I'm new to blogging, and I may be breaking a rule of blogging etiquette by taking issue with another blog posted on the same site....but then I don't think Next Left should be afraid of a little respectful, comradely disagreement. So here goes....
Sunder's blog 'Troopergate: who cares?' strikes me as profoundly mistaken (unless it is intended ironically, and I am not getting this, in which case ignore what follows).
Sarah Palin is seeking election to the second highest executive office in the USA. It is by no means inconceivable that she could become President if John McCain were to die suddenly. So the question of her executive ethics is of paramount importance. Does she understand, at a basic level, that those who hold public office hold office as a public trust and that they abuse this trust when they use public office to pursue purely personal agendas? Do they grasp that one of the key bulwarks - indeed, the key bulwark - against arbitrary power is the practice of keeping the rule of power-holders within the bounds of the law and related norms of impartiality?
It seems clear from the 'Troopergate' case that she simply does not understand these things. This disqualifies her from holding high executive office.
What is at stake here is not a minor matter of concern only to the citizens of Alaska. It speaks to the essence of what executive leadership is, or ought to be, in a democratic society.
So who cares about 'Troopergate'? I do. And so should you.