The question (or at least the follow-up) Couric should have asked is: "You define yourself as pro-life; does that mean your stance is that you support making abortions illegal--and therefore a criminal act--under any circumstances, including cases of rape, incest, and risk to the mother's life?"

Another followup: "If so, what do you consider to be appropriate punishment under the law? And to whom should that punishment extend? (e.g, the patient? the doctor? any health care professional involved in performing the procedure? the person(s) who paid for the procedure?"

Joe Biden gave a completely straightforward answer about his position in his interview with Brokaw on Meet the Press. I think we should expect the same from Palin.

Most reasonable people would agree that reducing the number of abortions and facilitating the adoption process are noble and appropriate goals (ideally, with adequate and accurate information provided about available options, and with adoptions, that the screening process of the potential parent(s) is fair and nondiscriminatory). As for sex education, it is obvious that abstinence-only programs may be right for some, but are by no means failproof. As for contraception, beyond the issue of pregnancy, there are issues of spreading STDs and AIDs. Also, as AKA Smith rightly pointed out, teens as well as older women are frequently prescribed to regulate periods and for other health reasons--e.g., my niece (now 36) was put on BCPs when a teenager because she has Polycystic Syndrome; the BCPs greatly minimized severe symptoms of that condition.

GEH!!!

Ok, they've dragged out the footage of the Couric interview, on that I might agree. Thought I don't agree completely in terms of one thing MSM may have gotten right--ferreting the info out gave a chance for each segment of Palin's responses to be considered rather than all swept away in one news cycle; benefits MSM, but I'd argue it may benefit voters as well...of course, unless as reported on Fox.

However, at least, we the people, are getting somewhere past the fluff stuff into useful information toward determining what Palin is about and has to say (and how she expresses herself) in terms of national and international policy, domestic and social issues, and allows insight into her own character, competence, knowledge, worldview, and intellectual curiosity. And I will repeat--knowledge. Or lack thereof.

So far, I don't see much...wwell, anything...that's redeeming. She doesn't appear to have thought much through on her own about what our country is confronting, much less the effect on other countries, but does seem to be concerned about keeping track of the McCain's "talking points" rumbling around her head. Even I would like to play stump the candidate--and I think I could--and that's pretty sad!

Yes, McCain should be the focus. But considering how she (at least initially) energized certain segments of the Republican base, giving McCain (at least initially) a bump in the base, she is fair game. I'm sure, with her hunting affinity, she would understand that reference. A heartbeat away. A wolf away from the airplane.

Speak your mind, Straight Shooter [irony on "straight" intended], or else don't take the interview.

I know there's an attitude out there about being disingenuous put toward anyone starting a statement with "some of my best friends are.. [fill in blank]." But don't forget, please, that such a statement can be sincere. Geez, even at my wedding last year (at my age 48 and husband 52, so I'm not talking youngsters), when several of my long-time gay friends/couples were there, plus a whole bunch of beloved family members who happen to be conservative Republicans, at least three different family members (dad? mom? who's gonna take this one?) had to respond to their kids who were wondering why men were dancing together, hugging, even kissing occasionally! I have to say, I was fairly impressed with most of the answers they told me they gave to the kids, and I'm not disowned. If my lesbian couple friends with their web-site-selected-sperm baby had been able to attend, no doubt the baby would have been oooh-ed and ahhh-ed over--until they had to think about the baby having two mothers--and oh, that's too much to handle.

Sarah Palin made a "different choice" from her (supposedly) lesbian friend of many years...I agree with other posters: ask Palin when she made her "choice" not to be gay?

Me, I'm still wrestling with the concept of: Black Gay Republican Conservative (male or female).

RE: video of Palin in gubernatorial debates in Alaska

"She appeared calm and confident in these, her speech is markedly better."

I listened/watched to those clips with great interest. I'd say, she was on her turf and within her framework of immediate (local, state) understanding, which is why she came across (relatively speaking) better. She didn't need to know nuttin' much about what else what going on in the world--at least not to enhance her position in that particular election.

Different election now. EXTREMELY more important election now.

And IMHO, she was just as snarky (I detect that's the new buzzword--and I like it, it's just like it sounds) in the gubernatorial debates as she has been at any time I've seen in her "element" since becoming a (shudder) potential VP of the US. Did you notice that in her entirely appropriate response to her candidate rival being condescending to her [by his saying he would talk to her slowly in repeating his question] that she STILL failed to answer the original question? And it was about the AK budget and spending cuts........hello?

Does anyone recall that when she first got selected as R-VP nominee, in answer to a question about Iraq, she said something to the effect that she hadn't thought about it much? I would refer her to the "Remember Iraq" article on Salon to help bone up, along with, of course, her reading up on everything published on earth every day.