Moose droppings

*
Lucius MacAdoo, from the comments of an earlier post, wonders aloud if we even know for a fact whether Governor Palin can read. Since she recently refused to tell Katie Couric even one news publication she reads --- not even two "gimmes" like the Anchorage Daily News or the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman --- LMA's question may not be considered completely frivolous.

Now, today, in a post-debate Fox interview (as seen through TPM), Palin let the cat out of the bag. She reads the Post and the Times (both brutes of the "liberal media"), even the Economist. She also is aware of all those "investment publications" that come up to interview her about her prodigious energy development accomplishments, but doesn't name one --- not even Fortune, doggone it!

Someone has done a great job of teaching Palin how to make her words drip with earnest, sincere condescension. Listening to the clip from TPM, I realized that I now find Palin to be the creepiest person in the public eye. She can belch daisy chains of discredited lies as if they were her secret recipe for those special brownies she whips up for "her guy" after he's spent a hard day snowmobiling over the necks of baby harp seals.

Consider Palin's supernatural capacity to repeat lies without even an iota of self-awareness to dignify herself alongside stuff like this, where we even find so-called fact-checkers ignoring documented facts. If for no other reason, U.S. political events over the past few months may in the future be considered a historic watershed: politicians have now, for the first time, begun overtly using the Big Lie technique live, repeatedly, in nationally televised broadcasts. They show no embarrassment about being caught, but express anger that anyone should make such an accusation even when their own lies are read back to them verbatim. When private individuals do this, we call them sociopaths.

Do a thought experiment: imagine what the public discourse would be like if the Big Lie strategy (and in this case I think it is a strategy, not merely a tactic) goes unchallenged this fall and takes its place in our national political and social vernacular. What kinds of transactions could people have with each other if half of the population decides, like Ronald Reagan, that facts are stupid things? The first task would be to figure out which half of the population was which:

"Ma'am, that will be $3.50, please."
"I already paid you. Where's my change?"
"No, you didn't pay me."
"Yes I did."
"No you didn't."
"Yes I did."
"No you didn't."