The Daily News-Miner in Fairbanks, Alaska, has published a front-page apology to Sarah Palin for a headline referring to the former governor’s speech in Hong Kong this week: “A broad in Asia.”
The apology, in part, reads:
There can be no argument that our use of the word “broad” is anything but offensive. To use this word to describe someone of the stature of the former governor — who is also the former vice presidential nominee of the Republican Party — only adds to the anger that many people appropriately feel.
The Wall Street Journal appears to have been the American news outlet with the resources to take Palin’s speech most seriously. Palin gave the plane no specific mention, but she may have taken up for the Marietta-made F-22 in one passage noted by the newspaper:
Speaking on China policy, the former governor criticized the Obama administration for cutting back on some defense spending, suggesting that it sends a worrisome signal to allies depending on U.S. strength to counterbalance China’s growing influence.
“Our strong defense posture in Asia has helped keep the region safe and allowed … this area to prosper,” Ms. Palin said. “Our Asian allies get nervous if they think we’re weakening with security commitments.”
It is considered politically risky for U.S. public figures to criticize American policy on foreign soil. A White House spokesman declined to comment on Ms. Palin’s remarks.
The WSJ also published excerpts from the speech, which include these comments by Palin on the cause of the Great Recession:
According to one version of the story, America’s economic woes were caused by a lack of government intervention and regulation and therefore the only way to fix the problem, because, of course, every problem can be fixed by a politician, is for more bureaucracy to impose itself further, deeper, forcing itself deeper into the private sector.
I think that’s simply wrong. We got into this mess because of government interference in the first place. The mortgage crisis that led to the collapse of the financial market, it was rooted in a good-natured, but wrongheaded, desire to increase home ownership among those who couldn’t yet afford to own a home.
In so many cases, politicians on the right and the left, they wanted to take credit for an increase in home ownership among those with lower incomes.
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.