Lipstick 2012 blogger Jeanette Pryor makes the observation that if the likely GOP presidential field is reduced to those who have been governors and made executive decisions, Mitt Romney’s statist approach to healthcare reform in Massachusetts and Rick Perry’s undermining of the nation's immigration Laws by subsidizing in-state tuition for illegal aliens are poor examples of the kind of leadership everydays Americans are crying out for.
Sarah Palin's record as governor of Alaska, argues Pryor, contains no blemishes which are equal to those of Perry and Romney. She is "indisputably the single most-vetted political figure in recent history." As recent scrutiny of thousands of her emails as governor demonstrates, there are no major discrepancies between the Reagan conservative principles she advocated and her executive actions:
Palin consistently acted according to those principles, and not only when balancing her state’s budget, or restructuring the tax code, both highly publicized decisions, but also in personal, hidden choices that seemed economically insignificant.- JP
One incident that occurred during Sarah’s early days as Governor should be sufficient to elect her President. In an exchange of emails with the director of the Governor’s Mansion of Alaska that took place when Sarah and her family first moved in, we read the director’s offer to stock the home with any groceries the Governor Palin wanted.
Sarah answered:“We’re still trying to use up the ingredients we find downstairs.”It is impossible to over-state the significance of this statement. As a middle-class mom of five who struggles everyday with menu and budget, I will admit that it is hard to imagine the euphoria I would experience, were I elected governor of a state, to have someone offer to buy whatever I wanted from the grocery store starting on day one.
That Sarah Palin cooked what the tax-payers had already paid for in the Murkowski pantry is the act of a principled leader. This simple decision reveals Sarah’s whole approach to “spending other people’s money.” Isn’t the abuse of “other people’s money” the heart, soul, bones, and marrow of the economic [catechism]?