Palinesque Interview For Bernie Sanders
The Bernie Sanders interview with the NY Daily News has illicited much reaction. His answers were Palinesque in their nature, yet many of the same people who lambasted her for being unprepared are giving him a pass. Everyone knows where we stand on Palin, but can you really tell the difference? I suggest you read it for yourself, and the Peter Eavis defense of it. Make up your own mind as to his preparedness to be Commander-In-Chief.
When asked whether Wall Street executives could be prosecuted over their actions during the financial crisis, he responded by saying he didn’t have the legal statutes in front of him. The financial crisis, bankers, millionaires and billionaires are the crux of his campaign, yet he doesn’t know whether the people whose proposed incarceration is fueling his supporters actually could be imprisoned?
When asked what big banks should look like after they were broken up, he said he was not running JP Morgan Chase nor Citibank. The structure and responsibilities of these new banks is certainly relevant information. If banks are too big now, how will making them smaller make them less likely to fail?
The Metropolitan Life (the largest life insurance company in the United States) question referred to a recent Supreme Court ruling. MetLife racked up a massive win when a U.S. District Court ruled that it is unimportant ‒ or at least, not a systemically important financial institution, or SIFI. We call them “too big to fail.” If he didn’t know the Supreme court just ruled in favor of the largest insurance company in the country not being “too big to fail,” what is his plan exactly?
Enough about his Palinesque performance on his economic stance, the centerpiece of his campaign which he knew little about. Let’s talk foreign policy. When asked how he would handle the detention and interrogation of an ISIS commander, he said he had not thought about it a whole lot. Not good for the commander in chief.
When asked about President Obama’s policy of giving the military authority over drone strikes, his answer was he hadn’t thought about it a whole lot. Like Scarface after interrogating the guy on the couch in Half-Baked “I believe him yo.”
When asked how far he would want to pull back Israeli settlements, he acknowledged it was a fair question and said he could give a better answer if he had a paper in front of him. Don’t we wish we all had that opportunity?
Finally, when asked about the Palestinian leadership’s decision to try Israeli war crimes in international criminal court, he retorted with a question asking why he doesn’t support a million things in the world. Absolutely Palinesque in temperament.
These are the types of responses that, if one did not know any better, would’ve come from the former Governor of Alaska. When running for president, there is no such thing as a “gotcha question.” Either you are prepared or you’re not. I don’t fault Bernie as much as I do his campaign. Same with Palin. Though Bernie is no doubt smarter than she is in the academic sense, they sound similar when they are equally unprepared.