It has been reported that Joe McGinniss' upcoming biography of Sarah Palin The Rogue contains some striking accusations. While the book has already garnered criticism from the NYT among others for a general lack of credibility, it has nonetheless been turning heads with claims of cocaine and marijuana use, extramarital affairs, and even a tryst with NBA star Glen Rice.
As a rule, I would be hesitant to comment on these sorts of claims regardless of verity, as I see them as largely irrelevant to one's current role in the political sphere.
In that vein my gut feeling would be to treat Sarah Palin no differently. However, the notion also occurs to me that Palin generally approaches national issues not from purely political grounds, but also from a strong sense of morality. As such, should she be held accountable for her moral indiscretions (that is, if they are revealed to be accurate)?
How do Ricochet members feel? That is to say, should these allegations (again, if they are shown true) color Palin's standing as a political figurehead? Or, should they perhaps be noted, but deemed more or less irrelevant to her standing today?
For the record, I'm extremely skeptical that McGinniss' claims are accurate, but they do bring up an interesting question.