-
sponsorship
I agree it would be terrible if Sarah Palin, despite being an avid reader of newspapers, really couldn't name a single Supreme Court case besides Roe with which she disagreed.
But what if she's bluffing?
The woman vehemently criticizing Exxon v. Baker in this footage bares a striking resemblance to Palin and is, in fact, the Alaskan governor herself. So if Palin chokes tonight and garners pity from the audience, does that mean she's remarkably forgetful, an amnesiac, or, as the prevailing theory suggests, entirely conscious of her sympathy-vote potential?
Perhaps it is more likely that Palin is choosing not to mention this case to stay on message. In the case of Exxon v. Baker, Palin was pro-plaintiff and ran up against the Republican stance on trial lawyers and "frivolous lawsuits that threaten jobs across America." Either way, she seems to be better at manipulating her audience than we give her credit for. I'm beginning to think that win or lose tonight, Palin will still walk away the victor.