Parachute for Palin? Junior debates for Caribou Barbie

Looks like Palin gets a parachute ride to safety for the vice presidential debates.  On  October 2 we get the Readers Digest version of Sarah Palin, who will play on half court like girls once did in basketball:

At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates.

McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive….

McCain advisers said they were only somewhat concerned about Ms. Palin’s debating skills compared with those of Mr. Biden, who has served six terms in the Senate, or about his chances of tripping her up. [If you believe that load of codswallop, I’ve got a Bridge to Nowhere to sell you!] Instead, they say, they wanted Ms. Palin to have opportunities to present Mr. McCain’s positions, rather than spending time talking about her experience or playing defense.

My question is this: how the f___ does the McCain campaign get to call the shots like this??? Clearly Palin’s handlers realize how totally incoherent she is when off script. Case in point: in her first Q&A Townhall, her answer on energy (an issue on which she is one of the “world’s leading experts”)  was almost incomprehensible. Even to McCain.

No wonder they’re afraid.  She might look as ignorant, thought disordered and poorly educated as she really is.


One response to “Parachute for Palin? Junior debates for Caribou Barbie

  1. It’s got to be that ‘frame’ thing you talked about. Her (devoted) listeners hear the words, can’t understand what she’s saying, and tell themselves it’s their fault, they’re just not smart enough to understand all this energy stuff. All other (questioning and very much afraid of what might happen if McCain wins the election) listeners try to parse out her sentences and go insane in the attempt. (She really did say the opposite, didn’t she, stating that she was against export bans when she meant to say she was for them, right? Or did I get completely lost in that sentence?)