PALIN: SUBJECT DIPLOMACY TO A POPULAR VOTE, LIKE BRISTOL'S DANCING!

OK, the headline is a slight exaggeration. But I think it's a fairly close approximation of what Sarah Palin said in her first comments on the situation in Egypt, in an interview with David Brody of Pat Robertson's CBN News.

You may have already seen the quotes, but here they are again. I've emphasized the parts where she seems to be suggesting that the public ought to have a say in all this:

"It's a difficult situation, this is that 3am White House phone call and it seems for many of us trying to get that information from our leader in the White House it it seems that that call went right to um the answering machine. And nobody yet has, no body yet has explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak and I'm not real enthused about what it is that that's being done on a national level and from DC in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt. And in these areas that are so volatile right now because obviously it's not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House. We need to know what it is that America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with. And we do not have all that information yet."

And:

"Remember, President Reagan lived that mantra trust but verify. We want to be able to trust those who are screaming for democracy there in Egypt, that it is a true sincere desire for freedoms and the challenge that we have though, is how do we verify what it is that we are being told, what it is that the American public are being fed via media, via the protestors, via the government there in Egypt in order for us to really have some sound information to make wise decisions on what our position is. Trust but verify, and try to understand is what I would hope our leaders are engaged in right now. Who's going to fill the void? Mubarak, he's gone, one way or the other you know, he is not going to be the leader of Egypt, that that's a given, so now the information needs to be gathered and understood as to who it will be that fills now the void in the government. Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that or by that. Any radical Islamists, no that is not who we should be supporting and standing by, so we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support."

She clearly doesn't feel she knows what's going on. I suspect that's largely because she hasn't really been paying all that much attention to the available news reports, nor has she reached out to experts for informed perspective, which is what a serious, well-connected person who wanted to be president would be doing.

On the other hand, in a delicate global situation, should the U.S. government publicly reveal everything it's saying and doing diplomatically? I don't expect that -- but Sarah Palin apparently does.

So I think she's covering up her anxiety about being ill-informed by projecting it onto the public, and by implying that the administration is engaged in a sinister act of concealment. That appeal to the wingnuts' permanent sense of resentment plus the snark in the little "answering machine" quip is what she gives us instead of a real policy statement. For her fan base, I'm sure it's more than adequate -- I'm sure they think it's a home run.

****

Oh, and I love this:

... surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak....

She thinks the sneaky secret-keepers of the Obama administration know perfectly well who's going to take over, when, and under what circumstances, and they just aren't telling us -- the devious bastards! Pathetic. Utterly pathetic.