Not that there's anything wrong with that. But you have to wonder about a vice president nominee who, at 44 years of age, just hasn't expressed much interest in foreign affairs.
There was this interview:
Alaska Business Monthly: We've lost a lot of Alaska's military members to the war in Iraq. How do you feel about sending more troops into battle, as President Bush is suggesting?
Palin: I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments,
and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the
administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I
want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe.
Every life lost is such a tragedy. I am very, very proud of the troops
we have in Alaska, those fighting overseas for our freedoms, and the
families here who are making so many sacrifices.
James Fallows at the Atlantic wonders about Governor Palin's interests:
Each
of us has areas we care about, and areas we don't. If we are interested
in a topic, we follow its development over the years. And because we
have followed its development, we're able to talk and think about it in
a "rounded" way. We can say: Most people think X, but I really think Y.
Or: most people used to think P, but now they think Q. Or: the point
most people miss is Z. Or: the question I'd really like to hear
answered is A.
Here's the most obvious example in daily life: Sports Talk radio.
Mention a name or theme -- Brett Favre, the Patriots under Belichick,
Lance Armstrong's comeback, Venus and Serena -- and anyone who cares
about sports can have a very sophisticated discussion about the ins and
outs and myth and realities and arguments and rebuttals.
What Sarah Palin revealed is that she has not been interested enough in world affairs to become minimally conversant with the issues. Many people in our great land might have difficulty defining the "Bush Doctrine" exactly. But not to recognize the name, as obviously was the case for Palin, indicates not a failure of last-minute cramming but a lack of attention to any foreign-policy discussion whatsoever in the last seven years.
Governor
Palin may well cram enough to seem credible on foreign policy, or
whatever other issue she decides to bone up on. But just as President
Bush has been criticized for a lack of curiosity, shouldn't last nights
debate performance suggest Governor Palin may not be all that different
from President Bush in that regard as well?
Comments