Sarah Palin lives in the cracks between the questions, even when she’s on her own turf. When asked about Rand Paul’s criticism of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, she outdoes Paul himself in evading the question, redirecting to her familiar attack on the Media being out to get her [I suspect that she doesn’t know what Rand Paul criticized about the Civil Rights Act, nor does she know what the Civil Rights Act actually says]. She’s then asked if Paul shouldn’t tone down his positions that don’t follow the Republican Party line. She answers something like, "Well, Libertarians are like that" and "Senators should question the constitutionality of Bills." It’s not a great answer. But more to the point, it’s paired with the wrong question. It’s the answer to the first question.
| Rand Paul and the Civil Rights Act
|
|
The first question asked of Gov. Palin was her thoughts about Rand Paul’s criticism of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and about the whole controversy surrounding his statements. "I think Rand Paul is right in his clarifications…He’s right on when he says he is a supporter of civil rights. He’s a supporter of civil rights and the Civil Rights Act. He would have marched with Martin Luther King, Jr. he said and he will oppose any efforts to diminish or erode away any aspects of the Civil Rights Act."
Gov. Palin continued that Paul was in an interview with someone who may have had an agenda. He is a libertarian conservative, and was discussing the impacts of the Civil Rights Act on the Constitution, but Gov. Palin reiterated that he supports civil rights and that legislation. Wallace followed up by asking if Gov. Palin saw a similarity between this interview and how the media has handled her. "Yeah, absolutely! …Don’t assume that you can engage in a hypothetical discussion about Constitutional impacts with a reporter or a media personality who has an agenda, who may be prejudiced before they even get into the interview about what your answer may be….They’re looking for that gotcha moment." Gov. Palin said, "I’m thankful he was given the opportunity to clarify his support for the Civil Rights Act." Wallace asked, "Having said all that Governor, Rand Paul is a strong libertarian and even some conservatives have doubts about some of his positions," which Wallace then listed on screen. Paul wants Guantanamo Bay closed, the Patriot Act repealed, the Department of Education abolished, and subsidies to farmers ended, according to Wallace. "Does he carry his political philosophy too far? Shouldn’t he tone it down especially in a campaign for the US Senate," Wallace asked. "Well, I won’t speak to each one of Rand Paul’s positions, because no candidate is going to be the ideal or perfect candidate in any voter’s mind. Rand Paul is not a perfect always-to-be-agreed with candidate. Nobody is. Rand Paul is a libertarian. He is clear in his libertarian leanings. He asks questions about implications as it applies to our Constitution, our economy, our society when a law is proposed and a law is enacted, and I think that more of those who serve in the Senate – and Rand we anticipate will be serving in the Senate – should ask questions about the Constitutionality of policies that are proposed," she said. |
Sarah was called out earlier for having the answers to questions written on her hand. I think that was a pretty good idea and abandoned too soon. While she seems to have learned to memorize the answers, she hasn’t quite mastered the concept of getting her answers hooked up with the right questions.
In her response to questions about Nikki Haley’s possible affair with a conservative blogger, Sarah falls back to her default position – the liberal media is vicious and an agent of the "corrupt political machine," again she’s a bit fact-challenged.
| Nikki Haley in Opposition’s Crosshairs: a Good Sign for Nikki and South Carolina! |
| Well, whaddya know? South Carolina’s conservative candidate, Nikki Haley, recently zipped to the front of the line in her state’s race for governor; and lo and behold, now accusations of an affair surface.
Nikki categorically denies the accusation that was spewed out there by a political blogger who has the gall to throw the stone, but then quickly duck and hide and proclaim he would not comment further on the issue. Quite convenient. When Nikki and I held her endorsement rally on the steps of the beautiful and historic South Carolina state house a few weeks ago, I warned her and her family that she would be targeted because she’s a threat to a corrupt political machine, and she would be put through some hell. That, unfortunately, is the nature of the beast in politics today – especially for conservative “underdog” candidates who surge in the polls and threaten to shake things up so government can be put back on the side of the people. South Carolina: don’t let some blogger make any accusation against your Nikki if the guy doesn’t even have the guts or the integrity to speak further on such a significant claim. And don’t believe anything a liberal rag claims or suggests unless the reporter involved has the integrity and the facts to report to you so you can make up your own mind. For traditional media to rely on an accusation via some blog entry is almost laughable, but I know the seriousness of it because that’s exactly what my family and colleagues have had to put up with, every single day, for the past couple of years. As I said to Nikki this morning, “Hang in there. I’ve been there. Any lies told about you will strengthen your resolve to clean up political and media corruption. You and your supporters will grow stronger through things like this.” Reaching her from Wasilla, I then joked with Nikki that I was calling her from one of the many locations the lamestream media claims I moved to. (Let’s see, I think the last I heard I was living in the Hamptons, or was it Montana? No, supposedly L.A. is where they claim I moved when I “left Todd” in their idiotic reports.) South Carolina friends, don’t let ‘em just make things up. – Sarah Palin |
Writing on Facebook without the pressure of the camera, she has the luxury of thinking about what she says. But that doesn’t help her very much. She falls back again to her default position about the liberal media, only she gets her basic facts kind of twisted. The blogger who said he had an affair with Nikki founded a Haley-supportive conservative blog [liberal rag?] and worked for both Haley and her champion, Governor Mark Sanford [corrupt political machine?]. And, by the way, they may not be making things up [Haley-Gate: The Storm before the Storm].
But forget Haley-Gate for the moment, Sarah Palin is running on fumes. At first, I thought maybe someone else might be writing her Facebook entries for her, but I doubt that anyone could be taught to imitate her particular interpretation of the English language. Given her limitations, it’s hard for me to imagine that she is a serious contender for office [but I thought that about George W. Bush when he was running in 2000].
According to reports, she is bombing in her $100,000 a shot speeches to trade group meetings. She was keynote speaker at the real estate convention in Las Vegas last week; and there was a generalized negative reaction — nothing but her usual stump speech with a few one-liners about shopping malls thrown in.
And the Republicans in Iowa are balking at her asking for her $100,000 fee to speah to them. They say they’re accustomed to politicians paying their own way to come to Iowa to campaign for their caucus votes.
She has beg drawing appeal, of course, but that’s all. Pretty soon people are going to be tired of paying $100,000 for what they can see of her on Fox news for free.
Funny slip, I made. She has “beg” drawing appeal. Of course I meant ” big” but I guess my disapproving editorial self crept in to reveal that I see her as a beggar and taking advantages of people’s shallow fascination with her. Pretty soon the beggar is going to go begging.