I am weary of Palin's rhetoric that she is an advocate for children with special needs. She has repeated this so many times that I think her statement has become a political mantra. Perhaps Palin thinks if she says "I am an advocate for special needs children" in every speech this will become a fact. I sincerely hope those unfamiliar with disability rights are not naive enough to accept Palin's words. I for one see through this smoke screen that has no basis in reality. Palin's advocacy for "special needs children" is a emotional ploy designed to sway voters and create the illusion that she cares about people like her son Trig. The reality is she is not in any way shape or form an advocate of special needs children or disabled people. Her action not her words demonstrate this.
When Palin was in Colorado early this week she spoke out against Amendment 51. Amendment 51 seeks to raise the sales tax by one cent on every $10 spent in the next two years. The tax is earmarked to help the 12,000 special needs children and adults who are on waiting lists to receive state service such as nursing care and job training. The money is specifically designed to help people like her son Trig and others with cognitive disabilities. Why is Palin against Amendment 51? She thinks "there's got to be an alternative to raising taxes. It's a matter of prioritizing the dollars already there in government". Does this mean the money already exists to help special needs children? If so, how does Palin intend to change existing priorities so children like her son Trig can enjoy the same civil rights as others? This is pretty hard to do when the McCain/Palin campaign does not have a platform that outlines how they would help special needs children and disabled adults. The bottom line, the gritty reality, is that Palin's words and actions do not correspond. She cares about special needs children in name only. Palin blew a chance this week to be the "advocate" she says she is. Maybe I am jaded from living in a heavily taxed state like New York but I would pay the modest sales tax increase for two years knowing it would help 12,000 people that desperately need state support. This is a matter of money and the human rights.
2 comments:
Her ignorance of what people with disabilities need to survive, let alone thrive, in this country shows in her patronizing tone, superficial offers of emotional support and lack of committment to real action. If a 0.001% tax increase REALLY is more important than meeting the needs of 12,000 languishing citizens, she is no advocate.
Terri, Palin made a speech today about special needs children I will write about tomorrow. The McCain campaign posted a press release outlining its supposed commitment to children with special needs. I guess this is better late than never. The skeptic could point out Obama had a clear policy written over a year ago.
Post a Comment