Even though many Republicans are now distancing themselves from Palin, she is still a force to be reckoned with on the right wing of American politics. Not that I necessarily disapprove–I think she’s done wonders for the country, in terms of alienating so many people from Republican politics and highlighting what’s wrong with the party and the conservative movement in general. The primary danger is that, under some bizarre set of events, she might actually be elected to some form of national office. That would be scary, and perhaps make the other benefits not worth it.

Let’s take a look at one particular claim made about Palin, and then by her: that she has foreign policy experience because Alaska is close to Russia. There is no possible way of parsing this statement so that it makes sense. First, as I have pointed out a week ago, the basic claim itself is absurd. Proximity does not equal experience. Even if Palin lived in Russia for some time, it doesn’t mean that she actually learned anything. But Palin’s “proximity” to Russia itself is a joke: Wasilla is more than 600 miles from the closest Russian territory. I’m closer than that to Korea; trust me, it gives me no insight. Moreover, it’s not as if the far reaches of Siberia represent the heart of Russian politics; realistically, Palin was more than 4000 miles away from the Russian capital–about the same distance as Maine from Moscow. Does that make Olympia Snowe a Russian expert?

No one should be taken seriously if they make the claim that their foreign policy credentials are in order because they live in a state which, at its farthest reaches, is within eyesight of the farthest reaches of another country.

Really. It should not be allowed. Think about it. What if you are hiring for a job and someone gave an answer like that in the interview? Say you’re hiring a person to be a vice president of an electronics company. You ask, what is your experience in handling import and export business, and the candidate replies, “Well, I lived in a place where I could see cargo container vessels pass by, every day!”

Trust me, you would smile and then find a way to end the interview as quickly as possible; just that one answer would amply demonstrate that not only is this person unqualified, but they are probably delusional for believing they have a shot at the position in the first place. They are wasting your time. Just as Palin has been wasting ours.

To fully understand the context of Palin and the “Proximity” claim, let’s see how it developed. Looking up the history of that claim was rather interesting, in that Sarah Palin was not even the first to make it. In fact, Steve Doocy of Fox News was first, on August 29, the same day McCain nominated Palin. Watch it:

Kilmeade: He’s going to capitalize, she has no international relations experience, she’s not the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. …

Doocy: But the other thing about her, she does know about international relations because she is right up there in Alaska right next door to Russia!

At that point, everybody just thought, Oh, it’s another Fox News idiot blathering away. Stewart was succinct and on the nose; jump to 1:40 in this video:Then, Cindy McCain made the claim:

… And also remember, Alaska is the closest part of our continent to Russia, so it’s not as if she doesn’t understand what’s at stake here.

But still, people thought, “well, she’s just the wife of the candidate. We can’t expect her to be an expert herself.”

Them U.S. News and World Report writer Michael Barone opined, “Foreign policy experience? Well, Alaska is the only state with a border with Russia.” But still, people thought, “Who the hell is Michael Barone?” and probably thought nothing more of it.

But then we had John McCain himself making the exact same argument:

McCain: “Alaska is right next to Russia. She understands that. Look, Sen. Obama’s never visited south of our border. I mean, please.”

“Please” indeed.

Here’s where some serious alarm bells should have started going off. And with many of us, they did. But not on the right wing. Oh, I suppose they had little choice–they could not exactly ditch McCain at this point. But at the very least people could have laughed this off as a little jest, that McCain was kidding, and perhaps McCain himself could have taken that tack.

And perhaps the problem was, they really didn’t have anything else to push in terms of her foreign policy credentials. But even then, it should have been clear that the best move would be to simply talk about being an executive, that you get general skills in working with groups of diverse people, finding common ground, and coming to a solution, that she would be able to apply these skills to foreign policy which she would of course expand upon from this time. It might not be a perfect answer, but it is at least a halfway reasonable one. And at least, it would probably have been enough to answer the interview questions. That’s Political Interview-Giving 101: when asked something you don’t have a good answer for, just give the best possible BS answer for long enough and the interviewer will move along. If that failed, then point out Obama’s lack of executive experience and how he’s at the top of the ticket. There are a variety of ways to competently deflect the question.

But neither McCain nor Palin did that–for some bizarre reason, they kept going with the “you can see Russia from Alaska” angle–as you can see from this interview with Charlie Gibson more than a week later, when Palin had finally come out of her cocoon. She knew she would get the question and had a good, long time to practice one of those competent deflections. Here’s what she said:

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

Oy. Unbelievable. She doesn’t even try any of the usual techniques, she just barrels right ahead. She doesn’t make light of the “jest,” she doesn’t give a long-winded explanation about general skills, she doesn’t deflect to Obama, she doesn’t segue into a practiced speech about a considered foreign policy opinion regarding Russia, or any of the other many ways one could intelligently answer Gibson’s question.

“They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska!” Therefore I am qualified to be president!

At this very point, federal agents, sworn to protect our country from harm, should have whisked Palin away and prevented her from taking national office or operating heavy machinery.

Seriously, anyone who gives such an idiotic answer after having so long to prepare, knowing exactly the question that would be asked, should automatically be made ineligible for office, for the good of the country.

Many on the right cited conspiracy theories about ABC sabotaging Palin because her extended answer was edited. Here’s what she said right after “from an island in Alaska”:

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We’ve learned lessons from that in our relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.

Boiled down, what she said was: being physically close to Russia shows you how important it is to deal with those countries. Everything else is filler, unrelated to the question.

So, does that competently answer the question? Even ignoring Gibson’s focus on Georgia–which Palin did not address at all–it’s still not even close to making sense. You have foreign policy experience because you live close to another country which makes you realize how important foreign policy is.

No. It’s still a stupid answer.

Any competent person should have then realized what was happening and finally picked up on how to deal with the question competently. And let’s remember, Palin was not exactly giving interviews like this every day. She had more than a week before she met with Katie Couric. How did she evolve the answer?

COURIC: You’ve cited Alaska’s proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?

PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land– boundary that we have with– Canada. It– it’s funny that a comment like that was– kind of made to– cari– I don’t know, you know? Reporters–

COURIC: Mock?

PALIN: Yeah, mocked, I guess that’s the word, yeah. Um.

COURIC: Explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy credentials.

PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our– our next door neighbors are foreign countries. They’re in the state that I am the executive of. And there in Russia–

COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?

PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We– we do– it’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where– where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. It is– from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to– to our state.

That’s after two weeks of hard, long practice in answering a question she knew with 100% certainty would be asked. “Putin rears his head when he flies over Alaska”? First, it was established that Putin doesn’t fly over Alaska when he travels to DC, not unless he travels via Siberia, and second, even if he did, Palin is now claiming that having a foreign leader fly over her head qualifies her in terms of foreign policy.

So come back to that job interview where the candidate says she knows international business because she can see freighters from her window, and you can clearly see why Sarah Palin shouldn’t even be governor of Alaska, let along a political leader of any office greater than that. Maybe I’m just being elitist or something, but I happen to believe in leaders knowing what the frack they’re talking about and doing.

For Sarah Palin to still be taken seriously in American politics, just from this set of events alone, is mind-boggling. It demonstrates how thoroughly the right-wing has become divorced from reality, and it now completely about pleasing the base.

But this is what conservatism in the U.S. has devolved to.