COMMENTARY | The biographical tell-all concerning the former governor of Alaska and undecided presidential candidate Sarah Palin is set to hit the bookshelves and be available for Internet download on September 20, but many of its salacious and damning allegations revealed in The Rogue: The Search For The Real Sarah Palin have already become public knowledge . Some of those details and stories could be not only personally damaging to the controversial politician but could also present problems if she chooses to actually enter the 2012 presidential race. But should they? Should Palin be held accountable for personal indiscretions and failings that are part of her past and may or not be true?
Joe McGinniss, the bestselling author of various works that include true crime exposes like Fatal Vision and Blind Faith, has revealed in The Rogue that the current manifestation of Sarah Palin as the family values icon and model of conservative femininity might be a facade hiding an individual given to activities normally not associated with the purity advocated by family values voters. As the National Enquirer and other media outlets have reported, the new book puts on display a couple of affairs by the former governor of Alaska and the use of drugs.
The book alleges that Palin engaged in a premarital affair with then University of Michigan standout Glen Rice (who later became an NBA player for the Miami Heat) because of her “fetish for black men” acquired sometime around the end of her college days. Given that she is supposed to have been with high school sweetheart, Todd, at the time and to whom she would marry nine months after the alleged one-night stand, the story becomes an accusation of untrustworthiness.
The Enquirer also noted that their story of an extramarital affair was corroborated in The Rogue. Although both she and Brad Hanson denied the affair, Palin supposedly enjoyed a six-month dalliance with husband Todd’s snowmobile dealership partner, an affair that led to marital problems and the dissolving of the dealership.
Then there are the drug allegations. Supposedly, Palin smoked pot with a college professor as a college undergrad and snorted cocaine off an overturned oil drum before becoming governor.
But are any of those valid reasons — even if found to be true — why Sarah Palin, former mayor of Wasilla and ninth governor of Alaska, should not be considered a candidate for president of the United States?
Although many of his past indiscretions (alleged) are now widely known, President Bill Clinton had problems with rumors of pot-smoking while trying to gain the Democratic Party’s nomination in 1992 and caught plenty of political heat when he admitted to experimenting with marijuana but not inhaling when he smoked. He also had to deal with allegations of sexual harassment brought against him by former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones in 1994 that he propositioned her in an Arkansas hotel room while governor of the state, allegations that would be used against him in his reelection campaign.
President Barack Obama also admitted to smoking marijuana and using cocaine as a teenager in his autobiography, Dreams From My Father, which was published in 1995. Although sometimes brought up, most found early drug use immaterial to the campaign for presidency in 2008.
But what about Sarah Palin? Would her seemingly exploratory behavior at a younger age be held against her should she run for office? Would voters use a double standard against her, holding against her what they would not in a male contender for office? And what of the extra-marital affair? Clinton’s reputation with the ladies became the model for the Joe Klein novel Primary Colors, which was made into a popular movie starring John Travolta as a southern governor running for president. He was reelected while being investigated for the Paula Jones incident and amid numerous allegations of like or worse conduct while in an elected office. None of Palin’s activities occurred while holding public office and not one of the allegations has been proven to be true or investigated through legal channels.
But there is little doubt the Joe McGinniss information would be used against her anyway should she run for president — through the media and through political surrogates. And there should be even less doubt that the information would be held against her by millions of voters who would measure her against a double standard or against a family values template that would most likely find everyone measured against it lacking. Not that any of the information, even if found to be true in all regards, actually had anything to do with what she did politically or would have anything to do with her being able to perform the duties of the presidency.
For corroboration, just ask Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.