Posted on 09/27/2008 8:37:20 AM PDT by PAR
Sorry for the vanity. Just watched the Palin Couric interview and I am concerned.
First, I think Palin was an inspired VP choice, gave a great convention speech, and did well under adverse conditions in the Gibson interview.
Second, even though I thought she was awful during the Couric debate, I believe she would make a very good President. Many people who are unaware of a candidiate's accomplishments and record, will judge a person's fitness for office based on how they "come across" during an interview or debate. While I think that the substance of what someone says can reflect significantly on their fitness for office, I also think that there are skills, that if not honed, reflect poorly on a candidate that otherwise would do a great job.
Having said that, I thought Palin was abysmal with Couric. I am very far from being an expert on appropriate interview techniques, but the following are some comments.
1) Since Couric is obviously a woman, people naturally more closely compare Couric's demeanor with Palin's than they would with a male interviewer. No sensible person will ever mistake Couric for a serious journalist, but in the interview she had a professional, calm, low, and measured voice. Palin, on the other hand, spoke in what I will describe as a sing song, highly modulated voice that made her appear like something bordering on a valley girl (yes this is an exageration to make a point and I am showing my age) in comparison to Couric.
She has got to change this and she has to change it fast. She did somewhat better in my opinion on this front with Gibson. I recognize that there is a danger that if you ask Palin to change too much of her natural "way of being" it could make matters worse. That's why her handlers are paid the big bucks- to know where to draw the line.
2) For the love of God, could Palin and McCain please bring up these points EVERY TIME they are asked about the bailout!: a) Community Reinvestment Act; b) Lawsuits forcing banks to lend to people who can't afford it; c) Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac irresponsible lending criteria; d) Specific McCain attempt and more generally Republican attempt to reform Fannie and Freddie that was blocked repeatedly by the democrats; e) Obama said nothing and did not support repeated attempts to reform Fannie & Freddie; f) Obama is number 2 on the list of Fannie & Freddie contributions g) Jim Johnson & Franklin Raines;
How McCain last night could let the bailout discussion go by the boards without hitting HARD on the above in unfathomable. I don't know why Palin would not have hit on it as well.
3) Palin has to learn how to parry ridiculously biased questions. Case in point: Couric asked her if she was aware if John McCain had ever opposed regulation excepting his 2006 attempt to reform Fannie/Freddie. Palin's ultimate response was to say I'll have to get back to you. I thought this was a very weak response.
In my view, even if she knew of some examples, she should have refused to answer such a biased, no-win question by first stating that John McCain generally believes that regualtion stifles the economy and innovation but that he has a long record of supporting regualtion where it is clearly needed.
Then she should have turned the question around onto Couric by saying simply: "Katie, I'm glad you brought up John's Fannie/Freddie reform effort because I think it is appropriate to focus my comments on what has become the most significant financial crisis since the great depression. John McCain, consistent with his record of doing what is right for all Americans, presented legislation to fix the mess before it ever got to this point. Where was Barak Obama and the rest of the democrats when John McCain tried to fix this mess? They opposed him every him every step of the way. Maybe you should ask Obama why he didn't support the most important regulation of our lifetime." Then repeat the points above if necessary. Politically it will probably be necessary to insert some poplulist garbage about Wall Street excess as well.
If you respond by saying you'll get back to her, you are implicity admitting the legitimacy of the question, which you MUST NOT do. Better to communicate in a tactful manner that the question is bogus by not answering in an artful way, but if you can't do that, you just have to say that it is an unfair, biased question.
4) Finally, Palin needs to study the example of last night's debate. As Hannity mentioned after the debate, Obama came across as someone recalling lines he had memeorized from a textbook, unlike McCain who was able to rely on actual experience and events to place his answers a coherent context.
There were times last night that, because Obama can't speak directly from experience or knowledge, he gave rambling, incoherent answers simply because it is difficult to remember for 1 1/2 hours what the "script" is. However, Obama did't make a "total" fool of himself because he worked hard to remember his canned responses and generally tried to stick to the script. Even though McCain kicked his ass and made him look like the schoolboy he is, Obama was not totally embarassed (exception- the bracelet was priceless). Palin has to do what Obama did when it comes to foreign policy. Memorize your answers and stick to the script. If you can, mix in you relevant experience, but please don't talk about Russia being your next door neighbor unless there is some real substance. My parents are liberals and they are laughing out loud on the "Russia is our next door neighbor" story. Back it up or can it.
Hopefully the Couric interview was a bump in the road. In my humble opinion, she needs to be much better for the debate. Fortunatey, Biden has been making a non-stop fool of himself. Palin needs to hit Biden hard on all of his gaffes over the last few weeks. But please do so in the context or flow of the debate/conversation. Slamming someone out of the blue generally doesn't go over well.
Go Palin!!!!
Note: These comments are not meant to be comprehensive. Just my off the cuff initial reaction.
Did you watch the unedited tape? I haven’t,but I read that Katie did a lie on Kissinger, told her Kissinger was for presidents meeting with iran’s leaders,etc..... Sarah told her she had never heard Kissinger say that, Katie made a big detail that he did.
YE OF LITTLE FAITH!!!!!!!!!!
Sarah will be just fine, she has been just fine as governor. I agree with other posters, mccain campaign needs to turn her loose.
The chicken littles and the du trolls are a lost cause
Palin needs to quit saying that being in Alaska and close to Canada and Russia gives her foreign policy experience.
Palin also needs to be prepared to acknowledge that she is is not as seasoned on some issues as McCain or Biden. She should say that here experience is comparable to Obama’s.
I agree absolutely with you on Point 2. Please, why didn’t McCain bring this up or Palin bring this up in the Couric interview??
Did you see the entire interview? Has anyone on this forum? I know all I have seen in the Alaska/Russia part and the “I’ll get back with you.” Those are probably the 2 worst parts - and it’s all I have seen!!!
And let’s not forget the TV telecast that Roosevelt did during the ‘29 crash - oh the media hypocrisy!!
Yeah. They are. They read the press and watch TV and think they’ve got a handle on things. Smoke and mirrors and they buy it.
One problem with a small part of your premise is Palin was the one who first brought up McCain’s attempt to reform Freddie and Fannie and then Couric posed the bs question of “besides that”. Palin should have answered with the same answer three straight times as she did to Gibson for one question he triple asked. On the third asking she goofed and said she’d get back to her.
Are you trying to get your post reprinted in the NYT? j/k kind of.
I do agree with your thoughts on Palin. I’ll vote for the ticket undoubtedly...
But I do believe that Palin has not done well in these interviews. She looks nervous and like she is searching for the answers that have been scripted for her. The whole Russia answer in response to the foreign policy question has not been handled by the campaign well.
I think she’ll do fine as VP, but I get that queesy feeling when I watch her in interviesws just like when I watch Bush.
Did you watch the edited version???
The Couric interview could be really bad for Palin unless she learns from it. If she does and she does well in the Biden debate, the Couric interview would have served to reduce expectations, helpin Palin to do well in the debate.
That's what Kathleen Parker said in her National Review column.
No I didn’t. I’ll have to check it out. I know they heavily edited the Gibson interview to make Palin look bad but was not aware they did the same thing for the Couric interview.
She will be able to give full answers that are NOT edited. No badgering or condescension. Open discussion with the give and take that we need to see.
If she doesn't deliver in the debate, the ticket is in trouble. Just MHO.
Sarah Palin could have the perfect answer to every question but still be perceived as "bombing" in the interview as she is loathed by the lamestream media that wants nothing more than to utterly destroy her as a viable candidate.
Fact is, many people are now circumventing the lamestream media and they are becoming less and less relevant.
Sarah Palin may not be a polished Beltway insider with 82 appearances on "Meet the Press" under her belt but she's a real person with conservative values and we ought to support her.
How many years have people on Free Republic mentioned how sick they are of Washington being dominated by slick politicians who are slaves to the establishment and special interests? Now that a genuine fresh face appears on the scene, we want to rip her to shreds. No wonder decent, regular people don't want anything to do with politics.
Yeah, McCain’s team is doing a crackup job presenting Palin to the public. That’s why she has not once appeared on talk radio or on MSM live interviews where she can’t be edited.
And she was so well prepared to answer out-of-the blue trick questions like “What is your foreign policy experience?” and “What is Sen. McCain’s position on the bailout?”
If any other Republican politician screws up they get criticized on this forum. Why is Gov. Palin suddenly off limits?
Think of a football game. It’s the fourth quarter and you are up by a field goal. A lot of coaches play conservatively to avoid making a mistake that will cost them the game. (Sometimes they lose anyway, in spite of or because of that strategy).
That’s the McCain strategy. They do not want Sarah to have a serious “gotcha” moment that will be replayed endlessly by the opposition. It inhibits her performance, but she needs to adjust.
IMO, I would like to see her be more aggresively challenging of reporter’s false premises.
I suppose someone could use part of the post out of context to make a claim that that a conservative such as myself does not support Palin or think she is ready. Realizing that someone could try to do that, I tried to make it very clear that I support Palin and McCain and that any deficiencies that I see (that others might not even believe are deficiencies) are easily correctible tactical or technical issues, and not fundamental flaws.
I would suggest you read Post # 36. She is right on our issues so I could give a rat’s hind end if she measures up to what folks who’ve only been observing politicians since the Clinton era think of her “performance”.
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.