Sarah Palin 2.0 (?)

By Michael J.W. Stickings

According to the Politico's Jonathan Martin, Sarah Palin is about to be re-introduced, "tak[ing] a more forward-leaning approach and do[ing] additional interviews in the weeks ahead."

First, though, she's spending some quality time at "McCain's cabin in Arizona" prepping for Thursday night's veep debate.

And "do[ing] a round of conservative talk radio interviews." After all, since she can't quite cut it with Gibson and Couric, and won't even try with Brokaw and Stephanopoulos, nor even Blitzer and Cooper, she requires a more friendly environment. So, no doubt, her interviews will, post-re-introduction, be more like the Hannity infomercial than serious exchanges with serious newspeople.

But, before all that, there's still the not-so-little matter of more Couric tape to consider. Martin explains:

Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.

Now there's a clip I'm looking foward to watching. Perhaps Marbury slipped her mind -- you know, because conservatives don't seem to care much for judicial review these days. And perhaps she just doesn't care much for, oh, say, Griswold and Brown and Miranda and Lawrence -- you know, for obvious reasons.

Couldn't she at least have mentioned Bush v. Gore? I'm sure she's a big fan.

**********

UPDATE: Atrios has "some sympathy for Palin," and Benen agrees that she "probably knows about as much as plenty of lawmakers on the Hill." Still, "it's a reminder that Palin is struggling on two parallel levels: she's painfully ignorant and she hasn't learned how to hide her painful ignorance."

For the record, I have no sympathy for her. She's what I would call, as I have called others before, a dangerous idiot -- dangerous because she's such an ignorant ideological extremist.