[FreeReign]

Kathleen Parker:Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

Apparently Parker bases her opinion on the the (LOL) Gibson interview and the Couric and Hannity interviews.

Parker offers only two examples:

Parker:Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there. Here’s but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: “Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.”

When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama’s numbers, Palin blustered wordily: “I’m not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it?”

If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

Kathleen Parker is full-of-it.

[FreeReign]

Kathleen Parker
kparker@kparker.com
Washington Post Writers Group

To Kathleen,

I noticed that you based your opinion that Sarah Palin should resign solely on the Gibson and Couric interviews. As has been documented on the Net, both interviews were deceptively edited. I know that in the MSM, Washington Post circles that you hang out in, such practices are common place. I would suggest to you, if you wish to be objective, that you should reconsider such a poorly informed opinion.

FreeReign
FreeRepublic