Sarah Palin and the [Revisionist] Historian’s Code
After being deposed by the independent investigator inspecting the
TrooperGate TaserGate Scandal, Sarah Palin returned to the campaign trail with a new foe in sight: Katie Couric. This time Palin hit hard claiming the interview made her look bad because she was annoyed with Couric's frivolous line of questioning:
“Last time I was here I got to tell a crowd that I had to give a national interview that didn’t go so well,” she said. “And it was because I was kind of annoyed with the questions I was being asked because I thought they were kind of irrelevant to, you know, national security issues and getting our economy back on track, so I kind of showed some of that annoyance.” CNN
Palin claims to have been frustrated with Couric demeaning and patronizing her by limiting her line of questioning to what romance novels she likes best and where she got her shoes instead of asking legitimate questions on issues of national interest such as:
- what do you see as the role of the United States in the world?
- I know the McCain campaign has called for a surge in Afghanistan. But that country is, as you know, dramatically different than Iraq. Why do you believe additional troops, U.S. troops, will solve the problem there?
- Do you think the Pakistani government is protecting al Qaeda within its borders?
- You’ve cited Alaska’s proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that? . . . explain to me why that enhances your foreign-policy credentials.
It's an absolute shame when the Main Stream Media refuses to engage Sarah Palin in a way to showcase her vast knowledge on national/international affairs instead of overtly dismissing her by noting that nobody cares if she can answer [legitimate] questions. Worse yet, their insistence on changing the topic to her clothes, hair and make-up is something they would never dream of doing to a male candidate.
x-posted at the disenchanted forest