One thing you have to admire (or despise) in Sarah Palin: she sticks to her talking points, no matter what. There were a variety of familiar items previously discussed in my posts, and I don't really want to repeat myself. But she says a number of incredulous things, and Sean Hannity never pushes her on her talking points.
The Couric Supreme Court Decision Question
What is amazing here is that a year after the interview question was given, Sarah Palin doesn't seem to understand where Katie Couric was going with the question (or at least how I would have interpreted the thrust of her question) of Supreme Court decisions (other than Roe v. Wade). For example, as a working mother, did she have a position on the Ledbetter decision? As a Christian, did she take a position on the school prayer decisions in the early 1960's? What about the 2003 University of Michigan Bollinger decisions on the role of affirmation action in university admission? But, and this is the one I would have begun with, there was the unconscionable Kelo decision which dramatically extended the scope of eminent domain beyond traditional Fifth Amendment constraints. The point is, Katie was really giving Sarah an opportunity to express her key political values, how they have been affected by the Supreme Court, the current balance of the Supreme Court, and what qualities Sarah Palin would like to see in a federal judge.
Instead, Sarah Palin told Hannity that of course, she was well-aware of Supreme Court decisions and should have mentioned the Exxon-Valdez decision from June 2008. That is a fairly surface-level reaction to the question--Katie really wasn't trying to play the one-on-one version of Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?
The Couric Newspapers and Magazines Question
Sarah Palin made an admission I've heard before, that she deliberately refused to respond the question, which had more to do with her perceptions of the motivation beyond the question (i.e., "anti-Alaskan") and seeks to reassure Sean Hannity and the American people that in fact she does read, is well-read on current affairs and traverse the Internet. She does admit that answering the question the way she did wasn't a politically savvy move.
Again, this is a fairly surface-level response to the question versus what I think Katie Couric intended. I'm not that impressed with her initial reference (to Hannity) of newsmax.com, a pop conservative outlet. For example, I myself subscribe to the Wall Street Journal and have subscribed or continue to subscribe to magazines like BusinessWeek, US News & World Report, and the National Review. I will regularly check for new columns by articulate conservatives like George Will, Thomas Sowell, David Brooks and Charles Krauthammer. I also like to check on what the opposition is thinking (e.g., Chris Matthews podcasts, Slate or Huffington Post). I'm not a politician; I would like to think that people in public service are at least as well-read as I am on business, economics, and political issues. The point, however, isn't so much whether you read newspapers and magazines as explaining your approach to keeping up to date on topical issues.
The David Letterman Kerfuffle
Once again, Sarah Palin, despite have accepted an apology extended by Letterman, insists that the ill-fated, lousy joke in question was deliberately aimed at her then 13-year-old daughter Willow, whom attended a Yankee game, something that is patently absurd to any reasonable person. Sarah Palin is well-aware and taking full advantage of that the Letterman staff inexcusably failed to fact check which Palin daughter attended the game, assuming it was 18-year-old unwed mother, Bristol, and her smear of Letterman as a pedophile is unethical, unprofessional and unconscionable behavior, totally inexcusable and reprehensible. Furthermore, her justification for refusing an invitation to the Letterman show so he could apologize in person, saying that he was out to exploit the occasion for ratings is yet another departure from reality; Sarah Palin herself was responsible for overreacting to a lame "joke". David Letterman twice had to directly address the issue during his show, something I don't think he or any late show comedian has ever done with respect to any joke.
I have not really analyzed the joke before in a post, and I think I have a quick wit and good sense of humor. I just don't get the joke, but I really haven't been following Alex Rodriguez's career and life that closely, unlike Yankee fans. (My relatives come from a distant suburb of Boston and consists of Boston Red Sox fans.) What I know is that Alex Rodriguez had notorious rumored or actual extramarital relationships with pop singer Madonna and a stripper. A joke involving a brief encounter with Bristol Palin during the seventh inning stretch might work only if several pieces of information were true: Alex Rodriguez and Bristol Palin were sexually promiscuous; Alex had a history of chasing barely legal young women; and Alex had a reputation for short-lived sexual performances.
Bristol Palin was just a high school girl like many others, whose boyfriend pressured her into sex. She made a mistake, and she responsibly chose to bring a beautiful baby boy into the world. That hardly puts her in the same league as a 32-year-old stripper or a middle-aged celebrity singer whom once published nude photos of herself.
Even though Letterman's staff fact-checked Bristol's age doesn't mean that the joke was acceptable; they were making the governor's daughter out to be a slut. That was unfair, heartless, and mean-spirited. If Bristol decided after her pregnancy, she wanted to counsel other young couples against making the same mistake, that's honorable, not something to be ridiculed. Even if it was David Letterman's staff which came up with the joke, David Letterman is responsible for putting it in his monologue. What kind of professional judgment did he show after over 25 years in the business? He's a parent himself, for God's sake. He likes to keep his home life private; why didn't the governor's family deserve the same consideration?
I understand why the Palins are upset at how their daughter was getting treated. But I don't think it's wise for a politician to pick a battle with a late-night comedian (it gave a bad joke unnecessary exposure), and Sarah Palin's ill-advised escalation of the situation, insisting to this day that the joke was about statutory rape and accusing Letterman of being a pedophile. Not only did she lose the moral higher ground, but she raised questions about her judgment and her professional demeanor.
The Scandals
Sarah Palin is in a state of denial. Calling the numerous complaints "frivolous" is wishful thinking. In fact, the independent investigator of Troopergate concluded that Palin had abused her power. An investigator of her Alaska Defense Fund agreed with a complaint that it violated the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. In response to another complaint, Sarah Palin agreed to reimburse the state for thousands of dollars in travel expenses claimed for her children.
It does seem that a female former state employee (Ms. McLeod), a registered Republican allegedly unhappy with the fact that the Palin Administration had refused to hire her, has been the source for multiple complaints, and it is true that a disproportionate number of complaints have been filed since Sarah Palin's selection as McCain's running mate. However, Sarah Palin, who had built a reputation as a reformer taking on her own party and further added symbolic touches like putting a state plane up for sale and doing without certain staff positions at the state residence, seemed imprudent in other respects. Why was her unelected husband being carbon-copied on state-relevant emails and given access to state facilities, phones, etc.? Why was she using commercial external email accounts (e.g., yahoo.com) instead of secure Alaskan state email, certainly in appearance (if not fact) a possible workaround to relevant state sunshine/transparency laws? Why was she wearing a jacket in public, promoting one of her husband's snowmachine racing sponsors? Did she attempt to get reimbursement from the state of Alaska for legal defense of allegedly frivolous complaints and/or address the issue with the state legislature before establishing a legal defense fund? Did she get any legal advice on whether setting up a legal defense fund could violate existing Alaska law and/or did she proactively report any contributors to her fund whom were individuals or companies doing business with the state of Alaska? Presumably the fact that most of these charges were dismissed suggest that the violations were not deemed material or the complainant had not met the burden of proof.
But for someone whom built a career on combating corruption, Sarah Palin seemed remarkably oblivious to things like the state picking up the tab for her family's travel expenses; I mean, I've seen fellow consultants sometimes have their wives or families join them while on assignment, but jump through hoops to ensure the company or client were not charged for any expenses beyond their own.
The Attacks on McCain Campaign Staffers
The fact that Sarah Palin named her book Going Rogue seems to suggest she is far more comfortable fighting Republicans or campaign staffers than promoting a positive, substantive agenda. The media conservatives (like Bill O'Reilly) think there's nothing wrong with candidate Sarah Palin publicly questioning campaign strategy (e.g., ceding Michigan or robo-calls), griping about staffers encouraging her performance during the national interviews, the questions being asked by Katie Couric, the moderator's questions during the Vice-Presidential debate, etc.; however, when McCain staffers suggest, off the record, that Sarah Palin is high maintenance (say it ain't so, Joe!), it's a "PERSONAL ATTACK" on Palin; Bill O'Reilly and others allege that those staffers are trying to "scapegoat" Sarah Palin for a losing effort and question John McCain's manhood in not publicly rebuking the allegations...
Let me see a show of hands of all people whom think a fight between a sitting governor/VP candidate and a campaign staffer is fair--how many campaign staffers have gotten a $5M advance to air dirty laundry? How many of them have appeared on Oprah, Barbara Walters or the Fox News primetime lineup to give their side in a "fair and balanced" report on the dispute? Oh, that's right: apparently a few comments in obscure news stories get as much coverage as Palin's interviews with and endless negative talking point commentaries from Bill O'Reilly... Does Bill O'Reilly have a clue as to what left-wing websites were saying about Sarah Palin and her family, and does he believe minor gripes from McCain staffers are comparable? Does he think Sarah Palin had a blank check to treat staffers however she wanted? How many people think if Sarah Palin was treating the staffers like the professionals they are, with all due respect and common courtesy, you would have heard all this drama?
Sarah Palin, in writing her book, could have taken the high road, refusing to address petty disputes in practicing her Christian faith. She could have taken responsibility for her abysmal performance--it wasn't the fault of John McCain, the staffers, the national interviewers, or the debate moderator. She could have been a team player and gone with the flow.
Political Spin
"The liberals, their heads are just going to be spinning...." No, dear Sarah. Conservative heads are spinning, just hearing you praise Hillary Clinton: "Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America." What's not to love about a progressive with less than a 10% lifetime ACU voting record? No doubt Sarah Palin realizes, in saying that, what great affection conservatives have for Hillary stemming from her husband's years in the White House and her notorious first stab at health insurance "reform". And how about Sarah Palin's response to Letterman's unconditional apology to her and Bristol for the Alex Rodriguez' seventh-inning quickie joke. "Of course it's accepted on behalf of young women, like my daughters, who hope men who 'joke' about public displays of sexual exploitation of girls will soon evolve." Sarah Palin is adopting feminist/politically correct rhetoric in responding to an apology for a joke (admittedly in bad taste) that implies consensual sex between adults (not necessarily in public). Everyone knows how much conservatives love political correctness...
The Resignation
I want to say to anyone whom believes Sarah Palin's spin on why she resigned from office, there's a Bridge to Nowhere I would like to sell you. You know, the one she supported building during her 2006 campaign but canceled several months later after learning the costs had doubled--and then told the country she had told the Congress they could keep their money for the bridge (when, in fact, the Alaskan legislature had already spent the money on other things, which the Congress had allowed).
No, it's not the "spurious" ethics complaints, that she had accomplished all she intended to accomplish as governor or that governors are honor-bound to resign just as soon as they decide not to run for reelection (I guess, after all, the state administration and public service work comes to a halt after a governor decides not to run for reelection, a governor doesn't make appointments or other executive decisions, no longer has to promote the state's economy or direct emergency services, the National Guard is on auto-pilot, etc.)
Maybe the fact that Sarah Palin had earlier resigned in 2004 after less than a year as chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission should have been taken into consideration by Alaskan voters as evidence of her professional commitment to the citizens of Alaska... "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me..."
