Says Christopher Hitchens:
"At numerous rallies where the atmosphere has been, shall we say, a little uncivil, Gov. Palin has accused Sen. Obama of accusing our forces in Afghanistan of simply bombing villages. Only a moment's work is required to discover that the words complained of were never uttered in that form and that they occurred in a speech that stressed the need for more ground troops as opposed to more airstrikes a recommendation, by the way, that begins to look more sapient each week, at least in respect of the airstrikes. Again, I have a question: Did Palin know that she was telling a lie? Or did her handlers simply assume that she would read anything that was put in front of her, however mendacious? And which would be worse? And when will she issue the needful retraction? There seems no way of putting her in a forum where these points could be raised. So, continued media coverage of her appearances is no better than lending a megaphone to a demagogue, the better to amplify her propaganda."
She continues the Hannity, CBN circuit to avoid those "gotcha" questions that seek clarification and follow-up to get an idea of what she actually knows and to get a sense of the way that she works through decisions.
At this point, those comments at various rallys are so widely publicized through virtually every media outlet, that it might make more ethical sense for her to be proactive. But that is not her way of thinking. Blissful ignorance to reality is really how Ms. Palin seems to operate. Note the linguistic turn here:
“If I ever were to hear that standing up there at the podium with the mic, I would call them out on that, and I would tell these people, no, that’s unacceptable, let’s rise above that please.”
the form of the sentence is hyothetical as if to say that she cannot be sure that any of these comments have been said. Why is she so elusive here? The way that this response is quoted is not that clear. Now let's look at the quote in full to get a sense of the context here. It is far more interesting than the New York Times presents.
"But what we have heard through some mainstream media is that folks have hollered out some pretty atrocious and unacceptable things like "kill him" or some, we have not heard that. If I ever were to hear that standing up there at the podium with the mic, I would call 'em out on that, and I would tell these people, no, that's unacceptable, let's rise about that please. We haven't heard that."
I am not expecting her to hear sporadic comments from the audience. It's hard to hear yourself on a stage much less any solitary voice from the audience. However, we all know that these things are being said at a regular clip, and many of us have seen and heard it via various media outlets. Her response is that the mainstream media (MSM) has reported it, but they themselves have not heard it, therefore if they happen to hear it directly they will respond. Given the continued attack leveled by the McCain campaign against the MSM in order to discredit them and prop them up as sources that lack credibility, the message translates into something like this:
"We have heard sources that we cannot trust mention those comments, but since we have not heard those comments directly, they must not have been true. If I happen to hear comments like that outside of the mainstream media, I will respond."
The problem of the disturbing comments is framed between the mainstream media's role in reporting it and the fact that she has not heard it on the spot. Framed this way it is like saying that she cannot know for sure that any of this has really happened at all! The fact is that the campaign needs to be proactive about this kind of trash-talking rather than respond in rather ambiguous hypotheticals in this way. McCain has done so in person, so what explains Palin's odd response here other than this is who she is; a person who will only respond directly to a reality she has fabricated. This should be quite disturbing to anyone who thinks that McCain's judgment was sound when he chose her to be the second seat from the Oval Office desk.
Again, it's not so much her as McCain's clear lack of sound judgment and foresight when he chose her as his running mate.
No related posts.
