Deep Thought: Section 1 Paragraph 5
Here is what Palin should have done when asked about Supreme Court cases that she disagreed with. She should have brazenly made shit up. it would have sounded like:
Couric: Besides Roe v. Wade can you tell me about a supreme court case that you disagree with?
Palin: Well Katie I was never a big fan of Omiferris v. Widdington because, as you know, it cuts into states rights. And of course a lot of people think Bronsky v. National Chess & Checkers makes us less competivie in the world markets and I have to agree with that. I mean you don’t see China holding itself to those standards.
She would have sounded all smart and with it and by the time the nasty liberal media figured out that she was bullshitting – the rigth wing noise machine would have spun those reponses into gold.
Jason,
I went to sleep last night thinking the EXACT same thing! Then realizing that the obviously “liberal” media would pick up on it and bring her house of cards tumbling!!!
I’m disappointed she couldn’t at least have come up with Greedy Municipality and Developers vs. Kelo. At least she didn’t say Brown vs. Board of Education!
Kelo would have been a GREAT answer. If she had explained what Kelo did, she could have truly swung people. I suspect that she could have named Brown v. Board of Ed, but she couldn’t remember if she agreed with it or not.
Rubinski v. Klezmer Assoc. of Dayton Ohio
Agreed–if not names than subject matter–like porn sites permitted in public libraries…what was that name?
I dunno, Joanne, but I’m all for it!
She couldn’t even come up with the easy, obvious, bipartisan answers – Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson. Or the easy partisan answers – Miranda, or any of the habeas corpus cases of the Bush Administration (Hamdi, Hamdan, Rasul, Boumendiene – pardon my spelling).
Don’t worry about the spelling, the terrorists hate you (us) anyway… 🙂