Nine 0 Diamond’s claim is false – Hope you notice how often this has been happening lately Wade? – See the full transcript below – It’s my understanding the Q&A following Palin’s first answer was edited out of the video interview. (And ABC did Palin a favor there.) She did not “elaborate” on her answer until she was pressed – and then added nothing of substance. Tina Fay had her dead to rights. Please do take a look at the follow-up answer and ask yourself if that incoherent melange avec “Small World”, assurance that there’s no Cold War coming, and those floating “allies” (which seem to reference a neighborly Russia she’d invoked earlier in the interview and then morphs back into, I guess, NATO buds who will be pressuring the Bear?) During the first FP interview, Palin was NOT thinking on her feet – she was trying to find the p.c. (and I use that term advisedly) phrases to get her through…

“GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.”

BTW – You are certainly right that Palin sounded better when she was first introducing herself. (Though for me the key was how uncomfortable Mac looked on that stage…) I saw a C-Span interview (as I mentioned recently) from a few months back, in which she came off easy and confident and winning. But she wasn’t being asked for opinions on Pakistan or the M.E. or the National economy or gays…

As I was looking over the transcript, I came across quite a few sentences that reminded me of the prose-bomb you dropped when I questioned your claim (earlier in this thread) that O was an empty suit w/ no significant achievements in his past…You knew you’d gone over the top there. While it was fine to complain re O’s “rush” to Presidential candidacy, way wrong to discount entirely his academic and literary accomplishments which, as you acknowledged (second time around), were “impressive.”

So here’s one of her sentences re her global warming flip-flop that jumped out at me. By the way – I’m a bit of a global warming skeptic myself!!! Not all that bothered by her positions (then – “I’m not a doom and gloom environmentalist like Al Gore blaming the changes in our climate on human activity.” – or now). Just noticed how BADLY/baldly she tried to finesse the deal…

“That is why I’m attributing some of man’s activities to potentially causing some of the changes in the climate right now…”

Can you hear the sound of sinning?

Here’s the whole exchange:

GIBSON: Yes, but isn’t it critical as to whether or not it’s man-made, because what you do about it depends on whether its man-made.
PALIN: That is why I’m attributing some of man’s activities to potentially causing some of the changes in the climate right now.
GIBSON: But I, color me a cynic, but I hear a little bit of change in your policy there. When you say, yes, now you’re beginning to say it is man-made. It sounds to me like you’re adapting your position to Sen. McCain’s.
PALIN: I think you are a cynic because show me where I have ever said that there’s absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any affect, or no affect, on climate change.

- Hang with the twists in that last “answer” – Again this is the response of someone who is bullshitting – “show me where I have ever said that there’s absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any affect, or no affect, on climate change.” Show me…Wha’? Alaska – under Ms. Palin – seems to be something other than the show-me state…

Wade – When YOU CYA-ed your way around O’s actual accomplishments your prose indicated you don’t lie easily! – A sign of character!!. You’re a straight shooter. And you’re no Palin…See the latest re the Troopergate thingy – She’s now gone back on her stated willingness to talk to the investigators. Why? Because (she claims) the Obama campaign is the orchestrating the effort to get her to talk. Though, of course, the investigation (in question) pre-dated her Nomination. Did you see the (fired) head of the Alaska State Police – and former chief of Police in Anchorage – on the tube last night – Good witness. Course he should be – he’s a cop-for-life. Still he seemed quietly confident that there were others in the SP hierarchy who would confirm his story. We’ll see, but don’t say I didn’t warn you. (And when Obama turns the White House into the Black House and/or introduces Sharia Law in the States, Wretch can say he warned me!)

One last point re “my boy” Gibson as per Nine(ty-nine and a half-truth won’t do). Gibson is only slightly more than a hack. You may recall that he and Stephanopolous presided over the debate in which O was asked repeatedly re the Flag Pin, the pledge, The Star Spangled Banner, Ayers etc. – Then Hillary piled on. I’m not a fan of Gibson’s head or manner – and never have been. Gibson screwed up bigtime w/ Palin on the God’s plan quote – and he should be held accountable for it…He should also be credited with asking questions that revealed Ms. Palin is a pretty provincial person. Her unworldliness underscores one of O’s virtues. He knows much more about the dailiness of life outside the USA – in Indonesia, Pakistan, Kenya etc. than either of his opponents. But he’s running for Pres of the USA – not head-of-the U.N.? Sure. But – for good (and sometimes ill) – we’re the indispensable nation and (or but!) the world impinges on us more everyday. Important to have have a Pres who understands how it all ties together…

Re Iraq – I hear you re skepticism about “boots on the ground” arg at the top. But probably important to figure the Iraqis into the timing thingy. My guess is that Mac isn’t as attuned as he needs to be to internal Iraqi politics. (Which is how his position on the timeline came to undermined by Maliki.) That Kurd – deputy pm – Barham Salih may be a key here – By the way – saw there’s a new book out now just focused on PEtraeus and the Surge year(s). Not sure if I’ll get to it. You’re a better man than moi if you pushed through the Feith. Like to claim I knew better than to try, but not true – Time is Tight.