Palin Gaffes
Ok, I'm not sure it strictly fit's LAGuy's definition of a gaffe as "misspeaking," but Gov. Palin surely demonstrated "a rare gift to produce a paragraph in which whole clumps of words could be removed without noticeably affecting the sense, if any," as Dick Cavett so memorably put it. Taking into account that she was prevented from speaking extemporaneously for the vast majority of the campaign, it's still not very hard to top Joe Biden with Sarah Palin. Limiting myself to 10 minutes' research and only five examples, I think she wins by knockout:
1. "Sitting here in these chairs that I'm going to be proposing but in working with these governors who again on the front lines are forced to and it's our privileged obligation to find solutions to the challenges facing our own states every day being held accountable, not being just one of many just casting votes or voting present every once in a while, we don't get away with that." Wolf Blitzer interview.
2. “But not me personally were those cheers for, but it was just for the representation of a woman on the ticket, a mom, somebody who loves this country so much, somebody very, very committed to policies that I believe will progress this country in the right direction.” Greta Van Susteren interview.
3. “My concern has been the atrocities there in Darfur and the relevance to me with that issue as we spoke about Africa and some of the countries there that were kind of the people succumbing to the dictators and the corruption of some collapsed governments on the continent, the relevance was Alaska’s investment in Darfur with some of our permanent fund dollars.”
And, she concluded, “never, ever did I talk about, well, gee, is it a country or a continent, I just don’t know about this issue.” Quoted by Maureen Dowd (post-election).
4. COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?
PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We-- we do-- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to-- to our state. Katie Couric interview.
5. The pièce de résistance, of course, can only be appreciated on video:
posted by QueensGuy @ 1:19 PM
10 Comments:
#5 is a perfect example of how completely unfair the media treatment of Sarah Palin was. First SNL accepts a caricature that she can't speak (as did Dick Cavett) so mocks her for it. At least, however, they're a satirical show and regularly reduce political figures to a few tics, fair or not. Then CNN picks it up and as the video of the actual interview shows, Palin actually said a perfect undestandable, grammatically correct sentence. At worst it's a bit run on (as politicians are wont to do--half that statements in any debate are run on). After the first sentence, she has a couple words before she stops that and starts a new sentence--another thing quite common.
This doesn't stop the biased morons at CNN, however, from acting like they've just shown proof positive of what they so badly want to believe, and having a good laugh over it.
Imagine if people believed this about Hillary. Here is, literally, a random example I picked from a debate. I've removed all punctuation. Now imagine if the Media insisted she's stupid and can't speak English, and Amy Poehler got to read this:
"We all want to change the status quo which is George W. Bush and the Republican domination of Washington for so many years and we all are putting forth ideas about how best to deliver that change but I don't think you make change by you know calling for it or by demanding it I think it is a result of very hard work bringing people together stating clearly what your goals are what your principles are and then achieving them and I do think that you know part of what this primary process is all about and New Hampshire voters are you know famously independent in making their judgments is to look at our records to evaluate where we stand and what we stand for and I think that there is a lot of you know room to ask all of us questions."
I understand your position as arguing the problem with all of those Palin quotes was unsympathetic punctuation during the transcription. Having dealt with a couple of hundred deposition transcripts, I didn't read these as being particularly unusual (though I've never deposed or defended the deposition of someone who speaks quite like Gov. Palin), but maybe I'm missing something. I would sincerely appreciate you re-punctuating any or all of the Palin quotes to show how they should have been read. Also.
The point is when you listen to her, it's perfectly clear what she's communicating. Sure, she may speak colloquially, have occasional run-on sentences, and a few false starts, but what she's saying is never in doubt.
Look at some of your examples. In number 3, she was charged (rather outrageously) with not knowing that Africa was a continent. She responds in a fairly reasonable manner as to what she was saying(and, like any politician, she's often sticking to talking points):
"My concern has been the atrocities there in Darfur and the relevance to me with that issue--as we spoke about Africa and some of the countries there that were kind of the people succumbing to the dictators, and the corruption of some collapsed governments on the continent--the relevance was Alaska’s investment in Darfur with some of our permanent fund dollars.”
"Never, ever, did I talk about: 'Well gee, is it a country or a continent? I just don't know about this issue.'"
On number 4, she's being asked to explain how being a governor gives her foreign policy experience, as she's claimed. (Somehow living as a citizen elsewhere means Obama will be able to deal with foreign policy, but actually running a state with a border on another country means nothing.)
COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?
PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We...we do...It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia, as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America. Where...where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is--from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to--to our state.
Well, as to the last one, it's not so much the words as the idea that Alaska's maritime border with Russia gives her legitimate foreign policy experience. Nobody (who wasn't already crushing on her) bought that.
As to the others, I take your point that she intentionally speaks far more colloquially than most politicians. And speaking in a way that looks clear on a transcript takes a heck of a lot of practice, as anyone reviewing their first depo transcript as an attorney will vouch. But I disagree that you can always follow what she's saying. In my example 5, I remember hearing it and saying "what the hell did she just say?", rewinding it and still not understanding. It's obvious that she was flustered and babbling.
Oh, and I can't believe I left out my very favorite example -- "I read all of them." Another example of her losing her cool and saying something stupid. Quite Biden-ish, actually.
Anonymous #1 is simply in denial. Listening to Palin's sentence (?) about the bailout, even as stated by her in the video -- which, after all, CNN showed -- demonstrated that she jumps from the idea of the bailout (of financial institutions) to health care, to job creation, with no actual content or meaning. She literally seems to string catchphrases together without having any idea what she is saying. She seems for all purposes like a student trying to fake an exam by calling up every phrase she ever heard mentioned in (vague) connection with the topic. I was struck one evening with a sense of deja vu that I could not place until I remembered the unfortunate beauty queen from North Carolina (?) who answered a question about U.S. students needing to learn about geography with a meandering answer that touched on "the Iraq" and access to maps. (Yes, several commentators later brought this similarity up independently.)
When I read the statement from Hillary Clinton above, I could see where the punctuation goes. The sentences have nouns and verbs. There are complete ideas included.
I could go on. As QueensGuy points out, it's not always a question of no content. Sometimes the content is there, but just silly. The idea that Putin "rears his head" and flies into American airspace just had me stunned -- was she actually saying that she has had to defend our airspace against Putin? That there was some big plan that she was intimately involved in to do so? Again, it just seemed like a student stringing ideas together on the spot -- I've heard of Putin; our airspace is near his; we've had trade missions with Russia, etc. There was no sense of how much of this was real (I never learned whether she had personally been on any of these trade missions and what interaction there gave her foreign policy experience.) And this was a question that should have been 100% anticipated -- the proximity of Alaska to Russia had been touted and mocked for weeks at that point as a source of foreign policy experience.
There's more, but I have to go to bed.
Sure, she had talking points about the bailout, just like any politician--about what it needs to be about. When Obama or Biden talk about the miraculous things they'll do with the bailout, they sound just as ridiculous.
If the SNL character of Hillary was supposed to be clueless, it would be easy to read her lines that way. In fact, what's amazing is Tina Fey does her job on Palin, then you hear the original and realize it's nothing like that.
As for Russia, she was simply claiming that someone who runs a state with a border on a major country that's often antagonistic towared the U.S. gives her some experience with foreign policy. Sure, it's not much of an argument, but it's more serious than Obama's complete lack of foreign policy experience, but no one in the press thought that was worth asking questions about (much less mocking) even though there was nothing more valuable to discuss.
Again, you just seem to be listening to something else -- it was striking how similar Tina Fey's portrayal was to the actual tape -- THAT'S WHY THEY SHOWED THEM AGAINST EACH OTHER. Palin was hidden away except a few select interviews for which she should have been hyper-prepared -- at least for the obvious questions like the foreign policy one. She seemed like the question had never occurred to her before. Obama, Clinton, McCain, and to a lesser extent, Biden, were on the road for months or years, speaking prepared and extemporaneous speeches several times a day. Clearly they should be granted a few misstatements (and Palin too, if she did that.)
You would be far better off making the following argument, if you can: I admit that Palin seems hopeless as a speaker on policy, but she has many accomplishments (here you name them). Not every intelligent, competent person is articulate.
I have made the above argmument about Richie Daley, for example.
When you keep whining about her being treated unfairly by the press (in company with her, nowadays), you just sound like a partisan who cannot hear what is obvious to everyone else.
A"gain, you just seem to be listening to something else -- it was striking how similar Tina Fey's portrayal was to the actual tape -- THAT'S WHY THEY SHOWED THEM AGAINST EACH OTHER."
The words were verbatim, but the meaning and attitude were entirely different. Tina Fey played it as someone who had no idea what she was saying and was just making up words as she went along. That's why I was shocked when I saw the actual clip and Palin was speaking in an understandable and clear manner. THE REASON CNN SHOWED IT WAS BECAUSE IT FIT THE NARRATIVE THAT SHE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT SHE WAS SAYING AND THEY FIGURED IT WOULD MAKE HER LOOK BAD.
"Palin was hidden away except a few select interviews for which she should have been hyper-prepared -- at least for the obvious questions like the foreign policy one."
In the last several weeks of the campaign, she appeared regularly and did many interviews. It was Joe Biden who the campaign hid.
"She seemed like the question had never occurred to her before."
This is simply wrong, since she had talking points ready.
I might add the Couric interview was heavily edited.
"Obama, Clinton, McCain, and to a lesser extent, Biden, were on the road for months or years, speaking prepared and extemporaneous speeches several times a day."
Every day Obama made absurd statements with no backing, and he had no experience for President other than running for the job, and the media fawned all over him, sometimes even telling him they weren't going to ask tough questions, or saying how is it being so wonderful. They didn't ask the most elementary questions about his policies--not gotcha questions, just basic ones--and also accepted the silliest nand most dishonest answers when they were required to ask about his questionable connections (from stories broken by others sources--the media was too busy trying to protect him, while they went out in force to Alaska to hunt down the slightest rumor about Palin).
"You would be far better off making the following argument, if you can: I admit that Palin seems hopeless as a speaker on policy, but she has many accomplishments (here you name them). Not every intelligent, competent person is articulate."
I'll put up Palin's "bad" answers on policy over Obama's vague yet dumb answers. (And if I were giving advice to you, I'd say you should admit that, which is why I don't tell others what arguments they should make.)
As glad as I am to see goodnatured debate between readers, I think we've gotten stuck down a road where it's tough to make real progress. Anti-Palin Anon and I believe firmly that if Palin were a candidate on the left, pro-Palin Anon would find her bailout answer to be unintelligible. Pro-Palin Anon believes firmly that if Obama were a candidate on the right, we would find both the questions he was asked and the answers he gave to be non-substantive. Neither idea is susceptible to proof, so I think we're stuck.
Thanks for the out, QueensGuy.
Post a Comment
<< Home