David Wasserman's point about the footloose and fact-free candidate--it's unnerving when you realize that facts don't matter to a candidate and that they are basically pulling things from out of their behinds. But I just don't see her as being so uniquely scary as all that.
After all, what she's had to say about climate change is hardly any different from what Senator James Inhofe says about it, all the time, and he's been a senator for years. Of course, he's completely wrong, and for that matter, so is she. But is that so scary? Why, the Republicans in the Senate have just issued a report claiming that the whole green movement is run by a shadowy cabal of billionaires in a network so vast and opaque that the true extent of it may never really be known. Why, she practically seems standard-issue on that count!
And really--not wanting to land either way on the record regarding where President Obama was born? Hah--she's got company on that score as well. Who hasn't been a little Birther-curious at one time or another? (I mean, not-crazy people, but you know...)
Actually, the most shocking thing to me about how that interview seems to have gone wrong was the accusation that Wasserman was trying to have a "Sarah Palin interview". As in the interview where the vice-presidential candidate was literally thrown by the question "What do you read?"? Honestly, that seems more insulting to the candidate, than to the interviewer.
Come to think of it, it kind of seems like a certain party has become frightening...