It features the audio waveform overlaid with animated motion graphics of the transcript.

Must have been really painful for the good conservative citizens who are just waiting for Biden to say something really stupid. Which reminds me, where are they tonight? Are OW’s contingent of trolls feeling just too discouraged?

Hope JB asks her to clarify how she supported a right to privacy, but opposed RvW.

If he can get her to explore that theme, it will be very entertaining.

Joe Biden is like Joe Torre in the big game. Focused and impassive, familiar with the territory and knows every blade of grass on the field.

I think we should keep in mind that this woman hasn’t slept in a week, she’s terrified, for the last few days she’s been cramming facts like popcorn at the matinee, and now lives under the sort of pressure that no one should have to endure.

I’m betting on mindless, babbling implosion.

In that light, consider the bit about whether there is an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution. Palin says yes, which is odd, since as Couric points out, that right is central to Roe v. Wade, and (pretending for the moment that what Palin said actually reflected anything worth calling a view) accepting it also means that she cannot accept the kind of Constitutional literalism that is gospel to a lot of conservatives.

But Palin then goes on to say: “I believe that –individual states can handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in in an issue like that.”

If there is a right to privacy in the US Constitution, then protecting it is a federal issue. It has to be. You just cannot say that there is a right to privacy in the US Constitution, but that what to do about that fact should be up to the states. Not if you understand what the Constitution is, and how our system of government works.

Palin doesn’t even realize that she’s just completely undermined a key conservative legal argument against Roe v Wade and so she continues on as if she hadn’t, stitching together two completely opposed arguments. How on earth does the McCain campaign expect to spin this kind of sloppy parroting?

It’s also not unreasonable to suggest that McCain’s choice of Palin says a lot about his judgement, whether Palin ever became president or not.

I was also struck by something Kevin Drum caught:

Couric: Do you think there’s an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2008/10/palin_on_privacy.html#comments

Leaving aside Palin’s inability to name a single other court case, she doesn’t even understand one of the basic conservative arguments against the case she did know about.

Throw in her echo of Obama’s policy re: taking out Bin Laden in Pakistan, and I expect McCain’s biggest fear for tomorrow night is not that Palin can’t answer the questions. They can always spin incomprehensibility. It’s much harder to spin comprehensible answers that are opposed to conservative talking points.

Pop quiz, hot shot

Have to disagree with you though, about McCain. I always used to admire him too. Used to admire it when he used to take mavericky stances against the bulk of his party. I thought here’s a reasonable guy, a moderate, a pragmatist, I guy who won’t put up with bullshit or put party ahead of country (unlike Bush and his ilk). Even as late as this summer I was thinking and saying that hey, if we have to have a republican president again, we could do a lot worse than McCain.

No more. His eager wallowing in Rovian campaign tactics. His insane choice of Palin as his running mate with obviously no serious vetting. His drama-king histrionics over the bailout. All this make it clear as day that his mavericky stances are not mavericky stances at all but opportunitistic showboating, and probably have been all along.

McCain prides himself on making splashy decisions quickly, “quicker then the other guy”. And he boasts that if his hail marys turn out to be duds then he will manfully step up and take the lumps for it with no regrets. That’s fine, Senator, very John Wayne of you and all that. Problem is that if a senator pulls a boner, then the worst that happens is his nutsy bill doesn’t get passed, and some of his constituents and/or contributors don’t get their hunk of pork or their pet peeve petted. If a president makes a superman swoop and comes up short then wars are started, markets crash, cities drown. The Palin business makes it clear that McCain doesn’t understand that , or doesn’t care. The former would be pathetic, the latter despicable.

Come home to the Democratic Party. You will be forgiven.

Whenever I hear Sarah Palin talk/speak, I am reminded of William Macy’s character in the movie “Fargo,”:

“All right…I’ll do a damn lot count, if that’s what you want.”

I can see it now..

“All right Katie..I’ll do a damn terrorist count…if that’s what you want.”

Prior to his choice of Palin as a running mate, McCain had some of my limited $$, and my vote. Then comes Palin, who IMO, makes Dan Quayle look like a member of MENSA. People, do a YouTube search of “Palin Couric” and feast.

I am a big fan of John McCain, always have been…but it’s not unreasonable to suggest that she either will assume the Presidency in the next 5 years, or if McCain doesn’t run again, in 2012.

Leaning Obama now. (OK..ya, who cares what this former Democrat turned GOP, now leaning Dem cares. Right?)

JK

Why would you say that. Why Governor Palin herself said.

“I’m, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas.”

Ergo, Governor Palin would obviously oppose Bush v. Gore. If she had heard of it, I mean.

What. A. DINGBAT.

Sheesh, they asked my dad harder questions than that last year and all he was doing was becoming a citizen.