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.
Trackbacks
- Neocon News » Barracuda hooked?
- Sister Toldjah
- Sister Toldjah
- Open Thread: Sarah Palin Interview With Charlie Gibson..Reactions And Commentary Added | Right Voices
- ABC, Charlie Gibson Interview with Sarah Palin « Above My Pay Grade!
- Stuck On Stupid
- Suitably Flip
- The Charlie Gibson Interview, Part 1
- Gibson and Biden — Gibson vs Palin « Gunservatively!
- What Is Fair And Balanced? | Politics and Hypocrisy
- Webloggin » Bloggers Fact Check Distortions In ABC Palin Interview
- Badger Blogger » Blog Archive » Charlie Gibson proves his liberal bias
- Health Care BS - TROOPERGATE: MSM FINALLY NOTICES CHILD ABUSE … BY PALIN?
- Sarah Palin’s Interview With Charles Gibson « Nice Deb
- Charlie Gibson Eats Boogers | Democrat=Socialist
- ABC News Get’s It Wrong In Palin Interview « The IUSB Vision Weblog
- Charlie Gibson is Made of Epic Fail | PAWaterCooler.com
- Pitbulls, pigs and jackasses; Sarah Palin and her critics slug it out « Northern Thoughts And Reflections
- Right Wing News
- Charlie Gibson Mis-quotes Palin–UPDATED « Blog Entry « Dr. Melissa Clouthier
- Radio Vice Online » ABC News blows it
- Blatant Anti-Palin Bias in the Liberal Media: A Collection « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Does Charles Gibson Have the Experience to Give a Respectful Interview? « The Sisyphus Files
- PrestoPundit
- ABC's Charlie Gibson: P.o.S. | The TIW Blog
- Sarah Hits Homers against Gibson Curveballs, Change Ups and Spitballs: « Riggword Weblog
- WHAT IS IT WITH THESE RETARDED MEDIA GOONS? « The Urban Grind
- ABC Misquotes Palin on Prayer | Faith and Facts
- Gov. Palin on ABC w/ Gibson | The Anchoress
- (Video) Excerpts from Sarah Palin Interview With ABC : Stop The ACLU
- Putin reacts to Palin ABC interview : newsroom-l.net
- Why bother? | Cold Fury
- THE DRIVE BYS’ ASSAULT CONTINUES « Texas Hold ‘Em Blogger
- Palin Derangement Syndrome - ‘Talk Left’ Stands Up For Sarah : BigMouthFrog
- Hyscience
- Charlie Gibson is a butt. Suffers Palin Derangement Syndrome « Mcnorman’s Weblog
- WaPo takes a little creative license with the truth. « Republican Party of Jefferson County, TN
- Gibson Versus Palin - Round One | Jeffrey A. Setaro
- Kick the Anthill » Jake, Buddy, You Made A Mistake…
- miamipress.net | miamipress.net
- ABC News blows it « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Charlie Gibson lied « Alaskan Orthodox Patriot
- Michelle Malkin » Earth to Howard Kurtz
- Talk about falling into your own trap. Gibson’s actions spoke louder than the words he used to accuse Governor Palin and instead of diminishing her he created his own boomerang—a boomerang which mirrors him as one who has the most hubris of all. |
- More from the "lib" intelligentsia | Pirates! Man Your Women!
- Sarah Palin & Charlie Gibson Video & Transcript of Interview - Part 1 : BigMouthFrog
- third world county » GOOD LORD IN HEAVEN ABOVE!
- Palin Does Better Than Her Interviewers « Tai-Chi Policy
- Sorry Charlie, you got it wrong. | Think Forward
- What Charlie Gibson said Palin said vs what Palin said « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- The Unsinkable Sarah Palin for The American People vs. Condescending Charlie Gibson for The American Elites « Pronk Palisades
- Charlie can’t seem to understand answers to his questions! at Desert Conservative
- Charlie Gibson lied « Pizzarebbe’s Weblog
- ABC Distorts Palin With Editing « Sooshi Soo
- Unsinkable Sarah Censored by ABC News: « Riggword Weblog
- Nicholas Fitzgerald » Charlie and Sarah
- Michelle Malkin Breaks Down Gibson’s Palin Interview - The NeoSexist
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Sarah Palin
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Founding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-ShirtDoug Ross @ Journal
» BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Boston Globe Climate Beclownment SpectacularRadio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist RemarksDoug Ross @ Journal
» The CRU Climate Scam In 90 SecondsHot Air
» 3rd quarter GDP 2.8%, not 3.5%
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.
She answered the question just fine. The media is running a hatchet job on her.
WoW! Obama has NEVER been scrutinized like this guy Charlie Gibson has done to Palin. I wish one of these ah’s would do this Obama so we could listen to the annointed one go “uhhh,, duhhh,… ahhh, well… uhhh” for two hours.
MJ is a pompous fool, recycling and parroting what conservatives have been saying about Obama as ammo to attack Sarah Palin.
Charles Krauthammer connected the Chauncey Gardner character to Obama months ago. Unlike Sarah Palin, Gardner was a “community organizer” – among plants.
I’m on the westcoast and YES ABC edited out the “you’re mistaken” “exact quote” lines, leaving the original charge unmolested.
ABC just disappeared their own sloppiness in quote and let it stand as if it were fact!!
I’m watching nightline now on my east coast feed on DirecTV, and my blood pressure is boiling already.
ENOUGH with the global warming stuff! Gibson just can’t get over the fact that it may not be caused by MAN! Keeps hammering Palin on it. Unbelievable.
Based just on what I’ve seen here, she’s apparently a staff attorney for the Obama campaign, probably at some flunky level – like reading comments on internet blogs and getting out the campaign’s talking points.
Now there’s a surprise. She could have produced an off the cuff commentary equivalent to the Gettysburg Address and they would be running a hatchet job on her.
Palin held her own in a difficult interview. She will survive to fight on and will in the end come off looking better than Gibson.
The liberals will have a few talking points that will look mean and stupid to anyone with a brain and that will be that. Her popularity will grow because Gibson didn’t play fair.
The libs can’t help themselves now, they are in self destruct mode. It will get worse and worse and in the end they will explode.
Watch Biden try to step down this week.
The Obama campaign has become a parody of itself. No matter what it does it can’t change that image, they can only reinforce it.
The pig thing was Obama’s macaca moment.
Scary.
Big blunder putting her up for this interview.
Gibson just demonstrated he’s one of the “unhinged”.
Democrat Party opposition research staff wanna be? Nah! She’s just doing the volunteer service Obama’s been promoting, which includes middle school indoctrination, don’tcha know?
I think Gibson was just trying out for a show on MSNBC: Countdown with Charlie Gibson.
OT: One of the NYT headlines tonight:
I guess he thought he had this election in the bag, now he has to actually “work”. Unbelievable. The arrogance of this man is truly amazing. The questions that Gibson was asking Palin, should’ve really been pointed at Odumbo.
Asking her if she had enough experience being a major of a small town, governor in a sparsely populated state, never having traveled overseas, etc.
As IF Odumbo has? He’s done what exactly? And he’s running for the #1 spot. Sorry, but living in Indonesia when you were a kid doesn’t qualify you to have foreign “experience”.
After watching the interview again, I came away with a better impression of Palin. I thought she was more nuanced in her answers about the Bush Doctrine. I myself am still wondering which version of the “doctrine” Gibson was referring to: preemption? democratization? with us or against us? Also, I think she looked thoughtful — and reminded me of how my aunt answers questions. She’ll try to dissect the question a bit before answering. I used to make the mistake thinking she didn’t understand the question in the first place. So, all in all, I’ll stick with my B-, but only because the interview was so bad, not Palin necessarily. Also, I thought the edits were terrible. What I thought were repetitive statements were simply poor edits. I’m glad I watched this again.
The McCain/Palin campaign should issue a memo of “clarification” after all of the interview with Gibson has been broadcast. It should state plainly that Gibson’s and ABC’s implications that Palin banned books, fired librarians, that she supports a holy war, etc., are all false. Just a simple, unemotional correction of the record.
You know, while on a business trip I’ve been reading Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism. Fascinating. It puts everything in perspective remarkably well. Obama is just the lastest liberal/fascist to attempt to resurrect the progressive/fascist ideal of “one nation” united in purpose led by a charismatic leader who, for the benefit of the nation, can crush dissent and critical opinion, all for the good of our country. And its all collectivist philosophy. And, as in every other outbreak of fascism in this country, under Wilson and FDR for example, the press are the willing co-conspirators. Really ugly.
Not really. They’ve already been beaten up for keeping her under wraps. The worst is over now that she’s had her baptism of fire, and undoubtedly she’ll be more prepared in the future. Meanwhile, since the majority of the public already realizes that the MSM is in the tank for Obama, I doubt that this interview will do any harm.
As far as passports are concerned, I’ve never had one, and I spent almost 12 years overseas. Besides, you didn’t used to need one for Canada or Mexico anyway.
I noted in the second comment of this thread that the long shot camera angles in the teaser clips made Palin look fidgety and nervous. I’ve now seen clips on Youtube of the same questions, but in full face and close up, and Palin comes across much stronger.
While we were all hoping that Palin would go for the jugular if faced with these sort of questions, I think she did reasonably well. Perhaps I had my expectations up a bit too high. Maybe the McCain camp wanted her to play it safe. This was not the Palin I’ve seen in other Youtube clips, the one that would’ve torn Gibson to shreds with a smile.
I watched the ABC news excerpts and was astonished with the feeling of Charlie’s tension in this interview. He looked like he was about to explode with anger and intimidation. He was interviewing her in a way that was like he was talking down to this little girl who doesn’t know what she’s talking about. It’s like he was trying to trap her. But I thought she handled herself wonderful and was never at any moment intimidated. This is just the beginning Media Land!! Every time she would say “Now Charlie” I could feel his frustration through the TV! It was hilarious.
The media does not know what to do. Liberal women don’t know what to do. Some of the most liberal women I know have said “Why doesn’t she stay home with her kids?”. They are all so scared of this smart, beautiful career woman with a large family that is conservative and didn’t need to use her husband to make it this far like Hillary– they are boiling over with anger and frustration!! If only Obama would have chosen Hillary! I’m looking forward to 2012…Palin against Clinton!
I watched the interview on Nightline. I have seen Charlie interview people before, but never have I seen him pose his questions with this type of tone to his voice.
My impression was Gov. Palin did and excellent job of answering his questions. And, loved it when she said she did think Charlie was being cynical.
My impression was Charlie Gibson was downright mean.
It irritates me so much how the MSM keeps hammering at “foreign policy” as if Obama is soooo much better.
Maybe she should have asked Charlie to compare Obama’s foreign policy experience. Since Obama keeps claiming that running for office counts… maybe he’s trying to include his German rock concert. Of course then it would become apparent that Jon Bon Jovi has more foreign policy experience than Obama… maybe HE should have been at the top of their ticket… they do like their stars after all…
You’re not alone in that feeling, K2. Get a load of this from the LA Times, no less!
Charlie came across as an a**, and everybody but the Huffpudlians and Kosians is in agreement.
It comes down to one thing: he’s a complete and utter twat.
They are going to be even more scared, acting even more cornered than before, they are going to be even more foul and loathsome, taking the definition of the word “vile” to new limits.
And she walks away from it like she is bulletproof.
Speaking of blunders, were you one of these jurors, sausage?
With idiocy coming from people in countries like yours, sausage, I’d dump renewing my passport and just stick to traveling around my own.
Did anyone notice that Charlie had the smug face during the entire interview?
Not even a hint of friendly demeanor?
The interview was more like an angry Dad quizing a teenage kid, repeating questions until she gave satisfactory answers?
Even the camera was positioned to make Palin appear as if she was defensive and slouching in her chair.
In spite of being in the enemy territory, I did not hear Palin stuttering in any of her answers.
I did not see Charlie’s interview with Hussain Obama. Did he conduct the interview with the same angry attitude?
Youre kidding, right?
NO, of course not.
Obama did not have to answer questions. He was not asked about his experience. No traps were attempted. Thru it all Charlie prayed to the almight ONE.
I’m glad to see I wasn’t the only one who noticed Charlie Gibson’s patronizing, condescending interview of Sarah Palin.
First of all, the editing was awful – breaks in the filming were so obvious – not smooth and with good transition.
Secondly, Charlie’s demeanor and tone was such that I’d never seen him question any other interviewee in that way – low tone; looking down his nose over his glasses; at times stretching his body to sit taller in the chair to look further down at Sarah.
Third, the questions were rapdid fire, stacatto as if he were trying to confuse to the point she would hopefully give a bad answer – almost not letting her finish the previous answer.
Fourth, at times he would sigh (Al Gore type) when she didn’t answer quick enough or give the answer he was looking for.
If Sarah Palin considers Charlie Gibson one of the fairest interviewers, journalism is in trouble. He may be fair, to the point of being soft with liberals, but not conservatives.
After all is said and done, I think Sarah Palin handled “Charlie” quite well and gave straight forward, confident answers. Charlie Gibson is the one who looked bad.
The MSM is doint God’s work. McCain and Palin really don’t need to do any negative ads. All they have to do is let the liberals open their mouths and then respond to their lunacy.
Liberals will never be able to trap a conservative with a high intellect. They’re not smart enough and the conservative doesn’t have to duck direct questions.
I thought his attitude was antagonistic throughout. Its as if a liberal interviewer from Obama’s camp were given the task to distort her positions, The numerous interruptions in the interview, probably for time purposes, affected the quality and fairness of the interview.
I follow politics. Do I remember every nuance from Bush’s 2002 pronouncement on foreign policy aka the Bush Doctrine? No. This was a “gotcha” question if I ever saw one. Gibson was out to get her.
Good news, however. Fox News this morning recited numerous mainstream news sources (including the New York Times) as saying Governor Palin did a pretty good job.
I guess ABC hired Michael Moore to do some of his creative editing.
Dear Sarah – The next time one of these MSM minions tries the ole’ “Are you just going to ignore Pakistan’s sovereignty and cross their border … yada yada?”; I have a new answer for you to consider. “No Charlie, we’ll just BUY the Pashtun Mountain Range from them. I think they’ll bite for maybe.. hmmm.. $10 million dollars? I mean, how much is it really worth to them when you think about it when that poor country spends maybe a third of their military budget patrolling that area? Once we own the area we will simply be defending our own property and nitwit news casters won’t be able to ask this question ever again. So..it’s a two-fer!”
Charlie’s question “Do we have the right to cross into Pakistan [to follow terrorists, Charlie!] without consent of the Pakistani government: I think the correct response is “What government? What has Pakistan been doing to control terrorist activity on its western border?”
Charlie Gibson needs a good THRASHING from us for going so low as to take a prayer, (of all things!), out of context to snipe at conservatives. I think Sarah’s reference to Lincoln, (I’m assuming his 2nd inaugural address?), put Charlie back on his heels because he doesn’t know it, (nor would someone like him likely understand it anyway..).
From Lincoln’s 2nd IA referencing Exodus in relation to slavery as being the scope of God’s Task before us at that time:
Such ground only the faithful dare tred.
The question about the Bush Doctrine was interesting. Although it is clear that Palin didn’t know what it clearly was, as she tried to hide it a little, her answer was more accurate than Charlie’s. Charlie tried to explain that he understood it to be we have the right to attack anyone we see as a threat from terrorism. That isn’t correct or we would have been in Pakistan and Iran by now.
The actual doctrine is a divergance from the previous doctrine of “containment” of the Middle East since it is clear after 9/11 we cannot contain the radicals there. The new (Bush) doctrine is to introduce Democracy to the Middle East in Iraq and Afghanistan in the long term hope that the people of the region will have more say in their lives, prosper as a result of freedom, and make the madrasses’ (sic?) ideaology less attractive. As these countries prosper, it is hoped that the people of Iran, Syria, and other radical Islamic governments will see this and demand it of their own leaders. It is sound policy in my view, but it is a long term approach. The ME will not convert quickly or easily.
Has anyone asked Obama about the Bush Doctrine?
She could have just replied with the question, “What do you mean, an European or an African Swallow?” Hopefully then he’d go flying off somewhere…
I didn’t watch – I was at my local candlelight 9/11 memorial service – but from the clips I’ve seen she did a good job. Even if the answer might not be politically correct, she answers with confidence and not alot of uhs and ums. Compare to Barry last night where he uhs and ums even in the middle of answers that come straight from his stump speech. Sarah’s a pro. People may mock her beauty queen days, but pageants do test your interview abilities. You need to be able to answer with confidence even if you have no idea what the heck the judges are asking you.
Excuse me, I haven’t read all the posts here, but just because something is in a history book or taught in a history class doesn’t make it history or even factual. Now, if he’d of asked her what NAFTA was and she couldn’t tell him, that’s one thing – Bush Doctorine – not so much.
Regarding crossing over into Pakistan to kill terrorists, I remember Bush stating that we will hunt down terrorists no matter where they are. There will be no sanctuary for them to hide. If the country isn’t for us, then they are against us in this war on terror – or something to that affect.
My answer to Charlie would have been if Pakistan will not control their borders, we will. We will not allow raiding excurisions by the Taliban into Afghanistan to kill our soldiers and then scurry back across the border into Pakistan for safe harbor.
BTW – didn’t Barack Obama say he would attack the Taliban in Pakistan if need be?
D.I.T.T.O.
Charlie Gibson tried to interview Gov. Palin “Bill O’Reilly style” and failed miserably.
Just finished watching a video of Gibson interviewing Obama in Nov 2007. It’s an interesting comparasion to last night. He brought up hubris but in a much less confrontational manner. Even the way the chairs are set up is much more in Obama’s favor than the way the chairs were set up in Palin’s interview.
sausage quoted and wrote:
What in the world is scary about not having a passport? You know, not everyone has the funds to travel abroad and therefore they don’t have a passport. A passport does not equate to being wordly. You could have one, travel, but only sit on the beach or in a hotel. A passport really doesn’t mean much at all.
I would also like to point out that I have only had a passport for about a year and a half. However, I majored in Political Science and my emphasis was in International Relations. I didn’t need a passport to learn about foreign policy, and neither did Gov. Palin.
Funny as hell: The Red State Update guys weigh in on Palin vs. the Media. Have a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpHBPQyoYXQ
This clarifies so much.
WHY WHY WHY does anybody bother watching the mainstream media??? Did we really expect a fair and intelligent interview, rather than a biased silly interrogation??? Gibson is another pathetic leftwing freak in the tank for Obama, like 95% of his brothers and sisters in the MSM. Since there is nothing I can do about it, I just dont watch these types of things, because the aggravation factor just isn’t worth it.
Can we just go right past “Go”, collect our $200, and arrange for Sarah to interview with Keith Olbermann?
Camp McCain should make the offer, just to induce trembling fear deep within Herr Olbermann’s diseased mind.
MessNBC would then either decline, in which case they’d be exposed as the diaper-soilers they are; or, they’d accept, and Sarah would expose Olberdoom as the agenda-driven hate-monger that he is.
Either way, a big gain for Camp McCain.
i have been reading various reviews of GOVERNOR Palin’s interview with the Liberal interrogator, and they have been a bit biased and dishonest, if not outright misleading.
There was one in particular that accused GOVERNOR Palin of refusing to leave the prepared answers given to her from the McCain Campaign. It was in reference to how the Liberal Interrogator would ask a question, reword it, re-ask it several times, and she would continue to give the same answer.
To say that she was merely parroting the prepared answers given her is a great dishonesty.
GOVERNOR Palin had answered his question and was not going to play his “Gotcha” game. What she did was stick to her answer because that is exactly how she felt and what was in her heart.
This is going to end up being another episode of what the Liberals have done to President Bush. They accuse him of being the biggest moron to ever walk the planet, let alone sit in the Oval Office, who can barely string 5 words together etc., yet at the same time he is the most incredibly evil mastermind to rival those of James Bond fiction, who was able to diabolically rig not one but two elections, convince the entire planet of his lie concerning Hussein (Not Boama) and the never, ever existing WMD’s, and so many other lies and diabolically evil plans. The difference between the two always seems to escape them.
Well, in this case, they are accusing GOVERNOR Palin of being too stupid to string two sentences together, but she is smart enough to memorize verbatim everything that the McCain Campaign teels her to the point where she doesn’t slip up or even stall and sputter when giving a speech or being interviewed.
Sorry folks, but the way of thinking that you Libs have is just tired and played out. It is not going to work. She is everything that you wanted Clinton to be and more. What’s worse is she is genuine and honest, and well spoken and that drives you guys nuts. We are through listening to the ridiculousness of your hippie logic and Liberal rhetoric. 8 year was more than enough.
GOVERNOR Palin is the real deal. Don’t be frightened, just accept it and reliae you backed the wrong horse, move on with your lives.
Charlie who?
reliae=realize. Fingers just not working today.
Sorry if this has been posted already – too busy to keep up with everything… but :
In reference to the snooty “Bush Doctrine” question by Charlie G… this is a great reference as to how confusing the definition of what that truly is… even to the media… like…um… Charlie Gibson!
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/09/what_exactly_is_the_bush_doctr.asp#more
Gibson can ask away. He can ask Sarah Palin whatever he wants and followup. I just want to see the same type of questions asked with comparable follow up to Obama.
I just finished watching it. Yes Gibson was a condescending ass, but Sarah did fine. It was edited to make her look bad. She stuck to her convictions, avoided clear traps, and spoke in clear concise sentences. Obama should try it. If he can.
Even with the edits she did fine. Look the moonbats and Obama kool-aid drinkers hate her anyway. Sarah resonates with real people.
the entire MSM blows it….with few exceptions they are so one-sided (to the left) it’s a joke…
In a comparison of this interview with Palin and another by Gibson with Obama (back when he went to 7 countries in 8 days), Obama beats Palin by 34 to 0.
Of course, that’s hardly fair because Palin’s interview as I have seen is variously 9:46 for the Russia/Isreal/Bush doctrine topics and about 2:00 when they only discuss the Lincoln prayer. And Obama’s was a bit more than 6 minutes but was overrun with intro pieces and video clips from Obama’s tour.
Still, the O-man gets off 34 uh’s to Palin’s zero.
Side by side here: http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/09/charlie_gibson_misquotes_palin.php
You know, if we made fun of the Uh-man, he might spend the next two years trying to fix that inadequacy of brainpower. Unsuccessfully.
On second viewing, Palin was spot on. Gibson was both an unfriendly guest and an ill-prepared interviewer.
As I say way back in #42, Gibson’s “Bush Doctrine” question only shows that he doesn’t have a clue.
I now hear that Wikipedia is urgently re-writing their definition ot match his, which is another mistake.
Krauthammer confirms what I said yesterday: there IS NO “Bush Doctrine.” There have been at least four, and that doesn’t work with a “doctrine.”
Gibson’s question wasn’t unfair; it was stupid. Sarah, politely, tried to let him off the hook.
The story here isn’t that she was unprepared – it’s that he asked a nonsense question and then tried to look haughty about it. He should be pilloried by his peers.