IT EXISTS!
And it’s worse than I imagined. Warning: This is mind numbingly painful to watch.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRuBdW0yBUY[/youtube]
Don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m feeling better about tomorrow night. This woman is an idiot.
Tags: 2008 Presidential, Sarah Palin
When is the next video going to come out where Couric slips her a piece of paper and says “Now, Gov. Palin, can you read this piece of paper for me.”
Palin: “Suuuure, Katie, let me see what we’ve got here. I am we todd did. I am we todd did. I am sofa king we todd did. I’m gonna tell ya Katie, I just don’t get it…”
Couric: “I rest my case.”
Not only she is an idiot but she also is not even a conservative.
There is a right to privacy in the Constitution ? Isn’t that the exact opposite of what Republicans and pro-life idiots have been bitching about for thirty years ?
There is….there are many…uh…what I think we need to….the uh…thing to keep in mind…is…uh..
The thing we need to do is throw feces at this mess.
Ben – If the judicially constructed rights are actually rights then shouldn’t the enumerated rights be plainly obvious?
She’s horrible! Although I do agree that we have a right to privacy. No wonder the McCain camp is going crazy.
Okay, so now we know what Sarah does when she doesn’t know the answer. I would recommend a drinking game for tomorrow night, but we’d all be smashed within 10 minutes.
Don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m feeling better about tomorrow night. This woman is an idiot.
You should and she is. I thought this tape was another figment of the left’s imagination, but nope. It was painful to watch.
Goodbye McCain.
My husband was groaning when I was listening to it because it was so bad.
Perhaps the drinking game could be drink if she gives a coherent answer or if she talks about lipstick.
Ouch! Hube sends it home!
Pandora: I’m not Mike Protack who’d claim the tape is “doctored.” I’m also honest enough to realize that that segment is just … tragic. It’s unconscionable. I am just beyond flummoxed that she couldn’t name another SCOTUS case other than Roe. And Couric was NICE to her — gently prodding her to cite another case!!
It’s irrelevant now, all of Obama’s and Biden’s faults. I still think Obama is a Machurian-like candidate who’ll govern nowhere near how he campaigned, but at least he isn’t fucking stupid. Cripes. Again, that video is nauseating…
You should and she is. I thought this tape was another figment of the left’s imagination, but nope. It was painful to watch.
Goodbye McCain.
I’m speechless
That couldn’t have been easy for you to write, Hube. Thanks for the honesty.
Truly disappointing….but I do appreciate Couric being gentle as a high school guidance counselor…she is blameless, in this snippet of press handling….what’s to come?…..
O’Reilly just played the tape with Bernie Goldberg watching. Goldberg was speechless. He couldn’t believe it. And O’Reilly didn’t make many excuses for her. He just said maybe she froze under the pressure. Yeah, it happens, but C’MON!!
Pandora: You’re welcome. It wasn’t easy. At least there are plenty of local races for which to cast my ballot …
Roe Vs wade ! McCain was ask that question and said, “sounds like fun I haven’t been to a regatta in years!”
That’s the spirit Hube!!! And gosh are there some local races needing address…or maybe it’s redress.
Okay. This is bizzaro world. Hube makes his statement and I’m about to defend Palin.
Couric asked for anther case that she disagreed with. That makes it a much tougher question because it takes Bush V. Gore, Brown v. Board of Ed, Miranda, almost all the well know cases off the table.
Clearly, you still need to be able to handle that question, and she is a train wreck, but not as much a train wreck as it looks on the surface.
You know what’s really sad? She plans on forcing her daughter to marry before the election to use it as a media stunt! I am being 100% serious! I was in the same situation at the age 16 and did get married at the age 16. The odds are stack against these kids and the pressures for normal kids in this situation are tremendous. If their marriage last three years it will be amazing. Will this young couple be living in the White House? The game plan is to use the wedding as a media distraction and hopefully she’ll get pity points.
Jason,
She couldn’t have named any cases that she agreed with, either.
She couldn’t pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel.
You are right. I just watched again. Horrible.
Wow. I do agree that that naming cases you disagree with is more difficult, but there are some extremely famous cases that are thought of as great injustices. Like Korematsu (in favor of Japanese internment), Plessy v. Ferguson (“separate but equal”) or Dred Scott (people of African descent could never be citizens). Isn’t Dred Scott used in wingnutty circles as some kind of anti-abortion argument?
Clearly, you still need to be able to handle that question
Indeed. Hell, even if she couldn’t recall the plaintiff/defendant names, she could have cited any of the against-Bush rulings during the War on Terror! POW — her base eats it up and she answers the freakin’ question. Hell, even Bush v. Gore would’ve sufficed — at least portions of it that seemingly infringe on states rights. Many conservatives had problems w/it on those grounds.
But Jason is right — the question IS a tad harder because it’s about disagreement with a SCOTUS case … after I settled down I too realized this. But again….c’mahn.
U.I.: Indeed. Those are killer obvious ones that NO ONE could go wrong citing!
OK, I’ve pulled enough hair out now …
Truth is… she just doesn’t know any Supreme Court cases other than Roe v Wade. Fine, and if this was her only “gaffe” it wouldn’t be such a big deal, but the entire interview was a disaster. We can’t even say, “Well, sure she messed up that question, but she really nailed those economy and foreign policy questions.”
What is also ouzzling about the answer to that question is that Alaska, like much of the American West has a fair number of cases that go to the Supreme Court for resource management and EPA related decisions. There was one 6 or 7 years ago back affirming that a zinc mine did indeed have to follow the EPA regs for air emissions controls. Maybe that’s not recent enough, but the fact that folks in the lower 48 get to say how they operate is a big sore spot with alot of Alaskans and I would think that she could talk about some of those. They may have been arcane cases, but at least she would have demonstrated some of the knowledge she gained as a Governor.
How could she have gone wrong with Plessy v. Ferguson?
Olbermann cited a case tonight that was decided in July in which the Supremes ruled in favor of Exxon reducing the amount they had to pay for damages in the Valdez spill. KO noted that Gov. Palin issued a press release expressing her disappointment (and, presumably, disagreement) with the SCOTUS ruling. She could not even name that case, which isn’t 100 years old.
Maybe she should plagiarize someone else’s comments like Sen Biden has done repeatedly?
“Maybe she should plagiarize someone else’s comments like Sen Biden has done repeatedly?”
And the award for weakest comeback of the thread goes to everyone’s favorite pornstache pilot.
Mike P,
You really are all done with politics aren’t you?
Can’t believe I didn’t remember the Valdez decision. It would have been an excellent answer.
And our latest Talking Points Generator weighs in! Wrong, of course, but that is what talking points are for.
I can actually understand freezing up and not remembering the name of a case, or of any case.
That wouldn’t be an excuse. If she had said, “I disagreed with the Supreme Court when it ruled in the 200 election,” nobody would have given her shit for not specifically saying Bush v Gore.
Or if she had said, “I disagreed with the Court over Japanese internment,” nobody could have legitimately criticized her for not knowing the citation.
But to simply not be able to come up with the substance of any case in which she disagreed with the SCOTUS is … just painful.
Here’s my bet: she will have been coached to work in the names of at least two SCOTUS decisions besides Roe v Wade in the debate.
Maybe she should try to steal another party to win, Protack?
One of the first things that I found enjoyable about this site was a particular thread where Von Cracker kept referring to Herr Wannabe Governor Pornstash as ‘Pornstash’.
I asked him – Why you call that dude Pornshash? He clicked the link to his home page… I laughed every time I saw his name on the site for weeks…
Pornstash
Pornstash
Pornstash
Yo, trim that next time you run for something…
I agree that she could have described the case without knowing the name (the one about segregation, for example). I also agree with pandora that if had been her only gaffe it would be a day-long story, at most.
I think one of her biggest problems isn’t that she flubs these gimme questions, it’s how she flubs them. She tries to bluff her way out of them, but makes it more obvious she doesn’t know what she’s talking about.
It really is too painful to watch.
If you ask anyone on the street the same question, you’d maybe get 3 out of 10 who would come up with a case. As a governor though, you’d think she’d come up with at least one!
It’s like that Leno skit on the streets of LA…..Pathetic!
Palin (v) to bluff poorly, esp. with regard to some basic knowledge.
eg. When he brought up the electoral college I thought he would palin, but he actually knew his shit.
eg. I’m going to have to palin my presentation tomorrow if I have another drink.
I’m so stealing that, Jason!
Let me get back to you on that… After McCain, rest his actuarial soul, has left me in charge.
Umm, just to clarify before the Secret Service comes seeking my IP address and knocking on my door, I wish no ill will to Presidential candidate McCain, I’m just trying to point out that he might pass from natural causes in the next four years, and that President Creationist Palin would be in charge.
On the issue of Pornstache-
Mike has said that he has the pornstache so that his Mother with dementia can recognize him more easily. Pretty good reason, if you ask me.
Granted it is one of the few things that Mike does that I would agree with, but it’s something. And yes, he does win for the lamest comeback of the year for his comment above.
I was thinking about that story geek. It was sweet and it was one of the few times he was able to humanize his crazy self. The whole rest of the campaign was as tone deaf as Hellen Keller with her head stuck inside a bucket.
“If you ask anyone on the street the same question, you’d maybe get 3 out of 10 who would come up with a case. ”
Sure, if it’s King Street right outside the federal courthouse. Otherwise, it’s more like 3 out of 100.
most likely geez!
I try to believe in the best of my fellow Americans. 🙂
I still say she’s hot, and her debate tonight will have more viewers worldwide than either one of the next two presidential ones…
I cannot say that I would even take the time to watch, had McCain’s choice been Lieberman…
And, if she (as prepped) comes off as good as she did in her convention speech… then millions of Americans tuning in for the first time, who have been too busy putting food on their families to pay attention to the hoopla buzzing around Katie Couric, may just take her side.
So I offer this hypothisis: that whether our country lives or dies during the next four years, depends solely on whether Ms Palin implodes.
McCain should have tapped Paris Hilton….. She’s hot and has a brain.
Food on their families… Love it.
But Paris said “No”….remember?