Not one?

Ok, I'm really picking on Palin lately, but I've been watching the interviews with Katie Couric online and they are becoming almost surreal. Today they released clips of the discussion of Roe.v Wade and abortion rights, and Couric asked her opinion on other SC cases.

This is a perfectly valid question - positions on the Supreme Court are going to open up in the next four years, and some idea of how the candidates would look to populate the bench are critical for many of us - do they think the court is too liberal, too conservative, too something? Do they generally agree with cases that support personal freedoms vs government oversight? Do they disagree or agree with cases that relate to religion, guns, race, sex, gays? I want answers from everyone on this topic, as do a lot of people, since the decisions of the Supreme Court will impact life for whole lot longer than any individual president.

COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions [than Roe v. Wade] 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.

She can't think of ANYTHING? Not the decision that prayer in schools is unconstitutional? Not segregation? Miscegenation? Right to council? Sodomy laws? The recent presidential election? Separation of church and state? Gun control? Equal pay for equal work? Assisted Suicide?

Even if she couldn't name a case specifically, she couldn't come up up with one decision to talk about? Whether she agreed with it or not, at least name a topic! Her answer is pure buzzword bafflegab.

I had to look up the specific case names for some of them, but the decisions at least jogged my memory and I could have answered the question. Brown vs the Board of Education? Loving vs Virginia? Bush vs Gore? Nothing?

Knowing these things backwards and forwards is NOT a requirement for holding office - I wouldn't expect comprehensive knowledge here - but everyone I talked to could come up with at least one other than Roe v Wade, off the top of their head. Someone who is running for office should be able to at least answer the question instead of trying to bullshit an answer. If you can't think of one you disagree with, at least mention one or two of the others as examples of the fine work that the Supreme Court does.