Palin couldn't name a single SCOTUS decision besides Roe v Wade

[Peikko 1,575]

OK, I warn you now, be prepared for whining from Palin should she percieve a question to be 'unfair', she'll spend at least half her time pointing out how biased the interview is, thus deflecting nicely from her answer

[luckytxn 2,265]

I can't wait until everyone finds out she doesn't know what the name of that flightless bird that is extinct.

Then we are really fvcked.

OK, I warn you now, be prepared for whining from Palin should she percieve a question to be 'unfair', she'll spend at least half her time pointing out how biased the interview is, thus deflecting nicely from her answer

Why? Is it that time of the month again?

Edited October 2, 2008 by luckytxn

[akdiver 3]

It would have been REALLY funny if she came up with Marbury v. Madison, Scott v. Sanford, or even Bush v. Gore (:

[akdiver 3]

SCOTUS is not the common abbreviation for the U.S. Supreme Court. At least those of us pre-Internet types never used the term in law school the early 90's before the Internet.

So...what....you have not learned anything since the early 90s? Edited October 2, 2008 by akdiver

[HAL 9000 96]

I don't think I can take a full debate.

I am with you, but will probably suffer through it due to the inability to look away from such a train wreck.

How can you have an intelligent debate with someone who doesn't have a clue?

It would be like discussing quantum physics and Schrödinger equation with Eric. loooool.

tell him there's a cat involved. He'll be there.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

tell him there's a cat involved. He'll be there.

mmm...p u s s y.....

[Peikko 1,575]

I can't wait until everyone finds out she doesn't know what the name of that flightless bird that is extinct.

Then we are really fvcked.

OK, I warn you now, be prepared for whining from Palin should she percieve a question to be 'unfair', she'll spend at least half her time pointing out how biased the interview is, thus deflecting nicely from her answer

Why? Is it that time of the month again?

It's a device she used on a previous debate she participated in when running for govenor. The debate I watched was on C-Span and while she held it together ok, she used a series of platitudes, dogma and complaints to try to obfuscate her obvious ignorance in many areas.

At one point all the candidates were asked a question on a SCOTUS decision and her answer relied on a definition of what traditional marriage was, not on whether she agreed/disagreed with the decision which essentially moved gay marriage into the arena of discrimination as it pertains to the constitution. This pertains to this thread in particular because it seems that less than two years later she can't even remember this discussion even though gay marriage is one of her pet peeves.

Incidentally, if Couric had really been trying to embaress her, I am sure she would have brought this discussion up as an example of a SCOTUS decision she should have been all too well aware of.

[Peikko 1,575]

Hmmm.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Madame Cleo

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Hmmm.

I saw it before the edit!

PH thanks for that brief glimpse into this overtly kinky side of your posting personality!

[Peikko 1,575]

It was just in the wrong thread A.J. Now it's where it belongs

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

It was just in the wrong thread A.J. Now it's where it belongs

riiiight

[Peikko 1,575]

You win A.J.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

PH, it's cool. I ain't gonna judge ya.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think Couric did a good job of letting Palin hang herself with her own rope.