CNN's Martin serves it up straight:
Do you know what was so great about Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Michael Jordan? They were three of the biggest trash talkers in the history of the NBA, but they had the game to back it up.
Somebody should tell that to Gov. Sarah Palin.
Martin points out that Palin's repeated comment, "This is not a man who sees America the way that you and I see America" is hypocritical in light of Todd Palin's AIP connections. He wants to know why Palin hasn't rebuked her rally attendees when they go postal. Then he hit the nail on Troopergate:
She was declared by a special investigator to have been within her rights in firing the commissioner, but she was blasted for abuse of power and violating the state's ethics act. So what did she say in a conference call with Alaska reporters -- who were not allowed by the McCain camp to ask follow-up questions? That she was cleared of all wrongdoing, legally and ethically.
That's right. She repeated over and over and over an absolute lie, and we are supposed to say, "Hey, it's all fine. She winks at us. We love her hockey mom schtick. Don't worry about that abuse of power thing."
As Martin points out -- shades of Dick Cheney!
Of course, Martin's real target is Palin's unwillingness to speak to reporters -- particularly fron CNN. Leving aside the parochialness of his argument, he's on the money when he reminds us that even McCain's mother and Palin's father have been interviewed by CNN. And my favorite line is this:
My goodness, Tina Fey has actually done more interviews about playing Sarah Palin than Sarah Palin has done about being Sarah Palin!
We know why Palin is the candidate in the bubble, of course; but it's good to see a commentator call the campaign out on it. One of the best aspects of this contest (for Democrats, anyway) is the ability to attack the McCain campaign for its VP selection. McCain violated one of the central tenets of Presidential politics: the VP nominee must do no harm to the ticket. Palin clearly has, and McCain has no choice to sail on with an anchor weighing on his dinghy. Palin pretty much cancels out all the attacks McCain might have intended on Obama. Pals around with terrorists? Check. Has a religious connection many Americans might criticize? Check. Big fan of earmarks? Check. Inexperienced? Check. The only way to keep these failings somewhat under wraps is to shield Palin from questioning media -- so that's what they've done.
Back in April, Obama appeared on Fox News Sunday, after Chris Wallace essentially called him out. Anybody remember the outcome?
Right. Non-event. Now imagine if Sarah Palin gave just one interview between now and November 4th to the likes of Rachel Maddow. Too tough? How about Wolf Blitzer? Campbell Brown? Geez, do you think she could handle Oprah? David Letterman?
There's a case to be made for ignoring Palin at this point; piling on would certainly be unseemly. But attacking McCain for choosing a nominee who is afraid to talk to the media (and that's precisely the word that should be used) -- I guarantee that would produce some results. To quote the estimable
Sherlock Holmes:
When you see a man with whiskers of that cut and the 'Pink 'un' protruding out of his pocket, you can always draw him by a bet.
And I'm willing to bet you could draw McCain out on Palin's cocooning. Seriously, John -- just one more interview. Or are you afraid you'd lose Alaska?