taxes! There is no state sales tax or personel income tax in Alaska. There is a city sales tax in Wasilla of 2.5%. Also they have a cap on sales tax so no matter how much stuff you buy in one purchase you will never pay more then $12.50 in sales tax on a single purchase. http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=49
http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=124
The city also has no property tax, although the borough does of 9.64 mills.
I'm disagreeing with the chief of police's argument, not yours, something.of.substance. He sounds all whiny, like the citizens of Wasilla are paying really high taxes already and they just can't afford anymore. I completely agree with your argument. Just wanted to point out that the city and the citizens aren't already highly taxed.