She's Just So Cringeworthyposted in Media on Sep 30, 2008
I don’t know if I’m going to be able to take another full month or so of interviews with Palin. I seriously can’t stand watching her without sitting in my chair, shoulders tensed, eye squinted, waiting for something to be said that makes my spine shiver. This isn’t the good kind of shivering that happens when you listen to a great piece of music, where your hair stands on end; this is the kind of shivering you get when you walk outside at 8am on the first day of winter and an icy wall of cold hits you in the face and genitalia or the first time you see Leatherface. It’s a shivering of impending dread.
Last week, while everyone was trying to pick up the pieces from a completely lackluster Emmys, Katie Couric interviewed Palin on a range of topics. I’m not going to show anything here regarding the questions involving how proximity to Soviets somehow makes her ambassador to Russia, because it goes without saying Palin fell all over the floor with that one like an octopus wearing roller skates. What I will show here is this week’s portion of the interviews with Palin, where Couric asks her about a statement she made that is pretty contradictory to the stance McCain holds on the subject. Let’s watch:
Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention that gramps was there too to help out. I always can’t help but feel it would have been worth my while to go to a McCain rally over the passed few months only because I’m sure he handed out a lot of Werther’s Original candies.
Basically what we just saw was a scrambling attempt to cover up mis-statements by Palin. Instead of just coming out and saying, “Yeah, hey, I misspoke. Since I’ve only known the old Windbag for about a month we really haven’t been able to get down to everything,” the two tried to find an eloquent way of saying that it was the media that twisted it around, which, of course, only helped to make them look worse. I wish Katie would have pressed them harder on the issue, saying something to the effect of: “Let me just put out this hypothetical situation: Let’s say that you, Palin, potential Vice-President elect to drive the White House mini-van, likes..oh, I dunno, apples,. And let’s also say – for the sake of hypotheticals, of course – that you, Father of Time, like oranges. No, let’s switch that, I’m sure the acidity of oranges aggravates the thin lining of your esophagus; we’ll say YOU like the apples. Anyway, this is beside the point. What I’m getting at, Palin, is that if I asked you what fruit John liked (in this case apples), and you told me ‘oranges,’ and afterwards I asked you why you have this discrepancy, how could you conceivably come to the conclusion that it’s the media’s fault for painting an, as you might call it, erroneous view of the events?”
As a friend of mine said earlier this evening: “Biden can just stay stone cold silent throughout the debate and wipe her out.” I couldn’t agree more. This Thursday’s debate is going to be something of legend. I’m sure years down the line, around the time we are pretending to vote for the new “president” of the People’s Republic of the United States, we’ll be bouncing our grandchildren on our knees talking to them about the night Americans (hopefully *fingers crossed*) didn’t blindly follow a pretty face. Until that time, all I can do is this when I see/hear Palin: