Open Threads

This Palin book is going to be THE… GREATEST… THING… EVAH:

One of the whackiest claims Sarah Palin makes in her new book is that she agreed to her disastrous interview with Katie Couric — a central event during Campaign 2008 — because a top McCain aide told her Couric had low self esteem, leading Palin to take pity on the CBS anchor.

A McCain adviser I just spoke to adamantly denied the claim, and provided a counter story: Palin was repeatedly urged by McCain aides to prepare for the interview, but refused.

Palin claims in her new book that she agreed to sit down with Couric partly because she felt sorry for her, after senior McCain adviser Nicolle Wallace told her that Couric suffered from self-esteem problems. It’s understandable that Palin would try to deflect blame for the interview: It was a disaster that hastened her unmasking as unqualified for the presidency.

“It’s not true,” the McCain adviser I just reached said, laughing heartily at the claim. “It’s ridiculous.”

I’m positively fucking dying for Mark Halperin’s take on this, because this is devastating news for the Obama campaign.

(via)

Just Helping a Sister OutPost + Comments (112)

How could you people laugh at earnest rightwing civil servants like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann? Just pause for a minute and think about the abuse dished out by cruel and terrible people.

The former governor, who in the book says her dream was to be a sportscaster alongside Howard Cosell, takes aim at ABC anchor Gibson, whose interview preceded Couric’s. He “peered skeptically” at her over his glasses, Palin writes, and had no interest in the substantive issues.

It must have felt especially galling to get peered at skeptically over glasses when so many reporters literally teabag John McCain.

BTW. Also. Here are some policy specifics about which Gibson showed no interest during the interview.

GIBSON: 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?

GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?

GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?

GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran?

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

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.

GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?

GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?

GIBSON: But, Governor, I’m asking you: We have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government.

For God’s Sake, Not The GlassesPost + Comments (147)

Without google, who are AC Wharton and John Peyton?

Answer: The mayors of Memphis and Jacksonville, respectively, both of whom govern cities with population sizes comparable to Alaska. I’m betting 99% of you have never heard of them.

So why are we going to spend the next few weeks listening to the lies of a grifter from up north who couldn’t even finish her term?

A QuestionPost + Comments (91)

Let Me Clear This Up For You, MarcPost + Comments (54)

I’m hoping Anne Laurie will post the weekly recipe here, because I think I deleted it.

All Your Open Thread Are Belong To Anne LauriePost + Comments (48)