Sarah Palin: Still in need of a remedial civics class
If you want a quick break from Michael Jackson coverage before the memorial service begins, check out this interview with Sarah Palin by ABC News correspondent Kate Snow.
It was just posted this morning, and it features Snow asking Palin about the ethics investigations that the Alaska governor has been citing as among the reasons for her abrupt resignation.
What would Palin do if she were president of the United States and there were ethics investigations, Snow asked. The answer is priceless.
Palin says that if she were president of the United States, the "Department of Law" would throw most of them out.
The Department of what?
The ABC editors felt the need to include a line telling online readers there is no Department of Law in the United States government.
We already know Palin's education is a little, shall we say spotty. But Department of Law? You have to wonder if she took high school civics.






Comments
Sarah Palin is a woman and a conservative. If you think it's OK to criticize her, you must be a sexist member of the liberal media elite. Shame on you.
Posted by: Cat Stoker | July 7, 2009 12:43 PM
Why is she always comparing herself to the President? Sarah Palin is shallow and if the truth be told, she had help (behind the scenes) in every position she has held. Is she upset because the complaints were not thrown out because she was a nominee for VP? We have not heard anyting about "Housegate"! She said Todd and his friends built the house... What about zoning and permits? Did Todd not have to work his "regular" job the time the house was built? Was there no license needed? All of these unanswered questions.... She gets away with a whole lot!
Posted by: Joyus | July 7, 2009 12:56 PM
Obama said there were 57 states.
And Joe Biden says something stupid every week.
Politicians are human too Z.
Posted by: Ballz Mahoney | July 7, 2009 1:14 PM
Ha! You're kidding right? She didn't say the Department of Law. No way. Her Q rating will probably go up ten points.
Posted by: Zarani Barrow | July 7, 2009 1:28 PM
Am I surprised by this? No, it is one of her major failings. She might have this natural instinct to fight all evil, but have some knowledge would benefit her greatly. This is what scares me about her. She reacts without enough knowledge and could cause some major world problems. Too inexperienced, too naive and too reluctant to listen and learn from people in the know. She is better off on the fishing boat.
Posted by: mem0 | July 7, 2009 1:31 PM
I'm a little spotty on my civics, but wouldn't it be the U.S. Attorney General. I know there is no Department of Law. Let me know if I am right? I'm sure someone will if I am not. If she is going to be in politics she might want to study government just a little.
Posted by: Sherry T. | July 7, 2009 1:33 PM
if i wasn't convinced at first, i'm more convinced now that sarah palin is a true nitwit!
Posted by: lucky | July 7, 2009 2:01 PM
In her defense, the Alaska AG heads the Department of Law, so she's obviously calling on that state agency when she speaks of the DOJ. How the DOJ throws out ethics complaints is anyone's guess.
Posted by: Tater | July 7, 2009 2:53 PM
Oops, I think it might be the Dept. of Justice, I was going to say that first then I changed my mind, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have said the Dept. of Law. That's why I stay in my little medical corner of the world and out of politics. Seriously though how could we ever consider her a future presidential candidate????
Posted by: Sherry T. | July 7, 2009 2:55 PM
You HAVE to be kidding! Okay she said Department of Law. Did you ever write or even maybe just wonder a tad about Obama saying that we have 57 states?!
Posted by: Jim Shue | July 7, 2009 2:56 PM
God bless Sarah Palin. And God help us if we let her take office in a national way.
She probably knows how many beans make five, but beyond that, she really needs more experience in office, which she won't get by leaving it. She strikes me as a smart cookie but massively ignorant at the same time. Even worse, she doesn't know that she doesn't know. Sad, really.
Jane
Posted by: Jane Horsman | July 7, 2009 3:20 PM
Department of Law?
And she was actually picked by John McCain to be his running mate? What was he thinking?
Department of Law?
Posted by: Doug E Stile | July 7, 2009 3:36 PM
Absolutely jaw-dropping.
Posted by: Mary | July 7, 2009 3:54 PM
Come on, David, you should be above such petty slights. Obviously this was a mistake, but there's no doubt she meant the Department of Justice. Did you wonder if Vice President Biden ever took a history class when he made his mistake about Franklin Roosevelt going on TV when the market crashed in 1929? I expect better from you.
Posted by: Jim East | July 7, 2009 4:02 PM
Maybe this was on her mind..possible
http://www.law.state.ak.us
Posted by: BobW | July 7, 2009 4:12 PM
Okay, but she was asked if she were president who would handle ethics violations, I'm pretty sure it would not be the Alaska Dept. of Law.
Posted by: Sherry T. | July 7, 2009 4:36 PM
Anyone who doesn't treat Sarah Palin with kid gloves is a hateful, fearful, liberal, sexist pig.
Posted by: John Frum | July 7, 2009 4:55 PM
John,
It's not about kid gloves. It's about the standards David usually promotes here. This crack on Palin is exactly the kind of thing Maddow would spend a half hour on. It's a non-starter and doesn't belong in the conversation. There is a forum for this kind of cheap shot, but this blog usually insists on elevating the conversation.
Sorry Jim, I believe she needs to be exposed in her basic ignorance of the federal government -- just as Couric and Gibson did with her. She was, afterall, a candidate for national office and could be again. Thanks. Z
Posted by: Jim | July 7, 2009 5:39 PM
David,
Others who posted in response on this entry noted that her state calls it the Department of Law rather than the Department of Justice. How do you feel confident identifying her as ignorant while identifying Joe Biden merely as a man who makes verbal mistakes?
To be clear: I don't think Joe Biden or Sarah Palin are ignorant. Rather I think they are human, unpolished, and I respect both of them for their achievements and for their service.
Posted by: Jim | July 7, 2009 5:56 PM
Of course that's what she meant, Jim. The FEDERAL Department of Justice would, indeed, fight in court to toss out any civil lawsuit against President Palin related to the office and not arising from claims prior to when she took office.
Posted by: JakeD | July 7, 2009 7:04 PM
"She's inarticulate and under educated" ... Liz Trotta on Fox News
I notice the right-wingers have to explain what she "means" every time she opens her mouth.
Please, PLEASE let this train-wreck be the center-piece of the Republican party.
Posted by: David | July 7, 2009 7:47 PM
I'm a female. I do not like Sarah Palin. Some have been complaining about Michael Jackson coverage. I could stand that, but I cannot stand listening to Sarah Palin's screechy voice and looking at her all the time. I wish this woman would just go away. She's after a job that she is clearly not ready for. I mean, I might as well go on tv everyday and keep yacking about how I should head up NASA or something. She just is not what are country wants or needs. She's aiming for something she clearly cannot handle. She's annoying. And I believe she thinks she has a chance because it's gonna be "easy" against the black guy. Give me a break Sarah. Go away!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Vegas | July 8, 2009 8:35 PM
David, your silent response to my statement regarding Palin's alleged ignorance is deafening. By your logic, one can only assume that anyone with a penchant for verbal gaffes is ignorant, which by my estimation, would include the entire human race. I trust you'll do better next time.
Her ignorance of the United States government is astounding -- especially for someone who ran for vice president. I thought I said that. Happy to repeat it if I didn't. Thanks. Z
Posted by: Jim | July 9, 2009 8:24 AM
So, by your logic, Joe Biden is ignorant of history? I don't think either of them are ignorant. Rather, I think neither of them are particularly good on TV, and it certainly is your job to point out what succeeds and what fails on TV. To assess with certainty, however, that someone is ignorant without actually speaking to that person, that smacks of arrogance.
Posted by: Jim | July 9, 2009 8:48 AM
I will give David credit for sticking to his talking point and refusing to follow his logic to its reasonable conclusion. You are obviously avoiding my question, perhaps because you don't like the answer?
Posted by: Jim | July 9, 2009 9:36 AM
Good morning, Jim. Happy Friday. I think the major difference between Fumblemouth Biden and Fumblemouth Palin is that Biden has the years and experience and gravitas to show he is a fumblemouth, while Ms. Palin is, in contrast, green as fresh paint. She might be a fumblemouth, she might be ignorant. She's certainly not bad on TV when she is scripted; when she has to wing it, watch out!
As I stated earlier, the only way to get experience in governing is by staying on the job, which she is not doing.
I don't think she's ready for a higher office right now, and since I don't think she will improve without more experience, I don't see how she could possibly make a good candidate for higher office until she gets that experience.
Jane
Hi Jane, Thanks. Green as fresh paint -- nice. Z
Posted by: Jane Horsman | July 10, 2009 9:46 AM
"Please, PLEASE let this train-wreck be the center-piece of the Republican party."
I respectfully disagree. I want to have to choose between the best both sides have to offer. This country will not progess any other way.
Sarah Palin simply isn't the best the R's can muster, thank goodness.
Jane
Posted by: Jane Horsman | July 10, 2009 9:54 AM
I think the media is in GRAVE need of a collective reading and discussion of Blake's, "Auguries of Innocence" while paying particular attention to the words,
"A truth that's told with bad intent
Beats all the lies you can invent.."
Posted by: John Carpenter | July 13, 2009 8:04 PM