A new AP piece suggests that Sarah Palin might not have been the die-hard Buchanan supporter that others have made her out to be. Past news reports show that she supported Steve Forbes, not Buchanan, in 2000, And although some commentators have claimed that Palin backed Buchanan in 1996, McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb is now saying that Palin supported Forbes in 1996. I suspect she was a Buchanan brigader in ?96, but her willingness to go along with the Goldfarb strategy of denial tells more of her current positions than what she might have believed in ?96. Does she hold any Buchananesque positions today? I, personally, find it hard to believe that McCain would select a running mate who disagrees with him on interventionism, trade, and immigration (although he is known to make hasty, irrational decisions).
Scott McConnell has speculated, “The Palin choice promises to instigate a boomlet of old Buchanan controversies, including a criticism of the Israel lobby which has become increasingly mainstream since the Iraq war went south.” But MSNBC is reporting that on Tuesday Palin met with AIPAC, accompanied by Sen. Joe Lieberman, to show her “heartfelt support for Israel.? Arutz Sheva also mentions that Palin has been known to wear an Israeli flag in her lapel and displays an Israel flag in her office. In light of these facts, Palin may not be the ?America Firster? some had presumed.
Copyright 2016 TakiMag.com and the author. This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only. You can order reprints for distribution by contacting us at firstname.lastname@example.org.