I doubt this is the type of gig the Governor would be interested in, but the New York Sun makes a compelling case that she’d be far better than the individual currently being floated as a candidate for the position:
In respect of the candidacy of Hillary Clinton to be president of the World Bank, let us just say that it’s a terrible idea. This is not a quarrel with Mrs. Clinton per se; had we been endorsing in the Democratic primary for president in 2008, we’d have put in a word for her, even if by our lights Barack Obama has a more presidential personality. It happens, though, that we’ve followed the World Bank for decades, and the key feature of the whole World Bank system is the conditionality it imposes on its lending. Its presidency is a pulpit in which a tribune of free markets, sound money, limited taxation, and growth could help the banks’ shareholders and borrowers. Whatever it is that Mrs. Clinton is for, these are not the causes that come to mind.
Sarah Palin would make a more credible president of the World Bank than Mrs. Clinton. Laugh not. We understand that no one (leastwise, President Obama) is going to nominate her and she wouldn’t take the job, anyhow. But she’s a radical, pro-growth politician. She understands natural resources policy, she is a leader on energy policy, she knows fishing down to the ground (so to speak), and she came up through a fight against corruption. She is prepared to lead on sound money, as her demarche against the quantitative easing of the Federal Reserve — made before the other politicians woke up to the issue — shows. And feature the rock-star receptions she got in such places as Hong Kong and India. Sarah Palin is exactly the kind of spark-plug one would need at the World Bank — if one needed the World Bank at all.
(h/t John Glube)