Posted on 09/12/2008 7:51:38 PM PDT by NewMediaFan
Gibson is a stodge. He nearly fell all over himself throwing softballs to Obama. Now he gives Palin the aloof, patronizing college professor treatment. Hopefully, people are starting to take notice at the blatent double standard. It should be obvious even an Ivy League journalism student or village idiot that the MSM has abandoned all sense of balance and fairness.
Say what?
HE scored the hit?
The Main Stream Media thinks it's all about THEM! I suggest that had Charlie been asking the same questions to an empty chair, or Joe Biden (same thing), that his ratings would not have been so high. People tuned in to see Sarah Palin... not Charles Gibson.
He would have been called a racist. If he did that with a liberal woman he would have been called a sexist. With Sarah he was just pompous?
Of course the hard-core Libtard response would be that “Bush is terrorist, blah, blah, blah...”.
Can anyone point me to a video of Fri. night’s interview? I didn’t get to see it.
Conservatives always must give a reason for what we believe. Libs almost never have to answer tough questions.
So now, when Gov Palin is asked the tough questions, she has no problems with them.
Obama is totally lost without a teleprompter. I am looking forward to the debates.
Tom Shales is a lefty, so for him to say Gibson looked like a jerk really is something.
The comments by WAPOWEB readers regarding this article by Tom “Big Boy” Shales are as follow:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091203499_Comments.html
annetta3 wrote:
I think Gibson was tough and pretty fair in his questioning. That confusing Bush Doctrine question (which of the 4 Bush Doctrines) and the question on what she was praying for seemed out of line.
I think Palin, who has only had about 10 days to learn the McCain doctrine, remember she is running for VP not for president, did pretty well. Of course she looked like deer in the headlights, a natural response I think for one being run to ground by so many journalists who are hoping to show that this woman they didn’t vet for the office wasn’t up to the task. I think she proved them wrong.
Now I’d like to see a similar interview with Senator Obama asking how many world leaders he met before his world tour this past summer and what he has done to prepare him to negotiate with the bullies of the world. And, is it true that both Obama and Biden voted to fund the infamous Bridge to Nowhere? She might have requested money, but only Congress can vote to approve the request.
Of course, since he is the candidate of choice of many of the critics of McCain/Palin I’m sure3 we won’t hear those questions asked.
9/13/2008 12:25:37 PM
Recommend (0) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
click212 wrote:
Just love your closing remark. I find Obama scarier than any candidate in my life time. As an independent who has voted either side depending on the issues and platform, this election year I see how the Democrats have been hi jacked by Chicago thugs and their machinations. I voted Democrat for 2006 to rid the Republicans of their stronghold on Congress, but geez this Obama dog and pony show is one kiss away from Jones Town. I’d rather have a vice president a heart beat away that doesn’t question the need to secure this country than a poseur who second guesses his enemies.
Aside: The hysteria behind Palin’s voter attraction is that she like Hillary speaks for women and men that live their lives in quiet dignity putting up with the insufferable shenanigans of both political parties and paying with the sweat off the backs for their comprehensive health care and perks for sitting their rear ends in the houses of government.
Obama talks about experience? A community organizer who admitted that he could not get one project completed and left organizing for fame and fortune in the political arena.
I’m so glad the Republicans have showed the Democrats how craven and hypocritical they are. Of course they hate Palin she’s not part of their club of cultural and social effete.
9/13/2008 11:50:31 AM
Recommend (2) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
bbmoe wrote:
Half this article is complete BS about the difficult position Charlie Gibson is in, excusing his less than stellar performance. Oh, please. If the MSM weren’t so het up about the pure effrontery of the Palin nomination, this would be a non-issue.
Is he really so concerned not to be seen as “beating up” on a woman? Is that the concern that has hampered the interviews of Barack Obama? Has the mainstream media descended on Chicago and fanned out across neighborhoods, pummeled the Annenberg foundation, camped out on Bill Ayers doorstep, or given anything but the most fawning coverage of Obama? Please don’t tell me that they are very concerned about how they “appear.” They look like a bunch of lap dogs.
As for “sheltering” Sarah Palin from a skeptical media: Didn’t the Democrat candidates all refuse to appear on Fox or participate in Fox-sponsored forums?
9/13/2008 11:49:26 AM
Recommend (1) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
Hempy wrote:
So how would Palin propose paying for a war with the Russians? America’s indebtedness seriously compromises any attempt at economic sanctions or diplomacy.
Isn’t Palin speaking bellicosely, carrying a big stick with a weakened and compromised military after eight years of Republican mismanagement and rule?
So how would Palin back up her bellicose talk? Give more tax breaks to the wealthy, outsource more U.S. jobs, and raise taxes on the rest of us to try and pay for it?
Or, would she pursue the Bush doctrine of going to war to get oil, only to loose it to a Chinese company who was able to buy control of Iraqi oil from the Iraqis using American dollars that the Bush administration owes to the Chinese government?
9/13/2008 11:43:44 AM
Recommend (1) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
forrest1 wrote:
Why should anyone in the press feel an obligation to be “gentle” to Palin, or anyone else who is running for Vice President of the United States? Surely she should be treated the same way a male candidate should be treated. Will you guys please do your job?
9/13/2008 11:42:54 AM
Recommend (0) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
dubious1 wrote:
The VP candidate should be someone who would be a reasonable candidate for President. Prehaps the time has come that the parties be required to choose their VP candidate by some other method — maybe the person who comes in second in polling in their party.
The Republicans have twice recently chosen someone who would not stand up to a campaign. The future of our country requires that the person who is one breadth away from the presidency be chosen by the people.
I would even be in favor of having the presidency and vice-preidency chosen separately. Should one, for example, be able to vote for McCain and Biden — or Obama and Palin?
9/13/2008 11:35:19 AM
Recommend (1) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
sassyone wrote:
Gibson wasn’t tough enough. Americans have the right to really know if this lady has the background and knowledge and good sense to be commander in chief. I did not see one thing in those interviews that led me to believe that she is in any way qualified to answer that phone at 3 AM!
As a 60 yr old female from the west, I resent McCain’s choosing a pretty lady with spirit as his running mate only because she is a woman. I also resent that she’s been hidden and unapproachable for so long , and that no one’s allowed to go after her like they do with Obama, McCain, Clinton, etc. She must be made of glass, given all the protection she’s receiving. A sharp tongue isn’t a qualification for president, and I fear for our nation if maverick McCain and sharp-tongued Sarah get elected!
9/13/2008 11:19:41 AM
Recommend (1) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
elder2 wrote:
I agree with tjandjenny completely. I saw the Charles Gibson interview, and when confronted with the Bush Doctrine question, she didn’t simply say, “What exactly are you referring to?” or “Can you make your question more specific?” as any intelligent or honest person would do. Instead, she squirmed and tried to pretend that she knew what he was talking about. This was very revealing about the kind of person she is. Also, when asked about the comment about Alaska being close to Russia, she got chatty about it, instead of dismissing it as not a serious reason to believe she can deal with matters of state. Her responses to this interview and that Americans would seriously consider her as qualified to be in the presidential office is embarassing to this country. No wonder the McCain campaign is trying to control her contact with interviewers. I shudder to think what she would do when talking to a head of state or high-level diplomat. Americans need to look beyond the pretty face, the charm, the “woman like me” and consider what is at stake here. My prayers are that those who think they would vote for the Palin-McCain ticket will take their blinders off and look more closely.
9/13/2008 11:18:22 AM
Recommend (2) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
wj_phillips wrote:
I see Obama’s internet thugs are busy filling this site with their usualy vile vicious assaults.
Can you thugs tell me how Obama can be so wonderful and of the “new” politics of togetherness, when he attracts followers like you?
Judging Obama by his followers he is not ready to be president. He is ready to lead a cult, but he is not presidential material.
9/13/2008 11:06:34 AM
Recommend (1) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
mtkennedy wrote:
Gibson disappointed me and added to the slide in media credibility with his pompous (good call) and condescending manner. I did not expect that from him. Stephanopolis would have been a better choice because he is savvy enough to realize how dangerous it is for ABC and the Obama campaign to treat the first Republican woman VP candidate this disrespectfully.
9/13/2008 11:05:32 AM
Recommend (1) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
johnsonc2 wrote:
Given that we have less than two months to understand what Sarah Palin is about, I am glad that Gibson grilled her a bit - gave her an exam. I don’t think she did very well. To me, hers was a barely passing grade - a C or D - in the foreign policy area, especially. She is clearly not the best person Senator McCain could have chosen as his VP. At 72 years old, John McCain showed very poor judgment in selecting someone who could very well have to take his place very soon. Congratulations to Charlie Gibson for respectfully giving Americans a window into Sarah Palin’s world and allowing us to see how truly limited it is.
Obama/Biden 2008
9/13/2008 11:04:35 AM
Recommend (2) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
wj_phillips wrote:
“Party bosses and hacks...”
Good ole Shales did not let the WaPo chauvins for Obama down!
What an a** you are Tom.
Be sure to bow down and kiss the feet of the second coming, you glorious leader, Obama! He will bless you as one of his favorite attack dogs!
9/13/2008 10:57:12 AM
Recommend (0) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
mewindows wrote:
Palin looked the whole time, like she was TRYING TO REMEMBER her MEMORISED SCRIPT - -
which in turn made her look like, a ‘DEER CAUGHT IN HEADLIGHTS’ !!!!!!
9/13/2008 10:56:42 AM
Recommend (4) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
hohhotu wrote:
Whats beginning to come into focus is the Bush legacy. Not Shredding the constitution. Not the spectacle of global disrespect and hatred for America and Americans. Not even the trashing of a once powerful economy.Or the destruction of the environment.
Rather its the cheap circus we are witnessing that used to be American democracy. How anyone can look at a GI with a straight face and tell him/her that they are fighting for freedom and democracy is beyond me. The daily degradation of this election is a disgrace and a direct result of the Bush/ Rove / Atwater/ school of Machiavellian politics which is making a mockery of elections.
What Afghan or Iraqi would die for this nonsense? What Chinese would find this inspiring?
Bush has damaged the deficit and the spirit of America but he seems to have nailed shut the coffin of democracy as we knew it.
Shame.
9/13/2008 10:22:49 AM
Recommend (5) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
tjandjenny wrote:
I find it utterly amazing that anyone would think Palin ready to be VP.
Her interview with Charlie Gibson revealed her total lack of knowledge about international affairs.
The issue isn’t Gibson’s attitude, questioning, or bias. It’s whether Palin is ready to be President if something happened to McCain. This is a legitimate concern, given that he is 72, and has had several bouts of cancer.
Palin failed this important test in numerous ways. Her answers were obviously canned material that she had been coached to say. Her vagueness, dancing around on the topics, and absolute lack of knowledge about the Bush doctrine were difficult to watch.
And while it’s true that many Americans couldn’t have done any better, I sure want a VP who does the best on these issues.
I don’t want a President or VP that are “just like me”. I want the very brightest, most discerning, thoughtful, knowledgeable, person possible. I want my leaders to have vast amounts of every good quality possible. I am not ashamed to say that I am not such an individual. I am not bright enough, not educated enough, not knowledge enough about foreign affairs, or any of the problems with which America struggles.
The fact that Palin accepted NcCain’s shoot-from-the-hip offer without blinking that she was the best person for the job, says much about her. Any rational person would question and give some consideration to that and other factors such as your family, etc., before accepting a job of such magnitude.
Add to that Palin’s statement that she would take us to war with Russia! over Georgia! I find totally scary. Last I heard Russia still had over 6000 nuclear missles, more than sufficient to blow us off the map. Anybody for another Cold War?
I also have serious concerns about her integrity, and that of the McCain campaign. It’s been increasingly obvious that this candidate is employing the same Karl Rove style smear tactics, including numerous outright lies about their own records and their opponent’s plans.
Lies such as Obama will raise our taxes - actually he wants to provide tax cuts to over 80% of us.
Or their lies about Palin’s supposed refusal of the Bridge to Nowhere. The record shows she was for it before she was against it, accepted the $$$$ but did not build the bridge.
Palin also did not sell the Alaskan airplane on EBay. She ended up selling it at a loss to one of her campaign contributors.
McCain himself has lied, then refused to stand by his own comments. I refer particularly to the lipstick on a pig affair. Obama did not call Palin a pig, yet McCain has a campaign ad stating that he did. When asked about the ad, he refused to recant the lie, or to admit he had sanctioned the ad.
Finally, Palin’s past record and accomplishments should be looked at under a microscope. The right wing did that kind of scrutiny of Obama, Hillary Clinton, and every other Democrat seeking office. Both sides do it. So why is McCain implying that Palin should be off limits? Sounds sexist to me. As a woman, I object to any treatment of a woman that differs from that of a male candidate. Plus the American people are entitled to know everything about a person who is asking for their vote.
Behind all their smoke and mirrors lies the same old politics, agenda for the rich and the powerful, and lack of any intent to help us average income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet. Same stuff as Bush. Isn’t 8 years enough?
9/13/2008 10:19:40 AM
Recommend (7) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
emjay1 wrote:
Gibson was pompous and condescending. I say this as a Biden supporter who was awaiting a professional, informative interview of Palin. Instead, the interview was primarily about himself and whether he would pass scrutiny of his media colleagues. I am deeply concerned that many members of the press have forgotten their critical role in a democracy and are, instead,inflicting the public with “news” processed to reflect their own personal agendas and peppered with their emotional biases. The result is that many who depend on the press for information remain uninformed, are turned off by the obvious distortions, and/or infected with the cancerous, polarizing virus transmitted by the media. I have found that even among my highly educated friends there can be no calm, rational discussion of the candidates’ position on issues. Daily I am forwarded highly charged blogs and segments from news articles denigrating the motives and character of Obama and particulary of Palin (during the Democratic primary Clinton was the target). I worry that the vitriol encouraged by both campaigns does not bode well for a bipartisan government or a united citizenry, no matter who is elected.
9/13/2008 10:04:18 AM
Recommend (4) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
bluehen1 wrote:
I though Gibson was generally fair, but one thing really steams me. Gibson inaccurately quoted her speech to her home church, and the quote painted her as some kind of holy warrior, rather than humble Christian.
Its the difference between “we are right” and “pray that we are right.”
The fact that she challenged him on it and he compounded the error by authoritatively responding with “exact words” calls for some kind of correction from ABC news. I’ve watched all of the excerpts over the last 3 days, and I haven’t seen the correction yet.
9/13/2008 9:58:22 AM
Recommend (3) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
el_barto wrote:
“cybervote wrote: The measure of how fair and balanced Charlie is to compare the list of questions he asked of Obama vs. what he asked of Sarah. The measure of good/bad Sarah handles the questions is to compare Obama’s performance of his first 10 days...Obama’s performance is well below Sarah. Charlie is more prejudiced against Sarah.”
The good, old Strawman argument:
“A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.”
The problem with your argument, ‘cybervote’, is that by the time Obama announced his run for president. he’d already done dozens of interviews with the national press.
But Ms. Palin only saw fit to speak with People magazine.
.
.
9/13/2008 9:42:59 AM
Recommend (3) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
LarryG62 wrote:
Style? You’re more like a shill for the DNC. Gibson came across like an idiod. He obviously doesn’t understand NATO, and his prosecutorial style illustrated his bias.
Too bad you libs can’t standit when a woman like Palin comes along with all the qualities that your female democrat icons don’t have.
Palin has principles, accomplishments, a record of governing, class, integrity, ethics and morals. No wonder liberal democrats hate her. She makes them look like the losers they are.
9/13/2008 9:33:24 AM
Recommend (2) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
jmm430069 wrote:
Tom, You surely hit the nail on the head with Gibson’s pompous, condescending, pretentious, imperial manner. Palin should have slugged him. Further, this method of interrogation is stupid - not how you gain the interviewee’s confidence so they open up and show who they really are. This would have been an excellent job for Gwen Ifel (Sp?) of PBS.
9/13/2008 8:58:22 AM
Recommend (3) Report Abuse Discussion Policy
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.