Now I'm no fan of Palin's , I think she was a cynical political choice - and would make a below average president - but I don't get some of the attacks against her.
here is the interview transcript
COURIC (to Palin): Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?
PALIN: I do. Yeah, I do.
COURIC: the cornerstone of Roe v Wade
PALIN: I do. And I believe that -- individual states can handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in in an issue like that.Couric seems to have done this with the 'bush doctrine" phrase too.
To me that means the doctrine bush has (which is a complex thing) - I suppose I'm not exposed enough to the liberal media in the USA and neither is she - but that would be the literal interpretation.
Similarly here She asks a question about the right to privacy which to me reflects 1st amendment protection of 'privacy' of religion, 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches and 5th amendment privacy against self incrimination.
Is there some secret American language in which the right to privacy implies roe vs wade? If so then I suspect it might be a secret democratic language which could explain why Palin does not know it. the same language where 'bush docterine' is a direct translation for 'preemtive strikes' and maybe 'republican' = 'fascist'.
Maybe Palin should know this language - in which case the critique may be valid - but in the absence of this assumption it is the critics that start to look bad to me.