ABC News blows it
Scroll for updates…Is ABC doing some West Coast whitewashing?…Wow, Even the LA Times sees Gibson’s distortion…
Charlie Gibson had a chance to show that he could be fair, balanced, and P.D.S.-free with Sarah Palin’s first major MSM interview.
Looks like he blew it.
Taking quotes out of context.
Engaging in distortionary hype.
And the reason we should watch the rest of this hatchet job is…what exactly?
Also: Guess this is good preparation for the kind of neutral, objective questions we’ll get during the debates.
***
Interview excerpts here.
This is how Yahoo! News is promoting the interview:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.
That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie.
GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln’s words, but you went on and said, “There is a plan and it is God’s plan.”
What she actually said:
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”
Allahpundit rips Gibson:
Totally untrue, but that’s what he gets for relying on the Associated Press, which took the liberty of bowdlerizing her quote mid-sentence in order to make it fit the narrative they were trying to build of her as some fundie who thinks she can read God’s mind. Here’s my post on the subject from last Thursday. Read it and see just how egregious the distortion here is.
More:
What’s missing from the AP’s version? Right — the beginning of what she said, the part that makes clear she’s not asserting that we’re doing God’s will but simply praying that we are. It’s the difference between me saying “McCain will win” and “I pray McCain will win.” The first is an assertion of fact/secret knowledge, the second is an expression of desire/hope. The AP actually stoops to picking up the quote mid-sentence to make it better fit the stereotype of the holy-roller yokel claiming divine inspiration for Bush’s Crusade.
Will Gibson acknowledge this egregious distortion?
***
More reax…
Kathryn Lopez: “Or was Charlie Gibson just condescendingly explaining the world to Sarah Palin?”
Commenter MNgirl: “I just finished watching both ABC News and I was okay with it for the first 5 minutes but when Gibson looked down his little nose at her disapprovingly and said ‘Why don’t you tell me what you think the Bush doctrine is……’he lost me. This one is going to backfire on the media once again. He blew it, women hate being patronized and women watching that are only going to see him trying play “gotcha” with Palin and her fan club is going to grow. What a jerk. He gets a gift handed to him and the most he can do is patronize her and try to trick her. Idiot.”
Commenter jencab: “This is a lame interview. Charlie belittled her, chopped up her answers, seems repulsed, and sighed. What the hell is that? I never seen him like this with any other politician. Unbelievable.”
Patterico: “Holey Moley — L.A. Times Criticizes Gibson for Mischaracterizing Palin’s Prayer”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
More CPAC speeches in 20 words
February 11, 2012 06:53 PM by Michelle Malkin
72 CommentsPalin: If I Lived in South Carolina, I’d Vote for Newt
January 17, 2012 10:28 PM by Doug Powers
127 Comments
Sarah Palin is out of 2012 race
October 5, 2011 06:26 PM by Michelle Malkin
107 CommentsPalin Lawyers Warn Publisher of ‘The Rogue’ Not to Destroy Documents Ahead of Possible Lawsuit
September 26, 2011 10:46 PM by Doug Powers
70 CommentsPoll: Palin Picks Up Steam Against Obama
September 20, 2011 10:48 PM by Doug Powers
154 CommentsSaturday open thread: Palin, Solyndra, and public-private partnerships
September 3, 2011 01:32 PM by Michelle Malkin
170 CommentsSarah Palin’s Bus Tour Re-Launching in Iowa Thursday
August 11, 2011 12:01 AM by Doug Powers
342 Comments
Categories: Sarah Palin
Babalu Blog
» Greece is BurningPatterico
» NYT hails the safety net: Poor hardest hitDaily Caller
» Inside Media Matters: Sources, memos reveal erratic behavior, close coordination with White House and news organizationsGateway Pundit
» Notre Dame Tells Obama: HHS Mandate Is a ‘Grave Violation of Religious Freedom and Cannot Stand’AmSpecBlog
» Weekend Political Wrap-UpJustOneMinute
» I Guess I'm Still Stuck On StupidThe Hill
» Rep. Ron Paul not conceding Maine vote
Now, we KNOW the Clinton Doctrine involves getting busy in a closet.
vickisoup- you’ve confused doctrine with dictate.
*giggle*
Vickisoup – didn’t it have something to do with cigars?
lgm,
Why are you still pretending that there is no way Obama’s comment could not have been construed as a double entendre? Get real! Even I don’t think Obama is that naive. And I’m offended that you think we’re all as stupid as a bowling ball made out of styrofoam.
Actually, it’s spending all your time on line telling people who think just like you how smart you all are and how mean The Media are to Sarah that’s a sign of a loser. Defend yourself, punk.
I’d elaborate but I’m pretty sure it would violate the Terms of Service… and probably laws in several states.
Bemused
Did you see the interview then?
Since we’re all losers, why don’t you get lost?
I think she did great…obviously those here saying she didn’t answer the question haven’t been to a job interview lately. NEVER answer a question right away that you think may be a trap….always make the interviewer clarify their question. I think she did fine given the conditions.
Wow. If Gibson was lost with Palin’s short answer, how does he understand any of the extended monologues that BO pretends are answers? He’s too busy fawning over him to care, he’s so dreamy.
I read the transcript, and I never knew Gibson stuttered. He asked the same question multiple times waiting for Palin to slip up. What an idiot. His condescension and superiority are completely obvious, and will not go unnoticed by the masses.
What a disgrace. I agree, MSM RIP 2008.
BemusedLib said:
To be fair, these liberals do know a loser when they see one – that is how they ended up picking Obama & Biden.
I second that.
And just what part of McCain/Palin running on an agenda that is designed to differ with Bush’s perceived unpopularity, should have made her prepared to expound on an ambiguous term. It is not like Bush has written books and that there are are college courses explaining the “Bush Doctrine”. I did Google the “Bush Doctrine” and found exactly what I expected. That term is only used by the left or other detractors of Bush in order to discredit the president by tearing down his efforts in the war on terror. There is no merit to her understanding a term that has no basis in reality.
How about we ask Obama to explain “Fast Fourier Transform” in 30 seconds or less, during an interview, it would be the same result.
Thank you for confirming what everyone here has been trying to tell you. It was a gotcha question designed to get her to slam President Bush. By the way, when is Gibson going to get around to asking Obama if he is absolutely sure he has the experience necessary and is ready to be President?
Frankly though, I couldn’t care less whether she knows what the “Bush Doctrine” is. In case you guys STILL haven’t figured it out, Bush isn’t on the ballot. She’s not running to be his VP. What matters is that she know what the McCain Doctrine is.
Seriously, if that’s all you guys have, this race is over. And if I were you, I’d be worried about my own VP candidate. Tomorrow will be here soon, and he’s guaranteed to say something stupid.
I’m out. All of you “smart, loser types” have a good night!
The Clinton Doctrine -
When the American military or interests get attacked by Islamic terrorists, turn the other cheek, responding “Thank you, Sir, may I have another.” Talk tough, and issue the warning, “you better look out,” but do nothing. When overcome with personal scandal, remotely bomb milk factories, tent camps, and empty fortifications, to distract from said scandal. (Putting actual soldiers on the ground, would make you seem Imperial to area dictators.) Claim victory, and denegrate anyone who belittles your military decisiveness.
Even the liberal Juan Williams acknowledged that the “Bush Doctrine” question was a gotcha question.
And since when was asking for clarification considered a bad thing? Don’t you liberals always complain that we don’t seek to understand other people? That we just shoot from the hip and aren’t inquisitive?
Don’t worry, y’all can always hope for 2012…
Then pardon all the criminals in the family.
Really, I stand by my first statement, only libs will get their panties in a wad over it. I also think it’s a good idea to clarify terms.
You articulated nicely what I was trying to say!
If I were Obama, I’d do everything in my power to get the discussion back on McCain. The more he runs against Palin, the worse he’ll do.
Bemused Lib…. do you live anywhere near MN…. I’d like to meet you, Punk!
I’m having too much fun.
Sorry to break it to you but, even though he’s balck, Juan is a stone conservative (note that he does tome on the Fox plantation) and — whatever his leanings — a lame-ass excuse for a journalist.
Kathryn Lopez summed it up for me.
If anything, this makes Gibson look like a total assh*le.
What with that whole foot-twisting, peering down his bifocals and pursing his lips crap…good grief.
The MSM has gone into full-blown self-destruction mode over a vice presidential pick – Unbelievable.
I mean really…..asking if she prays for America.
Oh, the horror!
I agree, which kind of makes me think Obama would be wise to have paid attention to how she answered.
I say that since when is the last time Obama actually had a real job to learn the skills of interviewing for a job.
I hope the “pitbull” finds its way out of Sarah soon. If not the scumbags are going to chew her up and spit her out. She is a real “lady” and the liberal media are, if they realize it or not “satanists” that are out to get her. Like she said and you won’t hear this on MSM but God isn’t necessarly on her side but she is on the side of God. Thats is something liberals will never understand and laugh at. Every interview the MSM has with Sarah will be a setup to make her look foolish even if they have to edit evey other word like they did here. Notice the set, they had it so she couldn’t look into the camera without seeming rude to the weasleprick interviewing her. She is a nice lady but nice isn’t going to work. LOAD YOUR GUNS SARAH!!!!
I don’t get network news on my satellite; only cable.
Do you think he meant to imply that she was blathering without substance, like Obama is given to doing?
I’m glad I can’t see the interview. It sounds awful.
I stopped watching Katie Couric many years ago because she was very rude and arrogant to George HW Bush in an interview. So Charlie Gibson: *Pop* Goes the Weasel.
Buh-bye.
BemusedLib said:
Wow, did you just say that?! Yet another example of liberal racism.
What I can’t grasp is why Charlie had to be so dour. If you got the scoop, at least act somewhat pleased to be there. Mike Wallace was more cordial with Ahmedimijad than Charlie was with a sitting governor of a state in this nation and vice-presidential nominee!! This demeanor will come back to bite them. He was condescending, snide and impolite, as though he were doing her the favor!
I’m sure that level of enthusiasm is inclusive of the McCain/Obama debates, no?
My, but the trolls are in a real tither tonight! Unwad those panties and you might be a bit more comfortable.
Talk about partisan crap! Seriously, are you guys among Obama’s 300 paid internet trolls?
I have to admit, after a certain amount of initial irritation, I find the critical remarks from the leftists (Chapoutier, Bemused Idiot, et al) funnier and funnier, especially after seeing them previously defend Obamessiah’s stuttering and stammering as thoughtful responses.
thanks, in part to the msm I can hear the ‘swoosh’ of the toilet flushing on obama’s campaign.
Looks like Charles Gibson had bad jet lag and maybe had a few drinks the night before. Gibson is lame and unenthusiastic. Why were the colors so drab?
I believe Bush made the decision to strike Pakistan because he received information that the Pakistani intelligence service was infiltrated by radical militants. He was tired of being screwed with. I think what Bush did was right for once.
I thought Palin was supposed to receive briefings like this now that she’s nominated.
Holding my nose and getting past this disgusting proof of your bigotry, is it your ridiculous position that Alan Colmes is a conservative??
You be trippin’, Fool.
Has it ever occured to you libs that just maybe other folks do not give a rat’s behind about the definition of a supposed policy that you guys have coined? Defeating tyranny, thorugh pre-emptive strikes, or by any means, is not only reasonable, but it could only be asked about by liberals. We conservatives don’t question its appropriateness, have to give it a label or consider its origin. It is as certain to our belief system as the air we breathe. We are not gonna take crap from anybody and will fight to destroy anyone who either attacks, or seriously threatens to attack us. Do I need to draw you as picture.
As to the world domination stuff, I think you guys have been watching too much TV. We have had our chances to conquer portions of the middle-east as a spoil of war. Why have we not done so? Our consideration of a presence in that region is two-fold. We will be there to protect Israel from aggression and we will help to stabilize the region that contains a good deal of the world’s oil output. Sinister motives, or just sound reasoning?
Hey racist, take your load of crap back to DC. WTFDYM by “even though he’s balck (sic)”? Which racist liberal stereotype of yours is Juan Williams defying?
‘Splain yourself.
When Gibson said, “And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there,” I wish Palin would have responded with this:
“Let me ask you a question, and this is really central. Can you look me in the eye and tell me you have the experience and the ability to interview a candidate for Vice President?”
Oooh! Zing, kaPOW, Trollman. Good one.
Go Sarah.
It is even more pointless to say I was blaming anybody about anything.
I made a simple statement that is no different than my view of ABC yesterday, last week or last year.
It was simply a play on MM’s title.
A headline on Drudge states, pam anderson tells Palin to suck it! pam anderson wouldn’t make a pimple on Sarah’s tush. matt damon who at one time I thought was a somewhat intelligent indivudual, not because of his movie with Robin Williams either, says she would be like a bad Disney movie. Now this gibson moron? Well, gibson, damon, and that anderson ho…………can all suck it.
Meanwhile, “Barack America”‘s running mate mentioned a “Biden Administration” this week, and has talked about Palin being the “Lieutenant Governor” of Alaska, as well as (correctly) mentioning that Hillary is a more qualified candidate than he is. Talk about being lost in a blizzard of words…
chap,
That’s exactly why she could not give a precise answer to his question. If you add up how all those 21 million hits define “Bush Doctrine” you will get an answer very much like the answer to “How many grains of sand are in a heap?” It’s obvious to me that what you think the “Bush Doctrine” is and what I think it is are almost certainly distinctly different. Given such a vague term, can you honestly expect anyone other than a fool to give a precise answer?
Bush never stated a doctrine and named it the Bush Doctrine. That is an MSM term meant to belittle him and means different things to different people. There is no standard definition of that. Who declared it?
It is an abiguous question meant to create an answer that can be attacked.
Good for her to not pay attention to BS MSM propoganda like the “Bush Doctrine”.
Huge fan of Sarah, but I was not impressed. I thought she was way too scripted and repetitive. The McCain camp has to let her go. The Bush Doctrine is well known. I also think should could have better explained radical Islam. That being said, she never looked rattled or lost. She was forceful and able to answer immediately (unlike a certain Messianic figure we all know). I give it a B-
Exactly my point. Made just before I hit submit.
The “Bush Doctrine” is not a set doctrine, you are all right, BUT Sarah must seize on these MSM-created falsehoods, challenge them, and flesh out real policy positions. She’s done this many times, I would have liked to have seen her do so in this interview.
If anybody knows about that term, it would be Pamela. She is more than qualified to speak to the subject. There are videos to prove it. Nasty skank.
Thank God for our nice and decent conservative women!
What the hell does this mean? Your blather absolutely makes no sense. You need to work on your spelling and your syntax. I’ve taught 8th graders who wrote better than you.
What an absolutely insulting thing to say about Juan Williams. Where is your proof about his political leanings? Or are you blathering just to exercise your brain synapse?
I’ve been complaining about the daily barrage of negative coverage from ABCNews.com for almost 2 weeks now — ever since Palin was nominated.
Does it really surprise anyone that Gibson would take the snot-nosed route?
I’m waiting for a real interview one of these days — not sure who, but someone who can handle being in front of a woman.
Really, can you imagine if Palin had said to Gibson “I got lost in a blizzard of words there”? I’m embarrassed for you, Gibson, like when I saw Howard Dean scream “Yeeargh!”
Can you imagine if Gibson had to follow Obama’s answers from Saddleback? He probably would have said something similar, but a little different: “I got lost in your dreamy eyes and in the glow of your halo.”
LOL -
She was trying to be funny, right?
That sounds so searing coming from someone with fake teats and hepatitis.
I think she was weaker than she could have been. She was acting as if it wasn’t a hostile interview and it clearly was!
She needs to force the interviewers to ask a specific question and not try to answer the question in any accommodating way. Let them do the work! The bastards want to crucify her and there is little point in pretending otherwise.
She needs to turn the questions around to what she wants to emphasis and flat out ignore ambiguous questions. I also think she needs to challenge questions that simply make little sense or are too ambiguous.
I don’t think she can enter an interview with the fake camaraderie that they so typically have. Assume every interview will be a hatchet job until proven otherwise.
T-Bone,
I was quoting Chap about the 21 million hits.
Does anyone really care what this cheaply dressed, hideous, silicone boobed, aging peroxide bimbo has to say? She’s utterly classless.
I believe the Center for Disease Control has issued a permanent quarantine on Ms. Anderson’s suckable regions.
Except for that fact that it is so self destructive one begins to wonder if the media, tiring of Obama, is dumping him by going insanely over the top about Sarah Palin. But as insane as that seems it doesn’t seem any crazier than what we’re seeing day by day.
He demeaned her through the whole interview. Looked like any ordinary alphabet network interview with a Republican.
I know EWTHeckman. I just didn’t copy the rest of your post pointing out a possible 21 million different meanings of the Bush Doctrine.
Imagine, if you can, the ABC staff meeting before the interview…
“C’mon Charlie! We’re all counting on you to expose this _________ for the _____ she is! Don’t let her off the hook…Oh, man, is she gonna fold like an Alaskan pup-tent in a bad storm!”
Or something like that….he must have been under extreme peer pressure to perform…poor little mysoginist.
What does that say about Obama when he thinks there’s 57 states in the Union?
No problem. I’m just trying to be clear, unlike certain lefties we know.
sharrukin said:
She was leaning forward a bit too much. That really bothered me in fact.
I wonder what Pam Anderosn thinks the Bush Doctrine is? Oh never mind, I’m getting a bad visual.
Or dodges a tough question with the “above my pay grade” response.
The Presidency is definitely above Obama’s pay grade.
GOTCHA. The Bush Doctrine is part of history and is already taught in my son’s babysitter’s Junior High School class.
GOTCHA is something like “what type of government does Mongolia have”, or “give some details about Russia’s constitution” crap like that.
The Republicans are really trying to put themselves in a win-win situation. By acting like everyone is victimizing Palin, they can try to sucker fools into believing it and score votes.
If Palin looks increasingly out of her league, she will dropout in a teary press conference where she’ll talk about “protecting her family”. If she drops out, they’ll blame the media and Obama as forcing her out with meanie, sexist tactics.
The whole “lipstick on a pig” thing convinced about their plan. After protecting her and playing big brother for a couple weeks, they finally let her sit down with a “safe” non-partisan journalist. Gibson barely touched on some of the details about her political ideas(which are widely unknown). Yet, they still cry foul and whine afterwards. I’d be SHOCKED if this victimhood doesn’t backfire. I’ve never, ever seen anything like this. Hillary tried it in the primary, but at least she was a known article, and her brains and toughness are respected across party lines. America doesn’t know “jack” about Palin other than broad details from the news, and sleazy tabloid stuff. She SHOULD take advantage of every opportunity to let America know EVERYTHING about her thoughts and ideologies. But no, her party knows better. Instead, they’re gonna try to get away with the biggest, boldest con job in modern political history.
Check out “Being There” starring Peter Sellers, and directed by, I think Hal Ashby. The movie is so freaking prophetic. I can’t believe what I’m seeing.
I think she’s confusing the Bush doctrine with the Clinton doctrine. Wrong Bush Pam.
Absolutely. I’m sick of all the corny crap.
mistressjustice said:
You mean the “black guy that is doing time on the Fox plantation”?
Yeah, we should check out Hollywood movies to get our knowledge, history, and prophecy. Thats a plan. No wonder some people are so wrong headed and don’t know it.
She won’t.
Clinton Doctrine: Don’t count on your interns to do your dry cleaning.
That is a racist statement and you should be banned.
All of you out there trying to have a dialog with BemusedLib, please observe these facts.
BemusedLib(he-she-it (liberals like hyphenation)
AlohaGuy said:
If anyone is
goingneeds to drop out, it is mj’s favorite Biden. That pick has turned out really well so far…I had been hoping that Obama would pick Biden, and he did. I had been hoping McCain would pick a conservative, and he did. The moment it was confirmed that it was Palin, I knew the race was over – the Republicans had won.
(looks over the polling since these nominations)
Yup, looks like I was right.
Wow – nice catch. This is a viewer email on National Review – Michelle has the link above. He edits out his gaffes…dishonest “journalist”.
You’re so full of sh*t it’s amazing, oh wait you chase ambulances, nevermind.
It’s really beyond delusional. They are so bent out of shape over their overlord’s meltdown and exposure as the empty suit that he really is, that they are going bonkers.
If there was any rational thought applied to that rant you quoted, one would be able to quickly see that the criticisms cited could be applied to Obama by a factor of 10. The biggest con job in political history – Barak Obama. Zero record, zero accomplishments, zero judgment and zero speaking ability away from scripted comments flashed on a teleprompter.
The man is a Marxist in Democrat clothing. A trojan horse of a politician.
All of you out there trying to have a dialog with BemusedLib, please observe these facts.
BemusedLib, he-she-it, (liberals like hyphenation) only likes to stir the pot. (He-she-it) personality can best be explained by comparing (he-she-it) to a arsonist. (He-she-it) is a bit of a sociopath and only knows how to argue with inductive reasoning. My advise with (he-she-it) is to concider all converstion as
(SHE-IT)
Stop projecting. I’ve complimented plenty of Black conservatives. Marc Lamont Hill is a strong voiced democrat on Fox News.
I would never say something like your quote w/ the obvious racial overtones.
Tis, Tis, Pastor Trollman.
So, mistressjustice, you are of the opinion that no one is going after Gov. Palin to inflict injury on her credibility? I think they are trying to cross-examine her using falsehoods, rumor, and innuendo. Isn’t that what lawyers do…try to create doubt to help their interest?
I don’t think conservatives regard Gov. Palin as a victim, as do you. We have fairly described what has been said about her by people like you, who disagree vociferously with her beliefs about living life, semantics regarding infanticide, America’s greatness and…yes, politics.
How exactly do you know this? You’re now talking to a Social Studies/History teacher and I’ve never discussed this with any of my grades 7-12 classes. The Bush Doctrine is a popular culture term, not a historic one. If a teacher did this, then using such a term is a disservice to their students. If you think that history should be presented in a politically charged atmosphere instead of one that is neutral, then you really are on the side of liberal indoctrination. It wouldn’t be surprising.
Do you have any evidence? Frankly, this assertion on your part is reaching and doesn’t pass the truth test. Any self-respecting History teacher keeps the politics out of the classroom. This is a valid term to raise in Political Science college classes and even some Modern History college classes.
Stick to what you know, which is clearly not much when it comes to what goes on in a secondary classroom.
LOL. I’m sorry, mj, but when I read this it reminded me of a skit on In Living Color. It was a line like, “my baby daddy’s sister’s cousin’s mother.”
On a serious note…heresay much, counselor?
mistressjustice said:
Perhaps you didn’t notice that those words were in quotation marks? Guess where that sentiment came from. (HINT: scroll up)
mistressjustice said:
I think MJ gave birth through asexual reproduction I don’t know how else he had kids…
I just hope McCain can hobble over the finish line before 0 does.
It’s as valid as the Monroe Doctrine, just newer. People of your ilk are ashamed to own it. The babysitter(then an 8th grader) and I were hashing it out last year as 9/11 was approaching, and she was working on a project. The Bush Doctrine isn’t some sneaky, controversial, voodoo-like, politically charged term.
I hope you teach at a conservative private school, or otherwise I feel sorry for your students. I know I’ve said this before, and I’m sorry if I sound like a broken record.
This time it’s a little different, because I’m saying that I feel sorry for ALL of your students.
She did an absolutely amazing job of stuffing all of his “GOTCHA” questions right back down his throat. He tried and tried to give the Obama Campaign their next talking point along with their next ad…and she just plain stunned him with better answers than Odhimmi and Bidet would ever possibly be able to do if they had 1000 years “Experience”.
Outstanding job Governor Palin. I look forward to a future with you at the helm.
If anyone actually took the time to read specifically what Bush Doctrine is then Palin answered the question just fine.
Gibson is a tired, old, white sack of liberal sh*t.
She’s full of sh*t, Bush Doctrine has undergone an evolution of meanings since it was first coined.
I agree with BL’s view over 90% of the time. I suppose we differ on this point. I think it’s unfair in insinuate Juan William is any type of an Uncle Tom. That’s my opinion.
MJ, you better get up a littler earlier in the morning to jive talk my a$$…
I’m going to bed.
Goodnight to some, badnight to others.
They sure see things differently in Tehran, don’t they?
I think you hammered poor MJ down Goldwater
mistressjustice said:
No, it’s not valid, and your knowledge of the history profession is lacking. You’re a lawyer, not a history teacher. It is not right to force one’s political ideas or disaproval of a sitting president down the throats of 8th graders. What you did to this child (as with the child’s teacher) was inappropriate. You’re really off base here.
You know, when you say junk like this you’re being an *ss. I’ve taught at both public and private schools, and any professional history teacher leaves the politics out of the classroom. It takes more class to let students make up their own minds then it does to indoctrinate them.
You’re way out of line here and you know it. You actually think if I don’t insert some political bent into my classes, or attack a sitting president, then I’m not doing my job? Where do you get off?
Are you this bad as a lawyer? What kind of lawyer are you if all you can do for rational conversation is project about both a field of study and a profession you know nothing about. I pity your clients. I hear they can appeal verdicts because their court-appointed lawyers were incompetent. That couldn’t possibly be you, could it?
FamilyMan said:
Nah. She’s just playing hard to get.