Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Revealing questions

I am not sure the answers will be as interesting, but the questions reveal a lot about the people asking. Some investigative reporters are clearly muckraking, while others clearly have public interest in view... and still others seem either to be following some angle that is unclear, or are moonbats, or are simply baffled themselves and hoping that a shotgun approach will yield some interesting nugget that can be spun out (or just spun) into a story.

What would YOUR questions be if you were looking for information on Sarah Palin? Some of these questions resonate with my vicious-bully instincts, while others set off my political hot-buttons... but I'm not sure what I would ask, if it were my job to do so. I hope I'm not that passive a consumer. I'll think about it.


Sam said...

Seriously, I would want to know if she legally hired childcare help and any employees in commercial fishing. After all, nannies are supposed to have taxes paid for them -- did she? Also, there are illegal immigrants in Alaska. It would probably be embarrassing if she got caught up in something like that...

Robert Link said...

The premise is based on a truly fantastic proposition, that Palin or anyone else in the GOP at present is interested in, or capable of, giving substantive answers in legitimate discourse.

That said, I guess the question would be, "Do you think nooquelar war in the Middle East would qualify as Armageddon sufficient to herald Christ's return?" Convinced as I am that her answer is too close to "yes" our primary job is to keep her finger as far as possible from the button. No voting for spoilers, no "making a statement"---except for the clear statement that this kind of ideology has no place in our government.

Ducks said...

Good questions. (Particularly the tax issue: Nannies are a fraught issue where insurance is concerned, too, although most people may never realize that: your homeowners' or renters' policy should have a limit for "occasional" workers' comp to cover any injuries while working on your behalf. However, the restrictions on accessing this coverage can be tricky.) Palin's taxes, which are all over the internet if you look, are a mess; would that I had the income to have mine look such a mess and to bother postponing the due date for.

I do appreciate all the request for the emails cc'd to her husband; if I am voting for someone (which is, face it, NOT going to happen with Palin, but I hope there are similarly scrupulous Republicans that might) I want to know that THEY are capable. Think about the damning effect it had for the Clintons to quip that Americans were getting a "package deal" on Bill and Hillary. I don't think there's much enthusiasm for another such dynamic duo, particularly on that side of the aisle.

Although there are limitless topics I disagree with Palin on, most of them aren't really worth a fight cast in yes-no terms. I think one could profitably reexamine abortion rules from the ground up, although I am nominally pro-choice, for instance. The areas in which I see red and want to see more media attention are not necessarily the most important questions: environmental protection, resistance to big industry, and sane management of wildlife. Palin's record on aerial wolf hunting is the ONLY reason I knew she was alive before this campaign, and it wasn't welcome knowledge. I am sorry that we don't hear more about it on the sensationalistic news... it seems like the kind of vicious puff piece they love to run to attack someone's character, too, so I cannot fathom the omission. Oh well.

Thanks for starting the ball rolling, Sam... good thoughts! :)

Ducks said...

Robert, I just love you. I am trying not to explode into (louder) giggles at my desk. "Nooquelar war" indeed! Pat can attest that for the entire VP debate, I was snarling "nuCLEar" at the screen every few seconds. And yes, I am 100% with you.

Thank you both for your "revealing questions!" :)

Robert Link said...

Seems shibboleth's abound this cycle, with folks upset at Obama's pronunciation of that place next to India and other folks just as upset about the dearth of terminal g's in Governor Palin's talkin's. Here's an article from The Economist to that effect.

I harbor a suspicion that the neo-con preferred pronunciation of nuclear is a conscious tactic to distance themselves from Carter, who actually knew how to pronounce it, spell it, and clean up after it while in the U.S. Navy.

Ducks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ducks said...

Love, love, love that article. And for some reason the word "shibboleth" has triggered whatever proto-Tourette's I have... I'm trying not to mutter it to myself. Maybe it's just fun to say.

I don't rage-trigger on homespun homilies and our nation's quainter dialects unless it's a politician using them: even then, I tend to forebear unless my bullshit alarm is going off. It's the patently diacritical use of such shibboleths that sets me off, I think. I do my job as a citizen: I pay attention to the issues, write letters to my representatives, do small goods here and there, donate money every once in a while. As such, I deserve to be rewarded with more than false coin.

The other thing that triggers the psycho in me is inappropriately low standards of work ethic or dress code in elected officials. Pat could attest to my displeasure when, after "Terr'ism" became a reality in the American collective unconscious, the President would regularly appear rumpled and in a windbreaker over a golf shirt. Come on -- we're paying you to do a job you barely show up for. When the whole world is watching you, the least you can do is put on an effing tie.

I feel the same way about the deliberate use of language. Snobby? Maybe. A shibboleth of my own political agenda? Possibly... a notion I find provocative.

(Rewritten from a version so incomprehensible it could have been blamed on Palin... the irony of the subject matter is not lost on me.)