Palin's fact-free diet by Ruth Marcus

[sinkingfeeling]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/25/AR2010052503970.html

Has Sarah Palin learned anything since she was plucked from obscurity almost two years ago? Not that I can tell.

But Palin has had ample time now, outside the crash course of a presidential campaign, to develop and exhibit some understanding of the issues. Her learning curve, from all the available evidence, is a flat line.

I've started to write this column several times and put it aside. I worried: Was I being harder on Palin because I disagree with her politically? Was I being harder on Palin than I would be on a man spouting similar pablum? In a world where everyone already has firm opinions about Palin, pro or con, is there a value in pointing out that the empress has no clothes?

Palin's appearance on "Fox News Sunday" pushed me over the edge.

First, there was Palin on Republican Senate nominee Rand Paul, whose candidacy she had championed. Anchor Chris Wallace asked straightforward questions: Was Paul right or wrong in his view that the 1964 Civil Rights Act went too far in banning discrimination in private establishments? What did Palin make of the controversy? He got typically Palinesque answers, rambling and aggrieved:

Then there was Palin's best-defense-is-an-untrue-offense response to questions about the oil spill in the Gulf. The cheerleader for "drill, baby, drill" suggested that President Obama was in the pocket of Big Oil: