The Palin clip that everyone’s been waiting for has now aired on The CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.

Watch CBS Videos Online

And here’s the key part of the transcript. After Palin discusses her opposition to Roe v. Wade, Couric asks…

COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?

PALIN: Well, let’s see. There’s –of course –in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings, that’s never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are–those issues, again, like Roe v Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know–going through the history of America, there would be others but–

COURIC: Can you think of any?

PALIN: Well, I could think of–of any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a Vice President, if I’m so privileged to serve, wouldn’t be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.

This was part of Couric’s “Vice Presidential Questions” series, so she asked Joe Biden the same thing. How did he respond?

COURIC: (to Biden): What are the Supreme Court decisions you disagree with?

BIDEN: You know, I’m the guy who wrote the Violence Against Women act. And I said that every woman in America if they are beaten and abused by a man should be able to take that person to court. Meaning you should be able to go to federal court and sue in federal court the man who abused you if you can prove that abuse. But they said no that a woman, there’s no federal jurisdiction and I held, they acknowledged, I held about 1,000 hours of hearings proving that there’s an effect in interstate commerce. Women who are abused and beaten and beaten are women who are not able to be in the work force. And the Supreme Court said there is an impact on commerce but this is federalizing a private crime and we’re not going to allow it. I think the Supreme Court was wrong about that decision.

Another key moment:

COURIC (to Palin): Do you think there’s an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

PALIN: I do. Yeah, I do.

As The Caucus rather gently puts it:

Ms. Palin also said that she believed there is an inherent right of privacy in the Constitution. She did not explain how she could believe in a right of privacy and still oppose Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that established a Constitutional right to abortion. The decision rests on the belief in a right to privacy.

Another decision that rests on the Constitutional right to privacy: Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 Supreme Court ruling that legalized gay sex. I wonder which side of that one Palin is on. Maybe both?

Eli Sanders was The Stranger's associate editor. His book, "While the City Slept," was a finalist for the Washington State Book Award and the Dayton Literary Peace Prize. He once did this and once won...

60 replies on “Quite a Contrast”

  1. If you’re a pro-lifer, the right to privacy and the right to life don’t conflict. We also have a right to keep and bear arms, but that ends when we start using them to commit murder (which pro-lifers believe abortion is). In the same way, the right to privacy doesn’t trump the right of another person to their life. Remember, the Griswold vs. Connecticut case where the right to privacy was established dealt with contraception, not abortion. Just a short course in the logic here.

  2. In spite of the hearings on the issue that Biden referred to, the Supreme Court found that family law was traditionally regulated by the states

    What? Since when is violence a matter for family courts? Their argument boils down to why VAWA exists in the first place: too many jurisdictions consider domestic violence to be a private family matter. Christ.

  4. @45 – Um, after you clean up the mess from your head exploding, you might want to look up the word “federalism” in the dictionary. The lesson here? When making fun of Sarah Palin, it’s probably best NOT to reveal that you’re even more ignorant than she is.

  6. @54 – She said, “I’m a Federalist…”

    Here’s one definition: “One who believes in and promotes state individualism as opposed to nationalistic controls.” Under this definition, you’re right (ouch).

    Here’s another, and this is what I was thinking of when I heard the interview:

    “A member of a former political party (The Federalist Party) in the United States that favored a strong centralized federal government”

    Maybe this makes me dumber than someone who named their kids “Trig” and “Track,” but I’ve never heard the term “Federalist” used to describe a States’ Rights point of view (which Palin holds, along with her secessionist husband). Wasn’t Lincoln’s army called the Federal Army, fighting a confederacy of independent states?

  7. @56: Federalism = states rights in this context. It was a new nation’s natural reaction to an oppressive monarchy, an aversion to overly powerful centralized government.

    Now, I’m all for Obama, but, to be fair, Biden appeared to discuss Roe as if the trimester system is the law. It is not, and the only temporal distinction that matters now is pre- vs. post-viability. Biden should know that.

    Hopefully he was just answering the question as it was asked: Why do you think Roe was a good decision? Still, it would have been nice to hear him acknowledge that the portion of Roe he discussed is not the law.

  8. Amen @14. Even assuming that she’s done no homework or preparation on previous Supreme Court decisions, the Exxon Valdez ruling came down on her watch, with the state’s involvement, and with a tremendous –and negative– impact on her constituents. Shouldn’t we be able to rely on her to at least remember that!?

Comments are closed.