That's a fair enough point. I don't think the two questions I am referring to were edited. I don't think they clipped out the part where she knew what she was talking about. She gave complete answers, they were simply horrendous answers.
But let's say you are correct, it's not sufficient. That's fine with me. That's why I suggested the other day that a conservative group host a series of debates on the Constitution, and invite Sarah. Let's see her on our turf, on our terms, demonstrate her knowledge of the Constitution, and of republican government. Put her up against a liberal heavyweight, Larry Tribe or someone, and see how she does.
My problem is that OUR side is unable or unwilling to cast a critical eye towards her, and I think that's a problem.
No valid process has taken place by which Palin’s knowledge of the constituion can be questioned, therefore the question is invalid.
The Couric interview was a test of how bad Couric and the network wanted to make Palin look. Nothing more. The interview can also be described as a fraud, as can any critique of Palin inspired by the fraudulent interview.
Because of the sinister behavior of the media the true focus is on their behavior, not on Palin.
I caution you once again, don’t let Couric manipulate you.
Again, no valid process has taken place by which Palin’s knowledge of the constituion can be questioned, therefore the question is invalid.
To illustrate, imagine I throw mud on you as I drive past you on the street. Then I call up your family and question your hygiene. My behavior is fraudulent, because you just took a shower that morning and the mess on your shirt was my fault not yours.