The sad thing is that people really do want in-depth journalism nowadays, but the big corporate owners of these organizations see these channels as profit making bodies vice public services and would rather keep the people distracted with sensationalism and trivial detritus. The flotsam and jetsam that is the subject of most television reporting these days only serves to keep us in bondage and restricts our freedoms.

Joe Solmonese, the head of the Human Rights Campaign, got his ass kicked by, of all people, Maggie Gallagher, of the National Organization of Marriage. Gallagher was better briefed on the facts that they discussed, and more assertive in pushing her points, and she mopped the floor with Solmonese.

I have a hard time imagining why anyone at all supports the ineffective and utterly useless Joe Solmonese, who’s $340K annual salary, supposedly for “top talent,” is completely going to waste with him.

HRC will never be a respected agency by the gay community until they kick out worthless and less than useless Joe Solmonese.

Sweet Merciful Pie, what a maroon!

It’s arrogant to think you can be president when you display such shocking ignorance of the world.  When asked if being the Command-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard and being next door neighbors with Russia were sufficient experience, she dodged the question and went back to her reform of goverment statement; besides Canada and Mexico, she had never travelled outside the country before that trip to Germany and Kuwait recently.  She’s never met another head of state.

In the intense world we are in right now, not having travelled or having seen a teensy fraction of the world is not a good reason to be the replacement President.   Especially when your way of dealing with people with whom you don’t agree is to try to fire them.  And that it’s a good thing to have never met a head of state.  But it gets better.

Then Gibson asked her about Russia.  She’s hysterically funny here.  I love how she thinks that it’s an insight to be able to see Russian land from some land in Alaska.  As if that superficial viewing is enough.  She says we have to keep an eye on Putin, and with a stutter says “Perhaps so…” to warring with Russia if they were to invade Georgia.  It’s as if she thinks war is the first option.   No thought of diplomacy here, just the waste of human blood and American treasure.  I always thought that violence should be the last resort, not the first.  Or even better to turn the other cheek.

What I want to know is what does she actually know about the Russian people because “They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.”  Yeah, so what insight does that give you into Russian politics when Moscow is thousands of miles away?

And by the way, I’ve been to Wasilla back in 1998 for a week visiting a friend, and the one of the things I noticed then (besides the stunning beauty of the place) was how many pickup trucks had shotgun pellet holes in the sides or tailgates of them.  That was somewhat shocking to me, but also made me a little sad.  And weren’t you the Mayor of Wasilla back then, Sarah Palin?  What sort of law and order were you keeping?

And yes, if one is a member of NATO, there’s an obligation to mutual defense, but if you’re a member of NATO, you also know how to exert yourself diplomatically to avoid such necessity.  Being able to discuss one’s problems with one’s neighbors is a a wondrous thing.  It means understand and getting to know each other, and learning to respect each other’s similarities and differences.

And by the way, Mrs. Palin, it’s Ahmadinejad, not Achmedinejad.  Yes, I know it’s not a simple name like Palin or Brown, but it’s still his name.  Even if he’s not our friend, getting his name right is just simple courtesy. But it was deliberate, wasn’t it?  After all she got Saakashvili’s name right.  That’s just childish and chicken. I suppose we could give her the benefit of the doubt, but going by her petty behavior in the past, i’ll say not.

And speaking of Iran and Israel, “we cannot second-guess [Israel]…”  Three times she repeated this catch-phrase when asked by Gibson if the United States should just stand by and allow Israel to attack Iran if they felt threatened.  We don’t need more violence in the Middle East, but less.  The presidency of Iran is a largely domestic role.  He doesn’t have any role in foreign policy or military affairs.  Thus, he can say whatever he wants, but real power in Iran lies with the Supreme Leader, Ali Khameni.

She says the only thing for them (the islamic extremists) is to become a suicide bomber.  Why is it that that’s the only option? She wants to instill them with hope, but she proposed to instill them with hope by bombing them?  That’s not likely to engender hope, but fear and anger.  And while I vehemently denounce the violence that was perpetrated upon us seven years ago in no uncertain terms, I am not surprised that it took place.

Or maybe she wants to engender hope by converting them to christianity?  That would go along with her christian reconstructionist background.  “Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still,” wrote Dale Carnegie.

The editing of this interview was pretty terrible.  After explaining the Bush doctrine to her (which she apparently didn’t know about before he explained it), they clearly cut a different take in there.  How many tried did they give her to before they finally went with the answer they broadcast?  You can tell because the lighting is slightly different, and the audio is very different for that take.  It’s as if she got up and sat back down.  The audio suddenly became much boomier.  After that answer, it’s clear they went back to the original interview.

That seems pretty slimy on the part of ABC to give her multiple takes, or if it’s not a multiple take, then what?  Maybe she got up and talked to her handlers for an answer before it?  With the incredible superficiality of her answers so far, that wouldn’t surprise me.

She likes the phrase “hell-bent on destroying America.”  She used it at least twice in this interview to describe islamic extremists.  It’s as if the her handlers gave her a stock of phrases to cart out, and since she doesn’t have any real substance on these issues, she has to fall back on them again and again.

She’s like a barbie doll with a pull-string – “math is hard!”

Even McCain doesn’t think that a mayor or a governor for a short time is enough experience.  At least he didn’t when he was bagging on Giuliani and Romney during the Republican primary: