Thinking Is Overrated

It ain't no use to sit and wonder why, babe
It don't matter, anyhow
An' it ain't no use to sit and wonder why, babe
If you don't know by now

Don't think twice, it's all right
--Bob Dylan

Sarah Palin's answers on a variety of questions from Charlie Gibson are frightening:

GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you, and it is really the central question. Can you look the country in the eye and say "I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just vice president, but perhaps president of the United States of America?"

PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, will be ready. I'm ready.

GIBSON: And you didn't say to yourself, "Am I experienced enough? Am I ready? Do I know enough about international affairs? Do I -- will I feel comfortable enough on the national stage to do this?"

PALIN: I didn't hesitate, no.

GIBSON: Didn't that take some hubris?

PALIN: I -- I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink.

So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.

She didn't think about her experience, competence, family, capabilities or obvious weaknesses. She immediately jumped at the chance because "You have to be wired in a way of being committed to the mission".

What the hell does that even mean?

It gets better:

GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

PALIN: Right, right.

GIBSON: I'm talking about somebody who's a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state ... these last couple of weeks ... it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.

First off - no, over the last 32 years, every VP candidate has met a foreign head of state.

Then she starts spewing about the politics of change, stating her lack of experience means she is qualified. She doesn't even both to construct a sentence in regards to this obvious BS. Why doesn't she just grunt out talking points phrases, as opposed to straining herself by thinking?

*Grunt* *Grunt* Reform Washington!*Grunt* *Grunt* Me ready for office!*Grunt* *Grunt*

GIBSON: Let's start, because we are near Russia, let's start with Russia and Georgia.
The administration has said we've got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

PALIN: First off, we're going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain's running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep...

GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.

PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there. I think it was unfortunate. That manifestation that we saw with that invasion of Georgia shows us some steps backwards that Russia has recently taken away from the race toward a more democratic nation with democratic ideals.That's why we have to keep an eye on Russia.

This is not even close to being true. She states it as fact because she believes it, and therefore it is a fact. Facts are beliefs. Right?

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.

Ohhhh! I get it, you can see Russia, therefore, you have Russia "insight"! Genius.

GIBSON: Because Putin has said he would not tolerate NATO incursion into the Caucasus.

PALIN: Well, you know, the Rose Revolution, the Orange Revolution, those actions have showed us that those democratic nations, I believe, deserve to be in NATO.

Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but...

Yes, democratic revolutions are the only precursor to Nato membership.

Please bring me the Nato application form for Nepal.

...And yes, Putin of course disagrees with whether or not these countries deserve to be in Nato. That's his concern: whether or not their democratic bona fides are good enough for membership.
Reminder: This is the possible future leader of the free world talking.

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help

Good thing the Russians won't be reading this interview...

GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?

PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.

Of course not! That would take time, consideration, and worst of all thinking.

GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agree with that.

PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.

GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.

PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.

Giving glib auto responses to deep and complex questions must a VP job requirement.

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His world view?

Apart from being wrong, this is vacant and shallow. ABC didn't add the question mark at the end of "His world view", but I did.

She asked Charlie if it was correct.

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.

Um, what?

GIBSON: Didn't George Bush come to Washington eight years ago talking about reforming Washington in the same kind of language? Ran as something of a maverick actually; came to Washington. Eight years, hasn't changed the ethos in Washington particularly. Why are you any different?

PALIN: Well, we're promising the reform. And we are mavericks. There's no doubt in anybody's mind now across America, who's paying attention to the presidential race here, that I am a Washington outsider. I mean, look at where you are. I'm a Washington outsider. I do not have those allegiances to the power brokers, to the lobbyists. We need someone like that in Washington, someone committed to the American people and implementing their will, not the power brokers' will.

Let's re-write this one for Sarah:

PALIN: Well, we're promising the reform. And we are branded as mavericks. There's no doubt in anybody's mind now across America, who's paying attention to the presidential race here, that I am a Washington lightweight and way out of my depth. I mean, look at where you are. I'm a Washington lightweight. And besides the entire senior staff of the McCain campaign, who I now travel with 24/7, I do not have those allegiances to the power brokers, to the lobbyists. We need someone like that in Washington, someone committed to the unthinking action and implementing the oil companies' will, not the thinking publics' will.

This is a great passage:

GIBSON: One of John McCain's central campaign arguments, tenets of his campaign, is eliminating earmarks, getting rid of them. Are you with John McCain on that?

PALIN: I certainly am. And of course the poster child for the earmarks was Alaska's, what people in the lower 48 refer to as the bridge to nowhere. First it was a bridge to community with an airport in southeast Alaska. But that was excessive. And an earmark -- an earmark like that, not even supported necessarily by the majority of Alaskans. We killed that earmark. We killed that project...

This is actually factually incorrect, and is a lie.

She defends her earlier work to actually build the Bridge to Nowhere:

PALIN: I was for infrastructure being built in the state. And it's not inappropriate for a mayor or for a governor to request and to work with their Congress and their congressmen, their congresswomen, to plug into the federal budget along with every other state a share of the federal budget for infrastructure.

This is the justification of every elected official for...wait for it ....Earmarks!

It just gets more bizarre:

GIBSON: Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?

PALIN: I think it should and I think that states should be able to decide that issue... I am pro-life. I do respect other people's opinion on this, also, and I think that a culture of life is best for America...

And then she says:

GIBSON: Guns, 70 percent of this country supports a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. Do you?

PALIN: I do not and, you know, here again, life being an open book here, as a candidate, I'm a lifetime member of the NRA.

Is there no cognitive dissonance?

Summary
This is a shockingly unprepared and unknowledgeable individual, and it is beyond ridiculous that she is so close to the presidency.

For once, me and Matt Damon agree:

"I want to know if she thinks dinosaurs were around 4,000 years ago, because she is going to have the nuclear codes."

Nice.