Posted on 09/12/2008 4:20:06 AM PDT by Truth29
ABC'S BUNGLES
BOTCHES MAR PALIN INTERVIEW
September 12, 2008
LAST night, Sarah Palin had her first big-time media interview with Charlie Gibson on ABC World News Tonight. At times, Palin seemed to know less than she should. On the other hand, Gibson sometimes seemed to "know" things that just aren't so.
Her responses to Gibson's cross-examining seemed canned and rehearsed, a little like the answers you might give in a tough college interview. But that may be a result of the ham-fisted editing - which seemed to cut her off mid-thought on many answers. ABC should release the entire, unedited interview, so that Americans can judge her more fairly.
The biggest concern is that she appeared to not know what the Bush Doctrine is. There are, in fact, different definitions of it - but all have had an impact on this nation. One hopes Palin is more up to speed than she seemed.
(snip)
Plus, her answers last night are already being misrepresented. She said - quite correctly - that, if Georgia and Ukraine are admitted to NATO, the United States may be obliged to defend them. This has been morphed into an assertion that we might invade Russia. And ABC News bears much of the blame: It actually sent out a pre-broadcast alert to that effect. So now we can play this stupid game, pretending she wants to invade Russia instead of debating real issues. ABC's errors didn't end there. The interview seemed to show a lack of good faith, with the blatant misrepresentation of comments she's made about the Iraq war.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
She didn't know it by that name but her answer was basically correct. I was shocked that on the NBC's Morning Joe show, the roundtable basically said they all had different understanding of what it was or what people were saying it was.
Gibson came scross as smug and condescending. In other words, a liberal.
Palin did a fine job for her first major interview. I’m sure she looked much better in the unedited tape.
Charlie Gibson made a major misstep here. His snooty attitude will not be well received except by the Obama cult.
That inner tug you are feeling, the one that has caused you to write quite a few defenses of Governor Palin of late, that, Kirsten, is common sense and recognition of truth. The Dem Kool-Aid may be sweet at first but becomes cloying after a while.
Let this be your awakening.
It was a “gotcha” from the “git go”.
That’s because Bush himself probably couldn’t define it to their satisfaction.
You must understand — Gibson can’t show his face at the Georgetown and Upper Manhattan cocktail parties if he’s at all fair to Gov. Palin. So he’s got to muck it up, or he won’t be invited to the “right” parties and he might even be made fun of by his social “betters”. Reminds me of the skunk Robert McNamara - he who started the Vietnam War and set a remarkably idiotic strategy for it later wrote a book decrying it and trashing the men and women who fought it for him. That way, he could be “accepted” by the booboisie that consists of the Washington Post, the elderly liberals of Georgetwon and the admirers of Bella Abzug.
Said she flip flopped on Global Warming. Went from saying she was not a doom and gloom alarmist like Al Gore to thinking that science is somewhat correct in saying man has contributed in some part to Global warming.
>>That’s because Bush himself probably couldn’t define it to their satisfaction.<<
THANK YOU!!!!
I thought it was a term made up by the liberal press, or at least defined by them.
Let’s be honest here... if the McCain/Palin ticket will be different than Buch/Cheney, why does Charlie care about it? In fact, why should anyone care. Shouldn’t Sarah Palin be pushing a McCain Doctrine? After all, they are mavericks and this election IS all about change. Charlie was condesending and nasty to Palin. She did a great job in the interview. He’s lucky the pitbull didn’t come out.
I only watch these things if they’re unedited and uncut. I’m tired of liberals and their unwanted opinions! Someone should count the number of times any candidate has been asked if they were expressing “hubris” in their candidacy!
That’s outrageous!
Yes, but even if this liberal columnist is noting the blatant misrepresentation by ABC it does not bode well for the MSM. This columnist knows they are being lied too by ABC.
The question remains does the rest of voting public recognize it? And given the hostile environment Palin has faced so far...I think many are waking up and seeing it. Articles like this will just solidify their doubts about the big media.
Big media has not yet realized the play book has changed from American Idol to an investigative and thinking public. Let’s hope they continue to use the old play book.
BOYCOTT ABC!!!Let them KNOW WE have PURCHASING POWER!
charles.gibson@abcnews.com, charlie.gibson@abcnews.com
PLEASE let him know what a condescending partisan ass he is
Its those reading glasses he leaves on the bridge of his nose to make himself look wise and sophisticated.
He’s smug- and a horse’s as*.
It appeared to me that she was asking for clarification of the question. She answered the question well.
But we all know how the media attempts to misinterpret (or even lie).
Governor Palin didn't appear so much nervous as taut, IMHO. She looked cramped and fragile in that chair and Gibson, a comparatively larger man, appeared hostile and overbearing.
It looked very much like a cynical, authoritative principal was asking vulnerable school girl to explain herself and her actions.
I expect in the debate the question will come up again and phrased in such a way as to further the perception she doesn’t know it and avenues for news cycles to keep pounding that false point home.
We better brace ourselves — it’s only going to get worse. The “misrepresentation”, that is.
I have been exceedingly impressed by Kirsten Powers during the past several weeks. Used to be, I could hardly listen to her when she was on a talk show, she was so partisan. Lately, she has been reasonable, even downright fair and balanced.
ABC really botched the edit. It was propagandized in a dishonest way. The editor should be ashamed.
The problem with the ‘Bush doctrine’ question is that 99% of the audience have their own or don’t know what it is!...if it is indeed anything.
I’ll say it again, men who wear a pinky ring give me the creeps.
why, oh why, do conservative candidates continue to do interviews with the msm? everyone knows what the end result will be? what is the definition on insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
All questions put to Palin should already be asked and answered by 0be and Plugs.
“His body language said it all.”
I wonder what O’Reilly’s body language expert would say about it?
At this point I don't think Bush and Cheney know what the Bush doctrine is. State, NSC and senior leadership at DoD (less Petraeus and a few folks) are pretty clueless, actually.
I want to see the unedited footage. That interview is BS.
I was driving my kids to school this morning, and was listening to the local radio that the kids listen to, and they were aghast that Palin didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine was. Paraphrasing, they said that everyone knows that it means attack first and ask questions later.
Ridiculous.
I think history is the one to decide what the Bush Doctrine is or isn’t. Pre-emption is certainly not a new foreign policy concept.
If you had asked me yesterday morning, what is the Bush Doctrine? My answer would be— if you harbor terrorists, you will be held accountable as though you were a terrorist nation.
The Bush Doctrine is a response to the non-governmental (but in some cases state-sponsored) organizations that have become prevalent in our World. It is an attempt to craft a foreign and defense policy in an era when our greatest enemies are not foreign nations with standing uniformed armies...
Good point.
George Bush should correct Charlie Gibson about what the Bush Doctrine is.
If it were blatant interventionism, as Charlie believes, then we’d be invading Pakistan. Preemption as the media understands it is not preemption as I understand it. I understand it to mean that we defend ourselves even before the bullets start flying. They understand it to mean bold interventionism.
I’d bet money that’s what Palin was probing.
When is Joe going to get his turn???
Agree. She has been sounding a lot more sane than most of the talking heads on the left and seems to be genuinely offended at a lot of the deranged attacks that have been thrown at Governor Palin.
That email address is not any good...or else they’ve killed it because it was full...
Final-recipient: rfc822; charlie.gibson@abcnews.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 No such address
Last-attempt-Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 11:46:28 +0000
I love when Charlie Gibson literally looks down his nose at Sarah through those old-fashioned bifocals of his.
BTW Gibson is an idiot, the concept of a preemptive "First Strike Capability" is as old as the beginning of the Cold War and probably even older, as old as war itself.
Now Sarah Palin has more experience AND has answered tougher questions than Obama.
It may be me....But was Charlie closer to Palin than in other interviews with others? Was he deliberately invading her space?
First Dem talking point: McCain-Palin will be exactly like Bush-Cheney!!
Second dem talking point: Palin doesn't grasp the nuances of Bush-Cheney! How can she possibly step into their shoes???
I saw that and it is devastating against anyone who would try to make a big deal out of this.
I still cannot believe Charlie was such a butt to Gov. Palin last night. His body language said it all.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this morning, they have some woman criticizing Palin’s body language and saying she looked uncertain and nervous, blah, blah, they of course ignored Gibson,s body language.
The fact ABC as the official representative of Obama, does not understand we are to defend Nato Allies, then our alies should reevaluate this desire for Obama....
(obama will lauch stern letters at tanks rolling over small nations)
It was presented like they were quizzing a serial killer...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.