Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
From Sarah Palin, being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly. This one was even too much for O'Reilly when she claimed that the media should have questioned Joe Biden about his experience rather than questioning her about hers.
O'Reilly: You pointed out his [Obama's] lack of experience -- you don't have that much experience. You walked away from the governorship after, what, two years? Two and a half years?Palin: Going into my lame-duck session -- my fourth legislative session -- and not wanting to put Alaskans through a lame-duck session --
O'Reilly: OK, but is it fair for you to criticize Obama's lack of experience when somebody could make the same criticism about you on the national stage.
Palin: If you're talking about executive experience, I would put my experience up against his any day of the week. I have been elected to local office since 1992, and was a city manager, strong-mayor form of government, was a chief executive of the state, and was an oil and gas regulator. There was some good experience there that could have been put to use in a vice presidential ticket. We've to remember too that I wasn't running for president.
O'Reilly: No, but that's the key question. Because John McCain is up there in years, you had to be qualified to take that office over.
Palin: Right. But I -- I'm saying I was running for vice president, just like Joe Biden had been running for vice president. I never once heard you or anybody else question Joe Biden and his experience.
O'Reilly: Well, he's got a lot of experience.
This whole notion of executive experience being important is silly. Biden, for all his many faults, is a guy with serious experience in foreign policy and military issues, a guy who has spent the last few decades legislating on such issues. Comparing having been the mayor of Wasilla to that because it's technically an executive position is patently absurd. She might as well have claimed to have run a Dairy Queen as experience.
But this one may be even worse. See if you can find a coherent thought in this mess:
O'Reilly: Let me be bold and fresh again. Do you believe you are smart enough, and incisive enough, intellectual enough, to handle the most powerful job in the world?Palin: I believe that I am because I have common sense, and I have, I believe, the values that are reflective of so many American values. And I believe that what Americans are seeking is not the elitism, the, um, the, ah -- kind of spineless -- a spinelessness that perhaps is made up for that with elite Ivy League education and -- fact resume that's based on anything but hard work and private-sector, free-enterprise principles. Americans could be seeking something like that in positive change in their leadership. I'm not saying that that has to be me.
I'll see your tired cliche and raise you several platitudes and a bunch of gibberish.
Politics
Comments
Is this just O'Reilly trying to show he's not biases or has Palin lost his audience?
Posted by: Naughtius Maximus | November 25, 2009 9:26 AM
Leaving aside the question (beaten to death already) of whether Palin's resume qualifies her for anything, I'm always amused when career (Republican) politicians rail against people who work in government, and trumpet the inherent superiority of those in the private sector.
That comment about not wanting to "put Alaskans through a lame-duck session" is priceless--I mean, someone's gonna serve as governor during a lame-duck session anyway, right? So just what the hell is she trying to say here? Is she saying that she was uniquely ill-suited to hold the job during such a stretch? (I'd say "yes," of course, but I don't think she has the humility to even suggest that.) This is silly even for her.
Posted by: Solly Hofman | November 25, 2009 9:35 AM
Naughtius, say hi to Biggus Dickus for me.
Posted by: Solly Hofman | November 25, 2009 9:37 AM
May not have made the news in the USA, but Palin gave us Canucks some advice, too. She said, "Canada needs to dismantle its public health-care system and allow private enterprise to get involved and turn a profit."
Sarah, Sarah... talk to me when you don't have the lowest life expectancy of any of the G7 countries, and when your health expenditures aren't the highest per capita for the worst results.
Posted by: Epinephrine | November 25, 2009 9:38 AM
Nobody, but NOBODY tosses a word salad like Ms. Palin. Dog bless her.
Posted by: Rick R | November 25, 2009 9:41 AM
I saw this part of the interview and was pretty confused as to why she was still pitching the "Obama doesn't have executive experience" line. I mean I understood why it would be used in the campaign despite how lame it was. But if she's looking to reprise that line of attack in 2012 (when Obama has had nearly four years as President), I think she's going to find the general public even less receptive to it than they were last year.
Posted by: Odie | November 25, 2009 9:42 AM
I may have said this before, but every time I see a paragraph of off-the-cuff from Palin, I can't but think it came straight out of a Markov Chain text generator. Any set of 4 adjacent words could be part of a coherent sentence, but anything longer than that ends up like cereal that's sat too long in milk.
Posted by: Johnny Vector | November 25, 2009 9:44 AM
During the height of her book release media bump a friend of mine, concerned about 2012, asked me, "How do we beat someone like her?"
"Hand her a microphone," I replied. I grow more and more confident in that strategy every day.
Posted by: Abby Normal | November 25, 2009 9:45 AM
I saw some of this interview, but not all.
I had to switch off after Bill-O spent much of the segment gazing at Palin like a lovesick schoolboy before thanking her for "taking fire" during his interview which was chiefly made up of softballs (shock).
Posted by: CHV | November 25, 2009 9:46 AM
Once again, Palin proves her utter cluelessness. She and Carrie Prejean together may have enough brain power to challenge a fifth grader on any subject, ... and lose.
The quote about not wanting to put Alaskans through a lame-duck session is priceless. Doesn't she realize every previous governor has been a lame-duck at one point while in office?
I think she means, "I didn't want to put me through a lame-duck session."
Also
Posted by: wheatdogg | November 25, 2009 9:48 AM
Solly
Incontinetia says hi
Posted by: Naughtius Maximus | November 25, 2009 9:50 AM
Are you sure that last paragraph was by Sarah Palin and not Miss South Carolina Teen USA in 2007?
Whew.
Posted by: Rodney | November 25, 2009 10:04 AM
>>>And I believe that what Americans are seeking is not the elitism, the, um, the, ah -- kind of spineless -- a spinelessness that perhaps is made up for that with elite Ivy League education and -- fact resume that's based on anything but hard work and private-sector, free-enterprise principles.
Hello!
Does Palin realize that two recent presidents named "Bush" are the products of an "elite Ivy league education"? Whereas Sarah herself personifies a General Studies major at Cowtown Community College more than any I can think of.
In essence, Palin is truly Bart Simpson come to life: an underachiever and proud of it.
All the queen of mediocrity...
Posted by: CHV | November 25, 2009 10:29 AM
This article contains a priceless line from a Palin fan in my hometown of Fort Wayne, who complains about Obama: “He isn’t governing, he’s still campaigning.” This from a dude standing in line to see Miss Let's-quit-the-day-job-to-become-a-rock-star!
Palin actually reminds me of a woman I worked with a few years back, who had above-average intelligence but didn't develop it into real competence because it was easier to skate by on looks and charm. I suspect Palin could have been a fairly competent person, too, but that wasn't where the rewards were. She's benefiting from identity politics now, where her only necessary qualification is to demonstrate affinity with a particularly delusional subset of the public. She's smart enough to know that she doesn't need any knowledge.
Posted by: Scott Hanley | November 25, 2009 10:32 AM
Apologies, but I had to add one more thing about Palin's comment above vis-a-vis when she notes that higher education and "hard work" are apparently polar opposites.
I did not attend an Ivy League school myself. I got both my B.S. and M.S. degrees from a mid-sized state university in Illinois.
For the latter degree program, the lowest grade I ever scored in my English curriculum is a "B" which--and I don't how else to break this to Sarah--I earned thru working my fucking ass off, and studying.
Yet for someone like Palin who limped through her college years and various institutions, I would hardly expect her to understand that in order to graduate from any university program worth its salt, hard work and self-application are required personal ethics.
Posted by: CHV | November 25, 2009 10:37 AM
That last bit seems to have come straight from the beauty pageant stage during the final questioning before the judge. Does she win... the beauty contest? I still say she needs to get started on that book tour with Prejean. They can call it "Going Vogue - The prosecution of America's prettiest women."
Posted by: martym | November 25, 2009 10:40 AM
I can't wait to hear Shatner's poetic reading of this one on Conan.
Posted by: WScott | November 25, 2009 10:53 AM
Sarah Palin is qualified to be the POTUS. She's over thirty-five. She's lived in the country for the last fourteen years. And, perhaps most importantly, she was born in the United States, unlike certain other Kenya-born Kenyans.
Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the office holder must be proficiency in English, nor does it say that that person should have even the slightest grasp of reality. Hell, she doesn't even need to know what POTUS stands for. For Pete's sake, she can wink! The media elite should stop asking questions like, "Can you string at least for words together to form a coherent sentence?" and
start doing their jobs by asking questions like "In as many cliches as possible can you describe how awesome you are?"
Posted by: holytape | November 25, 2009 10:54 AM
We've to remember too that I wasn't running for president.
This from someone who referred to McCain as her "running mate", and wanted to give her own concession speech...
Posted by: Emily | November 25, 2009 10:58 AM
"In as many cliches as possible can you describe how awesome you are?"
...That would be the most awesome thing ever. I think it would produce the most hilarious word salad conceivable, and provide levity for generations to come!
Posted by: eNeMeE | November 25, 2009 11:00 AM
@Rick R. #5:
Toss, Salad, and Palin are three words that should never be in the same sentence together.
Posted by: Chillidog | November 25, 2009 11:07 AM
Has anyone else noticed that common sense and willful ignorance now mean the same thing?
Posted by: Todd | November 25, 2009 11:17 AM
Common sense? Now where did we hear that before? Oh yes, George W. Bush, the simple patriot who knew instinctively the right thing for America. Give us a break!
Republican leaders since Reagan are so stupid they decided to make it a feature and be proud of it.
Posted by: toby | November 25, 2009 11:35 AM
That woman doth piss me off to no end. I spent twenty years in the Navy, half-a-lifetime working as tech writer, raised a family, own my home, and now that woman, who cannot speak English for more than five minutes, declares that MY values are not real American values because I live in a larger city. I'd say more but it would be in sailor talk and inappropriate for tender ears.
Posted by: Yeti | November 25, 2009 11:49 AM
During the height of her book release media bump a friend of mine, concerned about 2012, asked me, "How do we beat someone like her?"
"Hand her a microphone," I replied. I grow more and more confident in that strategy every day.
Shit, I've been saying since September '08 that Dems should be her biggest cheerleaders. She was then, and is now, the gift that keeps on giving.
Posted by: Solly Hofman | November 25, 2009 12:30 PM
By Palin's logic, every governor--in fact every elected executive with a term limit, including the President--should resign to spare their constituency a lame duck session.
That's ridiculous enough, but if you push the logic back a step, it would mean then that they should resign prior to resigning, because, since all would know the resignation is coming, they'd be a lame duck then anyway. But then one should resign prior to that resignation, to avoid the pre-lame duck lame duck. But then...etc.
Palin is one of the most prominent parts of a movement in the country to legitimize (in the eyes of the very easily fooled) stupidity on a grand scale.
Posted by: cm | November 25, 2009 12:40 PM
Nay, I have seen every season of the Simpsons and Bart clearly is smarter, better informed and has more community spirit than the Palinator.
Posted by: ursa major | November 25, 2009 12:53 PM
First, an underachiever is someone of some intelligence who fails to accomplish what they could have. That's not Palin by any means.
But the remarkable thing about Palin AFAIAC is that no matter how blisteringly stoopid her remarks are, no matter how completely cluelessly she continues to string together worn out talking points, the wingnuts-who-don't-know-they're-wingnuts just love her to death and think that the rest of us are completely motivated by an irrational hatred.
Posted by: BaldApe | November 25, 2009 1:11 PM
@Chilidog #21: FTW!
Posted by: Woof | November 25, 2009 1:24 PM
CHV,
I get the impression that S. Palin considers "work" to be anything that Mike Rowe would do on his show Dirty Jobs, and everything else to be "not work." That includes jobs that spend the vast majority of their time thinking, talking, reading, and writing. It seems there is quite a bit of projection and hypocrisy going on, as well, because she is applying the word "elitist" as an epithet while considering people who do "real work" to be better than, i.e., more "elite" than those who don't. Amazing.
Posted by: Shawn Smith | November 25, 2009 1:31 PM
I think this is what she's saying:
"Education is bad, and Ivy League education is worse."
Posted by: DuggleBogey | November 25, 2009 1:41 PM
O'Reilly: You pointed out his [Obama's] lack of experience -- you don't have that much experience. You walked away from the governorship after, what, two years? Two and a half years?
Palin: Going into my lame-duck session -- my fourth legislative session -- and not wanting to put Alaskans through a lame-duck session --
A good executive is a lame duck for a few of months at most. Typically November to January because the senators are paying more attention to the person who just won the election. If your legislature stops paying attention to you when there's two years left on your term, you aren't a lame duck - you're a politically incompetent executive.
Posted by: eric | November 25, 2009 1:47 PM
Another rant—on Pailn supporters.
That woman’s fan base is of the same mind as she in regard to Real Americans. Her fans seem to consist of those who do real work, which equates to good honest work. Good honest work is usually hard, sweaty, dirty, sometime dangerous, and always low paid (R. Heinlien). Her minions are frustrated by their inability to get what they want by good honest work and envious of those of us who have managed to climb out of the ditch, throw away our shovels, get at least a minimum education and better paying jobs. Her supporters celebrate ignorance, disdain education, and revel in tribalism.
As for me, I don’t want a common American to be President. I want an un-common American to be, an American that is better educated, smarter and more experienced in a wider world than I. A person that closely resembles Kipling’s Man, we might just have one now. We’ll have to wait and see. Caveat emptor.
Posted by: Yeti | November 25, 2009 2:14 PM
Ape @ 30:
My idea of what "underachiever" means is one who settles for skimming by or applying a lazy, half-assed effort - which is Palin in a nutshell.
Posted by: CHV | November 25, 2009 2:15 PM
Yeti @ 33:
>>>As for me, I don’t want a common American to be President. I want an un-common American to be, an American that is better educated, smarter and more experienced in a wider world than I.
Couldn't agree more.
The fact that Palin paints herself as an "ordinary" is (IMO) an immediate red flag that she shouldn't be allowed anywhere near higher office. And while I do not want to see an elitist as POTUS, I also don't want to see some dumb schlub with a minimal education, and no original ideas get into the Oval Office either.
Posted by: CHV | November 25, 2009 2:20 PM
In essence, Palin is truly Bart Simpson come to life: an underachiever and proud of it.
And encourages others to embrace mediocrity because excellence is too elitist. This, in a nutshell, is why I find her so abhorrent.
Posted by: Shay | November 25, 2009 2:22 PM
At the end of every episode Mike Rowe asks viewers to write in with ideas for dirty jobs he can do. Just last week I wrote in suggesting he work as a Senator or, failing that, a lobbyist. They were the dirtiest jobs I could think of.
I think I may be spending too much time on this blog...
Posted by: Abby Normal | November 25, 2009 2:26 PM
Shay @ 36:
>>>And encourages others to embrace mediocrity because excellence is too elitist.
The funny thing about this statement (and Palin's apparent endorsement of it) is how "excellence" is a drum that Rush Limbaugh has beaten for years.
Yet with Palin, Rush obviously has no issue with her minimalist attitude, and resentment for those who rudely point out her lack of education and responsibility for one's own words (e.g. blaming Katie Couric for asking basic civics questions that Palin didn't know the answer to. Where's Sean Hannity's softballs when you need them?).
Posted by: CHV | November 25, 2009 2:32 PM
Unless we all want Palin to have a serious shot at the Oval Office someday, I think we should all start ignoring her. Every time she is embarrassed or lampooned in the media, there is a sector of our population who find her more attractive, much the same way Bush became attractive to them. She looks more & more like the underdog that is getting picked on by the big bad elitist intellectuals.
Seriously, ignore her, stop giving her attention.
Posted by: Madrocketscientist | November 25, 2009 3:24 PM
I've seen this sort of thing before. Go up to your dog with a treat in your hand and just stand there silently. If there anything like mine, they'll sit, raise one paw and then the other, lie down, roll over, and generally go through their entire repertoire of tricks trying to find the one that wins them the biscuit.
Posted by: DaveL | November 25, 2009 3:55 PM
@CHV:
You owe El Barto an apology.
@Madrocketscientist:
I understand what you're saying, and I would completely agree if we were talking about a mere pundit. But we're talking about a woman who was seriously considered by a major political party to be second-in-command. We shouldn't completely ignore her; she's an idiot, yes, and her words frequently bite her in the ass, but a sizeable segment of the population (in addition to her already-loyal fan base) could potentially be snowed by her pseudo "charms" and disdain for all things above-average in '12.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | November 25, 2009 4:07 PM
Short answer to O'Reilly's question: "No".
Posted by: jdhuey | November 25, 2009 4:17 PM
If Palin became vice president, I'd pity the interpreters who accompany her to meetings with foreigners.
Posted by: TheDude | November 25, 2009 4:54 PM
"If Palin became vice president, I'd pity the interpreters who accompany her to meetings with foreigners."
Heh. You reminded me of that classic scene in "Dick Tracy" where Mumbles (Dustin Hoffman) is giving testimony, and the clerk (Kathy Bates) is vainly trying to transcribe it. The hopelessly confused look on her face is priceless. I imagine that look on a lot of faces if Palin would gain national office.
Posted by: Rick R | November 25, 2009 4:58 PM
Rick R: You like. There were no classic scenes in Dick Tracy.
Posted by: Modusoperandi | November 25, 2009 5:10 PM
Pah! That should be "You lie...".
Posted by: Modusoperandi | November 25, 2009 5:11 PM
"There were no classic scenes in Dick Tracy."
Teach the controversy!
Posted by: Rick R | November 25, 2009 5:29 PM
@Sadie
I understand your concern, and I share it, and I felt the exact same way regading Bush in 2000 & 2004, and he still won both times because he was seen as the underdog. Doing the same thing again to Palin is, IMHO, unwise.
I believe she is a problem we can all ignore to death.
Posted by: MadRocketScientist | November 25, 2009 5:33 PM
George Saunders on spineless elites:
Posted by: Dr X | November 25, 2009 5:36 PM
I still find her very concerning because if she runs, which I think she will, and then gets thumped, which I think she will, she will still succeed in pushing the Republican Party further to the right. Whomever is selected by the GOP will then pander to those nutjobs on the far right to gain their support. What this means is basically two things:
1) Best case scenario Obama wins reelection. On the one hand that is good because I consider him likely to be a better, more qualified candidate than anyone I can see on the horizon for the GOP. BUT this will also likely drive the Republican party further to the right making it even more irrelevant and making our political system even more dysfunctional. We need two viable parties, the more this moron is involved, the more the Republican party will fracture. Sad thing is, this is the best case scenario.
2) Worst case scenario. She drags the GOP further to the right and some ridiculously right wing Republican is selected as their candidate claiming to be "moderate." The media and the voters buy into this faux moderate claim literally dragging the entire country further to the right. A political version of left is right, up is down, peace is war, etc.
This second point scares the shit out of me because I see people this bloody stupid all the time. They consider themselves conservative because liberal has been turned into a bad word by Rove & co. You talk to them about actual issues and they agree with the Democrats across the board, but they vote Republican because they firmly believe that the Democrats are a bunch of wild eyed radical socialists.
To go with the season, yes Virginia, people really are that stupid and uninformed.
Posted by: dogmeatib | November 25, 2009 5:37 PM
Well, I suppose she expanded from her beauty pageant thesis of "world peace."
Not that it's any better.
Posted by: MarkusR | November 25, 2009 6:02 PM
Shorter O'Reilly: "Are you qualified to be president?"
Shorter Palin: "No"
Posted by: ArtK | November 25, 2009 9:31 PM
Dr X: The New Yorker? Elitist.
Posted by: Modusoperandi | November 25, 2009 10:45 PM
I love Palin's lack of spinelessness as she bravely fled the post of Governor of Alaska. No one could have fled so quickly with such courage.
Posted by: MadScientist | November 26, 2009 3:55 AM
One can only hope that she treats the position of PUSA with the same respect.
Posted by: Modusoperandi | November 26, 2009 4:09 AM
Apart from the "quitter" aspect of this, so justly critized above, doesn't this imply that she thinks the Alaskans will be better off with a substitute governor, suddenly thrown into the job, and who will be at least as much of a lame duck, since the next election is still going to be at the same time anyway?
As I see it, there are only two possible* interpretations of the statement: it's either "I'm quitting for my own selfish reasons, and I don't care what happens to you" or "I'm quitting because I care about you, and the worst that could happen to you is that I stay on the job.
Which is it?
* Upon re-reading, I realize there is a third alternative: "I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I don't expect you to notice!" That's not much better than the first two...
Posted by: Thinker | November 26, 2009 7:26 AM
Many, if not most, of the idiotic rhetorical statements she makes, like being able to see Russia from Wassila, for instance, rely of the wingnut audience's complete willingness to believe whatever goofy thing someone says, as long as they invoke Jesus.
BTW, the recently elected governor of Virginia ia a lame duck. Virginia only allows a gevernor to serve one term. I guess that, according to Failin' every governor of Virginia should resign as soon as they are elected?
Posted by: BaldApe | November 26, 2009 11:17 AM
Crazy Arse Prediction that I keep repeating! :)
Sarah Palin will play a similar (but opposite) role in the GOP to Michael Foot on the UK's Labour Party.
After losing to Maggie THatcher, the Labour Party decided that the way to go was to the left. And so they elected Michael Foot as leader and went on to write "The Longest Suicide Note In History" as their manifesto. They were soundly defeated in the next election and were essentially unelectable for a couple of decades until Kinnock and then Smith and Blair dragged the party back towards the mainstream.
I really think that the psychological shock of losing to Obama will be enough for the GOP to decide that the best way to go is to the right. And the Palin, not the Goldwater right. They will hunker down into their base and say the reason they lost to a Socialist Communist Liberal is not because people liked the idea of a liberal, but because people thought they weren't right wing enough.
What this will mean for their electability after that, I leave as an exercise for the reader.
Posted by: Donalbain | November 26, 2009 1:37 PM
Sarah Palin is a flash-in-the-pan celebritoid of the moment. Just another passing, temporary infatuation. Remember Billy Carter and Miss Lillian? Disco? Right now she's making the most of her 15 minutes, but I really believe even the most inbred, mouth-breathing cousin-f***ing banjo-picker out yonder in the hills even realizes at some primal level she's a lightweight, semi-literate hillbilly shitnozzle who is being aggressively branded as just plain folks 'Murka, duh-hyuk. Stupid and proud is no way to go through life.
Posted by: Dave | November 27, 2009 1:04 AM
Palin - Bachmann 2012!
Oh, sweet wonders... it would be a rib-achingly good laugh if it weren't overshadowed by the thought that - well, they could actually win. Dumb things happen during US elections.
Posted by: Bananas | November 27, 2009 2:43 AM
FFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-----
Posted by: Griff | November 27, 2009 6:33 PM
More Palin bashing? Wow you Democrats really are imaginative.
Posted by: Walter | November 27, 2009 11:13 PM
Walter "More Palin bashing?"
It's not "bashing". We're just playing the straight man to her punchlines.
"Wow you Democrats really are imaginative."
If you think this is imaginative, you should see our paintings. We, as a Collective, just finished one of a unicorn eating ice cream.
Posted by: Modusoperandi | November 27, 2009 11:27 PM
I certainly lack the imagination necessary to take Sarah Palin seriously.
Posted by: Taz | November 27, 2009 11:34 PM
Walter - So enlighten us, O wise one.
Why would any sane person cast a ballot for Sarah, even for dogcatcher*?
Entries written on fast food wrappings in crayon will not be accepted. - DJ
------------
* or should that pit bull catcher?
Posted by: DingoJack | November 27, 2009 11:42 PM
"More Palin bashing? Wow you Democrats really are imaginative.
Posted by: Walter | November 27, 2009 11:13 PM"
Yeah, because the GOP has a spotless record in that regard.
Thanks, Walt. Now you can show this comment and the others to your "Political Science" prof at Liberturd U and get the "A" that you've been praying for.
Posted by: democommie | November 28, 2009 7:06 AM
Beck and Hannity would never have asked such questions, I bet. I don't like Fox any more than any other rational person, but O'Reilly > Beck. At least Billo is capable of intelligent thought.
In other news, it's things like this that make me wonderfully happy Palin is not in or near the White House.. although if she did find her way there, I imagine she wouldn't last 6 months before either throwing in the towel or being chased out of town.
Posted by: spongekill | November 28, 2009 11:06 PM