remember that palin may be very versed in issues pertaining to alaska and to the mat su valley, but she is not familiar with domestic and international issues. being poised and confident, and knowing how to turn an answer quickly into a talking point, is easy (or easier) when you are familiar with the issues addressed by the question.

but it was clear from the couric interview that she couldn't do this with some of the questions because she just didn't know what the hell teh questions were talking about. see: the question about gaza. she had no idea, clearly, what gaza was, or what happened there, and how it related to challenges in democracy building. she just knew that it was somehow related to israel, so tried to tack it on to a talking point she was given about iran. but she was nervous, because she didn't know if the talking point even matched the question, and it showed.

remember, even if she is really bright, it is obvious that she has had little, if any exposure to international issues before her VP selection. she has admitted it herself. this means that in five weeks or so, she has had to learn a massive amount of information. think about it. she has had to learn stuff like what the SEC is, who is in charge of it, what short selling is, what Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac are and how they work(ed), who the presidents/pm of Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Spain, the UK, Georgia, Russia, and Afghanistan are and what our relationships with those countries are, a history of our involvement in the middle east, the difference between a sunni and a shia, the different terrorist groups and who supports whom, the differene between the UN, the league of nations, NATO, and the G8, etc etc etc etc. not to mention what McCains policies are, what Obama's policies are, and how McCains are better.

That is a lot to learn in five weeks. i don't think she's "dumb." but i don't think she knew anything about any of that stuff before she was selected. and even for a very bright student, it's an awful lot to learn.

...but i can't help but think she sounds so much more competent, believable, and intelligent when she drops that stupid folksy accent. maybe because it sounds manufactured, or because i loathe the "you betchas" and "doggone its", but when she was being interviewed from what appeared to be her office in Alaska, or about her policies in Alaska, she sounded like someone who i wouldn't necessarily agree with, but wasn't a complete dummy.

i was born and raised in california, and my own accent and regional folksy expressions ("totally", "like", "that is so not even ok", etc) appear and disappear depending on my audience.

so saying "that one" isn't a slip up? he also seemed to misunderstand the question about health care, naming it a responsibility when he seemed to actually feel it was a right. Answering a question posed by an African American town hall attendee, Oliver, to tell him that his plan would keep men like Allen in his home--implying that black men didn't have homes or something--also not a slip up?

and continuing to straight up lie, in front of obama, literally to his face, about obama's own tax plans and stances on nuclear energy, and say things like "obama thinks nuclear energy should be clean or something"--that's not a slip up?

my friends, what then would it take for mccain to slip up? would have have to like drool on himself or piss his pants or something?

he spent thirteen minutes with that person and did not once ask her what she meant by "leftist".

of course, she probably wouldn't have answered any of these questions, but to have asked them would have better exposed the idiocy and uselessness of the terms "leftist" and "anti-american".

He could have asked, for example:

isn't it "leftist" to nationalize banking, as we have just done?

isn't it "leftist" to commit to buying $300,000,000,000 of Americans' home loans, as John McCain has committed to doing?

Is one automatically leftist if one proposes one or two leftist solutions out of an entire policy package?

What percentage of a Senator's votes have to be left-leaning for her to consider them "leftist"?

Are terrorists, who are anti-American, also "leftist" or are there many varieties of anti American, and the leftist kind is just the worst?

Is it "anti-american" to criticize america? Or is "anti-America" just sort of a "je ne sais quois"? Is she anti-American for criticizing a major party candidate and her fellow senators, or exactly what does one have to criticize about America to be considered anti-American? Or do you just have to not like America? What if I like parts of America, like the beaches, but not other parts, like the deserts? is that ok, or am I anti-America?

Is the first amendment then "anti-america"? or just people who actually dare to take advantage of their first amendment rights?

Is it possible to be "rightist" and be "anti-american"?

Of course, she wouldn't have answered these questions, as I said earlier. But it would have exposed to those who have an inkling that this is a stupid line of reasoning that this is a straw man that even republicans themselves cannot explain, and do not believe in.