My Interview with Sarah Palin Part II

Quotes taken from Going Rogue, just like always. Hey, I read the damned thing. Might as well make some use of it.

Click here for Part I.

ME: All right, Ms. Palin, I’ve had a chance to calm down and you’ve had a chance to Google economics, so we should be ready to start again, right? I’d like to get more into your tenure as governor. Now, what about this China bid thing? I understand you had an offer from them on the pipeline?

SP: “The bid, by Sinopec, bothered me. There was little doubt that the company could muster the manpower, technology, and funding necessary to do the job, but this proposal skated on the razor’s edge between the free-market and national sovereignty. An energy-thirsty Communist nation controlling Alaska’s natural gas reserves was not in the best interests of the state or our country.” (205)

ME: Unlike, say, oil deals with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. So why didn’t you give them the deal? I guess you would have had to have an ostensible reason.
SP: “It turned out Sinopec’s application was incomplete anyway. (205)

ME: Yeah, the Chinese are notorious for being lazy s.o.b.’s when it comes to paperwork. So who got the deal after all?

SP: “[The] Calgary-based TransCanada-Alaska, a firm that had not only met every single enforceable requirement of AGIA but exceeded them.” (205)

ME: Wow, that company with all those ties to your administration? The one you all but solicited, according to the AP? That’s a pretty sweet deal.

SP: “[National media is] too lazy to sift fact from fiction.” (203)

ME: Bastards.

SP: “It was one lie after another—from rape kits to Bridges to Nowhere. All easy enough to disprove if the press had done its job.” (237)

ME: Hey, what about that bridge? I understand there was some confusion as to whether or not you took federal money for it? And that the record states that you did?

SP: …

ME: Hmm. Well, we’ll chalk that issue up for a possible sequel. Let’s change gears a bit here: Matt Damon lambasted you for believing that dinosaurs were around two thousand years ago and that science is bogus. So to get the record straight: What’s your stance on evolution?

SP: “’[Science] proves parts of evolution…But I believe that God created us and also that He can create an evolutionary process that allows species to change and adapt.’”(217)

ME: [Lighting a cigarette] Makes sense.

SP: “And, by the way, I saw nothing wrong with students debating the merits of evolution in the classroom. If William F. Buckley—a devout Catholic and a world-class intellectual—could believe in the divine origins of man, why couldn’t I?” (219)

ME: Off the top of my head, because he wasn’t teaching a high school science course, and you’re not a world-class intellectual.

SP: “God says in Scripture, ‘Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this, says the LORD Almighty, ‘and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of Heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it.’” (22-23)

ME: That socialist prick! Sounds a lot like our current president, taking what we all have and distributing it to the poor.

SP: “I considered the Obama administration’s panicky effort to stimulate the economy by spending enormous amounts of borrowed money shortsighted and ill conceived.

ME: But doesn’t Jesus say, through Scripture, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me”?

SP: [The bailout] defied the lessons of history and common sense.

ME: So much for theologic/political consistency, folks.

SP: [Obama’s] nearly $1 trillion stimulus package was patently unfair both to future generations who will inherit our wasteful debt and to the everyday Americans who work very hard to pay the taxes that the administration seeks to spend at breakneck speed.” (357)

ME: Well, to be fair, President Bush did the exact same thing. He cut taxes and raised spending. And Senator McCain supported this, and so did you, if I’m not mistaken. That’s one reason the Democrats took the House and Senate in 2006, and another reason you guys lost.

SP: [Rahm Emanuel], now President Obama’ chief of staff, … crafted and executed the ruthless 2006 campaign strategy that won back Congress for the Democrats…” (370)

ME: Oh. I see. It had nothing to do with two wars, Hurricane Katrina, failure to find WMDs…cutting taxes on the wealthy and increasing deficit spending to fight overseas for dubious causes?

SP: “Servicing the $1.5 trillion debt is a huge annual expenditure in the federal budget. . . Our overspending today could destroy our children’s future.” (389)

ME: That must be why Senator McCain voted with the Republicans seven times to raise the debt ceiling. Gotcha. By the way, according to the Chicago Tribune, the bailout is a fraction of a fraction of the deficit. Just so you know.

SP: “That’s not entirely true.” (87)

ME: No, it is true. You can look it up on the Treasury page itself. Look at the figures on the wars, if you want to talk high spending.

SP: “Today our sons and daughters are fighting in distant countries to protect our freedoms and to nurture freedom for others. I understand that many Americans are war-weary…

ME: Nah. We love wars.

SP: “… but we do have a responsibility to complete our missions in these countries so that we can keep our homeland safe. America must remain the strongest nation in the world in order to remain free. And our goal in the War on Terror must be the same as Reagan’s: ‘We won. They lost.’” (393)

ME: Boy, if Reagan were around today, this whole mess would be gone. All he’d have to do would be to tell Karzai, “Mister President, get rid of those terrorists.”

SP: “I was in high school the day Reagan took the oath of office. On the same day, minutes after he was sworn in, a band of Iranian militants released fifty-two Americans, after having held them—and our national pride—hostage for 444 days. I had followed the Iran hostage crisis and remember wondering why President Jimmy Carter didn’t act more decisively.

ME: I think his retrieval operation was pretty decisive. Even if it sucked.

SP: From my high schooler’s perspective, I thought the question was, Why did he allow America to be humiliated and pushed around?

ME: And your adult perspective has led you to think…?

SP: “The new president being sworn in radiated confidence and optimism. The enemies of freedom took notice. In years to come, people would ask, what did he have that Carter didn’t? To me, the answer was obvious. He had a steel spine.” (46)

ME: I think that, if you’re going to exchange arms for hostages and fund contras, not to mention orchestrate campaigns that result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans, you have to have a steel spine. That pansy Carter would have been running off to weep at Stockholm at word of the first dead nine-year-old El Salvadoran refugee. Right?

SP: “…no…” (16)

ME: Well, maybe not. Let’s take a short break while readers look up our contradictory assertions and come to the inevitable conclusion that I’m right. Sound good?

SP: “I [don’t] put much stock in fickle polls.” (6)

ME: And I don’t put much stock in fickle minds. So let’s give each other one more shot.

Interruption in interview here. Palin heads to library, and the interviewer heads to a neighborhood Wasilla bar and gets the snot beat out of him for playing The Dixie Chicks on the jukebox.

Next week: The exciting conclusion!