Recently (points off for late assignments?) Sarah Palin’s campaign released a blurb answering those Katie Couric questions. In case you don’t know what I’m talking about, see here:
They claim she DID in fact, wait for it, read “the same things other people across the country read,” namely The Economist, WSJ, and the NYT. That doesn’t sound like a canned answer at all, does it? –and do they really think that Americans ‘across the country’ read The Economist? Give me a break. As CNN Hardball guest Mike Allen said, and I quote,
“Somebody told me, she should have just said ‘The Economist.’ Everybody lies about reading ‘The Economist.’”
Given the original gaffe, she could have at least added a little blurb about why she likes each one. I mean, I read the NYTimes every day, but rarely make it past the World News, Health, and Science sections as far as actual articles go. Before the election heated up, I’d usually only skim headlines in national news, although now I’m addicted to the politics section. When I was in college, I could regularly read all the fashion, style, and arts sections of NYT and WSJ, but little else beyond front page headlines. It’s not just what periodicals you read, it’s the articles you choose.
Also, she explains that she was offended by the question–she thought Katie was implying that she didn’t read…this race is so crazy. I’m pretty sure none of the other three candidates would have read it that way had they been asked. She’s so far on the defensive, that she’s lashing out and making herself look worse. I don’t want someone in office who feels like they have to hide from the press. We’ve had enough of that already.
Moving on….she also named a court case she disagrees with: Kennedy vs. LA, in which the death penalty is forbidden in cases of repeat offender rapists. Apparently, life is sacred, unless you leave the womb and grow up. But that’s a cheap shot. What I think is interesting here is how she goes for the emotional case (rape) instead of the safer, more conservative stance (capital punishment for violent murderers). Did they let her pick her own case to disagree with? Does the McCain camp think this is something most Americans would go for?
I’m certainly not in favor of going soft on rapists (for instance, you know, allowing the chance one might go free because the victim couldn’t afford a rape kit, ahem) but imposing the death penalty for a non-homicide crime? Can’t we just lock them up and throw away the key, chemically castrate, something? Clearly, I’m missing the point in here somewhere. Am I supposed to be impressed that after looking at a list of court cases, she can know her own mind and pick one she doesn’t like? They are setting the bar REALLY low here. Must be I don’t get it because I’m a “Republican Party Outsider.”
I couldn’t find the original article I read, but here’s a page citing Palin’s new answers:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/do-over-palin-a.html
For supporters and critics alike, who challenge Senator Obama’s sincerity in his Christian beliefs:
