Open thread: Palin on ABC; Update: Gibson distorts Palin’s Iraq prayer; Update: Video of Iraq prayer comments included in segment
posted at 5:20 pm on September 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
We’re still an hour away from World News Tonight, but ABC’s already starting to tease quotes so we’re likely to see web video before they go on the air. Here’s your thread to comment. Currently bannering at their homepage:
EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY
TV Newser has other quotes but so far they’re the most platitudinous platitudes. Stand by for updates. Exit question: When is it appropriate to mix medications?
Update: From what I understand, they’ll run part of the interview on the 6:30 news, then the rest on Nightline at 11:35. Use this thread for both. They’ll do another interview tomorrow and that’ll run mostly on 20/20 at 10 p.m., with other portions possibly to run on WNT and Nightline.
Update: Here’s a partial transcript. Good to see Charlie did his homework:
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.”
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.
Update: They’re also exaggerating what she said with their teaser, which makes it sound like she wants to unilaterally guarantee the security of Russian satellites. Read the excerpt linked above and you’ll see she simply means admitting Georgia and Ukraine to NATO and bringing them under the aegis of the all-for-one principle, which is McCain’s position. In the meantime, here’s what she says we should do: “It doesn’t have to lead to war and it doesn’t have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.”
Update: Two clips are already up in case the transcript’s not good enough. Here and here.
Update: This doesn’t excuse them entirely since only viewers who were paying extremely close attention will have noticed the distortion, but ABC did show the actual 15-second video of her Iraq prayer.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11 Next »
WTG, Sarah !!
DH and I, watching/recording in two seperate rooms…
we BOTH said, at the same time… did you see that ??…
she’s actually got CHARLIE squirming/stuttering !! ROFLMAO !!
‘Cuda’s ready, dudes and dudettes !!
pambi on September 11, 2008 at 7:07 PM
She did a great JOB!
Karmi on September 11, 2008 at 7:07 PM
Why didn’t she get the “what is most difficult: being charismatic, gorgeous, adored, brilliant, successful or inspiring” question Obama always gets?
Chuck Schick on September 11, 2008 at 7:08 PM
I think Palin did fine she held her own.
Remember she is not an inside the beltway policy wonk and has not been campaigning for office like Obama which is why she resonates so much with the nation.
I resent the effort to try and paint her as a religious extremist when obama has been given a pass on his religious affiliations.
elduende on September 11, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Here’s my issue so far.
Most of the questions were framed in a yes or no format, where both yes or no is the wrong answer. She did right by deflecting the yes or no and trying to reframe it into something that is answerable, but Gibson is a a$$ and kept trying to force her into his own yes or no.
I have no problem with tough questions but those questions were designed with one clear purpose- try to make her look unqualified and ignorant.
Gibson mostly lost that game, so they edited it with a chainsaw to try and get it back to their purpose.
She did as well as was possible in that scenario, aside from looking slightly irritated with Gibson looking down his nose at her (literally, in case you didn’t notice).
As was said before here- this was a quiz, not an interview.
The result- pass.
Damiano on September 11, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Came on at 7 here in Atlanta. What the heck happened to Charlene’s face? Looks like it has been punched in.
bill30097 on September 11, 2008 at 7:09 PM
I just rewatched it and even more now believe she did a very good job. I don’t know what many of you were watching, but she was strong, she was knowledgeable, and she was very professional.
The big loser here was ABC – no, not because of the questions (I’ve really got few problems with them), but they totally mucked up the editing. Heck, they should fire their editor because of this.
dugan on September 11, 2008 at 7:09 PM
That editing reminded me of this video
lsutiger on September 11, 2008 at 7:09 PM
I don’t mind a tough interview. That’s what journalists are supposed to do. But I’m curious how many times Obama has been asked foreign policy questions like that in the past 18 months.
BadgerHawk on September 11, 2008 at 7:09 PM
Give this woman some more experience and she’ll eat these “men” for lunch every day.
econavenger on September 11, 2008
Exactly! I watched this and I thought she did well. But I knew she lacked some experience here.
Gibson is throwing everything he can. She on the other hand, will begetting better and better as she gets more used to these formats.
Who is ever ready to be President?
Would Gibson ever have questioned Bill Clinton like this? Has he done so with Obama?
The press is pure evil. The mainstream press is nothing but pure Pravda for the Democrats.
JellyToast on September 11, 2008 at 7:10 PM
Agree. And Gibson’s elitism and arrogance were highlighted enough to create quite a few more votes for Sarah America.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 7:10 PM
Wasn’t Gibson one of the moderators at that really bad Democratic debate who made Obama look bad?
BTW, his holiness, Barack Obama has made it clear he would go so far as to invade Pakistan if he thought it was necessary.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 7:10 PM
Thus, you will never see her being asked these questions.
amkun on September 11, 2008 at 7:10 PM
I’m really looking forward to the debates.
Ronnie on September 11, 2008 at 7:10 PM
I am so nervous waiting for every word she manages. These interviews are made or broken in the editing, usually…I think she did well but I’m still nervous.
I’m still finding some comfort in her strong, authentic spirit. It’s infectious, that cannot be denyed.
I guess the left knows how we felt about Obama’s popularity but I doubt they had this much to worry about with the softball interviews he was given.
Moxie on September 11, 2008 at 7:11 PM
Governor Palin, you did GREAT!!!! You go girl.
bloggless on September 11, 2008 at 7:11 PM
The editing where they inserted her first word a split second after his last on damn near every question makes her look extremely aggressive.
DethMetalCookieMonst on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
I guess we have a different view of “great.”
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
If Gibson repeated that hideous, damnable distortion of what Palin said, that needs to be challenged at every level.
This is genuine Libel. If it’s the AP’s fault, let Gibson defend himself by condemning the AP.
Pythagoras on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Maybe they will put up the whole interview on the net after they play the parts out on the network. One of the big nets did that with another big interview, who it was escapes me at the moment.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Palin should learn from the BO method of dealing with hostile interviewers–just touch his knee 17 times to soften him up!
(I thought BO was gonna call O’R “Sweetie”)
jgapinoy on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Just wait for the far-left’s take on the interview. They’ll see her as an “out of control warmonger,” as they see everyone that’s to the right of Dennis Kucinich. That’s what I’m talking about.
RBMN on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Oh my god! She prays that God is on our side on the War on Terror! The humanity!
poljunkie on September 11, 2008 at 7:13 PM
Why are they showing her from the side like that? And why didn’t her people have her do the bun thing? Crap that looks bad visually.
Kat_Mo on September 11, 2008 at 7:13 PM
I thought the edits were horrible. I have never seen such crummy editing! She did pretty well on first viewing. I want to watch again.
But I do think that Gibson looked a little off – maybe because she kept calling him Charlie.
(I haven’t read all 500 posts, so if someone else said the same, sorry)
tru2tx on September 11, 2008 at 7:13 PM
I think she held her own and didn’t seem intimidated.
He came off as disrespectful, impersonal, terse, and condescending. I wonder what was edited out.
CP on September 11, 2008 at 7:13 PM
What would you have like to seen differently from her side? It was quiz-like, so I’m curious where you think she could have improved. She only had space to fall, and didn’t.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 7:13 PM
You’re right and you’re wrong. You’re right in that politicians ue the skill of nuancing and avoidance. And it is useful in diplomacy.
You’re wrong in that it was needed here. Palin wasn’t talking to Charlie Idiot, she was talking to the viewers, particularly the Repubs and some Independents. And personally I believe that the people are tired and wary of nuanced answers to questions. She and McCain base their campaign on Straight Talk and if she had danced around too much, it would have undermined that.
I thought she did well. I think she irritated the crap out of Charlie and her refusal to be dragged into an absolute comment on Pakistan was pretty good dancing without being nuanced. And when you are misquoted you need to be forceful in defence, as in her “God’s Plan” comment. I love the way she kept calling him “Charlie” like their old acqauintances.
Deanna on September 11, 2008 at 7:14 PM
Most of the questions were framed in a yes or no format,
Damiano on September 11
I noticed this too. By making them Yes or No, she becomes more vulnerable to “gotcha!”
I thought she did well. She is just as qualified as Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Obama.
JellyToast on September 11, 2008 at 7:14 PM
my two cents
The reason she may have seemed pissed/combative is that this part of the interview was after a few more “try to trip you up questions.” Then they show the ones that they want to, to frame her in a light that they think will come off badly for her.
Like others have said, the whole interview, without edits, would bring all of Chuck’s bias out.
dittos to that
NObama has never had an interview like this…not even OReilly.
Vanquisher on September 11, 2008 at 7:14 PM
I didin’t watch, but I get the impression from the comments that it may have been a tougher interview than Obama has ever been subjected to by the MSM – is that true?
drunyan8315 on September 11, 2008 at 7:15 PM
When I saw Obama do that, I actually jerked my own knee back. Eeeeiiiuuuww…don’t you dare touch me!
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Yeah, but he had a very stern look on his face and looked over his glasses at her when he said it.
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 7:16 PM
It reminded me of Homer Simpson on Rock Bottom defending sexual harassment allegations against him.
CanadianGuy on September 11, 2008 at 7:17 PM
Just saw the snippet on World News Tonight and she did very, VERY well and Charlie challenged her. And she answered and NOT like a religious not job.
Dang, I like her.
tree hugging sister on September 11, 2008 at 7:17 PM
Screw Charlie Gibson. All Palin needed to do tonight was avoid looking like a neophyte idiot, and she easily succeeded. She’ll get better as the years go on. Even Bush isn’t Mr. Smooth, and he’s had eight years of practice. Take it easy people.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 7:18 PM
The editing was such a hackjob. You could see the edits, and parts where they cut her off, multiple times, as she was still speaking.
They even cut out the portion where she corrected Charlie that he misquoted her.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Just wait for the far-left’s take on the interview. They’ll see her as an “out of control warmonger,” as they see everyone that’s to the right of Dennis Kucinich. That’s what I’m talking about.
RBMN on September 11, 2008 at 7:12 PM
I could care less what the far left things. It is middle america that I care about. they are the swing vote and she came across as knowledgeable, strong and stable. Not a wimp. It is the wimp factor that is hurting Obama in the swing states. People do not trust him to protect us. I will feel (i would imagine like the rest of flyover country) completely safe if GOv. Palin took that 3am call
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 7:18 PM
No I don’t think she bombed but I don’t think she great. To me it seemed like she didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was. Gibson basically had to define it for her. That’s not good. I think that was the biggest mistake in the interview.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 7:18 PM
No problem with tough interviews but not with condescending looks and pompous attitudes. BHO didn’t get these types of questions… and he is running for POTUS
kareyk on September 11, 2008 at 7:19 PM
He probably asked her out and she pepper sprayed him.
Chuck Schick on September 11, 2008 at 7:19 PM
No one who counts is going to get bent out of shape over her comments re. Russia. Besides being correct, she knows that the Left can still do no better than portray her as this gun-toting Annie Oakley — which America eats up.
grdred944 on September 11, 2008 at 7:20 PM
No. Wait and watch it for yourself. Many on here are seeing very different things. I for one, thought she hit a solid ground rule double. She is, and will be, a formidable VP candidate. But just don’t take my word for it, watch it for yourself.
Oh, and did I mention she did a darn good job?
dugan on September 11, 2008 at 7:20 PM
Yes.
It was an exceedingly unfriendly interview.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 7:20 PM
yeah….she needed more “um, er uh, y’know *touch knee*”
for GHod’s sakes she’s the damn VEEP candidate….
barry faced with this nutriding would wilt….
show me ONE M$M confrontational to this level interview….
she nailed it, knocked it out of the park all things considered….this exposed Gibson not her.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 7:20 PM
Tough, fair interview question: Governor, what experiences have you developed that make you feel that you would be able to assume the role of Vice President or, if needed, President
VS
A$$hole Gibson test question:Do you feel that you would be able to be President?
The difference- one allows the person to answer the question in a way that provides insight into their thinking and leaves the appraisal to the viewer vs. Gibson’s question is a “yes” or “no”, leaving no room to understand there interviewee, their position and leaves the answer open ended.
Worst interview ever.
Damiano on September 11, 2008 at 7:21 PM
how dare you say tap dance when speaking about the chosen One , that is just another gop code word for Black.
/sarc
Mojack420 on September 11, 2008 at 7:21 PM
I think the editing was to make it a lot more rapid-fire than it actually was. Her answers were chopped, sometimes raggedly, making the whole interview seem uncontrolled and unfocused. That said, it was the most difficult format that a politician can face: an open-ended gotcha session. Honestly, I don’t blame Gibson for his style, although it does grate. The editing was problematic, but that’s to be expected when facing a determined and hostile press.
All in all, she got through it without gaffing or breaking down. It wasn’t the showcase many of us had hoped for, but after the first question, it was obvious it wasn’t going to be that kind of interview.
Immolate on September 11, 2008 at 7:22 PM
That’s what I have been yelling at all of you since 4 PM, you miserable pukes. Man up and grow a pair. This is gonna be a bumpy ride.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 7:22 PM
LMAO! On that one.
The editing could be giving off the appearance that she was more aggressive than she needed to be for those of you that think she came off too defensive. However, I would ask this, if as a women she did not come back strong in her answers, then who would have said she was too wishy-washy and not strong enough? When Bush, McCain or any man comes across like this in defending our rights to defend America from terrorists we cheer. The same applies to any issue she dealt with tonight. I like it that she does not come across as one of those spaghetti spined males in the Senate that have to place their fingers out into the polling winds to know how to take a stand.
She just sent her son off today to fight in Iraq or wherever he is ordered. And yet she said she would defend this nation if required via the military. As a Mother, I cannot imagine ordering my first born, my son into harms way, but this woman loves this country so much that she would put her country first and not her son’s safety. I think that qualifies her to be VP and if ever needed President.
freeus on September 11, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Here are some more exerpts. ABC is updating them periodically so keep refreshing. BTW, I think she did a good job.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=5782924&page=1
MyriadScreed on September 11, 2008 at 7:22 PM
What’s the Bush Doctrine? If *I* don’t know, then I certainly don’t expect Palin to know. And for anyone else to expect her to know what it is shows them to be traitors.
Cut off their legs!
Sakaki on September 11, 2008 at 7:22 PM
The biggest loser here was Charlie Gibson. He came off arrogant and condescending. Sarah comes out with even more female support here.
kevinkristy on September 11, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Thanks C.F. It’s all AP’s fault. He suckered me into
watching that crap . . LOL
Texyank on September 11, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Up front, I haven’t seen any of the video. I will say this: if anyone thinks that the McCain camp will let Charlie Gibson get away with an obvious misquote/extortion of Gov. Palin’s words, I think they are sadly mistaken. I would imagine Gibson has already heard the initial McCain/Palin reaction…and there will be more said…very publicly.
tgharris on September 11, 2008 at 7:23 PM
O’Reilly was quite friendly toward Obama. Tough questions, maybe, but he smiled and laughed. Charlie attempted to intimidate and it didn’t work.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Hey TerryAnn, I agree that was the roughest moment, but that was the question to make it appear she was 4 more years of McSame.
So her question ‘what aspects’ I think is very fair (and good) considering the Bush doctrine is defined by pundits, not Bush and can include a believe that all men burn for freedom (she didn’t address), that all men have rights from Creator (she agreed) – these two together being the moral authority to nation-build so thus important, and that we have the right to preemptively strike at danger (which she did).
I think he lost that exchange when he said “blizzard of words”. That was very poor.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Actually Terry IMHO.. that was a wise move… Have him lay parameters of what he deems/ defines to be the Bush doctrine.
She avoided a blanket yes no.. thus can’t be labled as another Bush etc…
theblacksheepwasright on September 11, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Its funny how the ABC clip above started with a CITGO commercial.
malkinmania on September 11, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Thanks for your answer, btw.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 7:24 PM
No I don’t think she bombed but I don’t think she great. To me it seemed like she didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was. Gibson basically had to define it for her. That’s not good. I think that was the biggest mistake in the interview.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 7:18 PM
No Gibson tried to paint her as Bush 2. So she very correctly wanted Gibson to frame the question specificlly. If she would have said yes right a way that could have meant whatever the left wanted it to mean. It could have meant that she was in favor of invading other countries, ticking off our allies, using toture techinques etc. So she made him define exactly what the question meant. ((preempitive strikes.) And then said she agreed with that part. Not all the other baggage.
take notes because that my friends is a very skilled politician. Most people would have said yes or no or deflected the question. she MADE the questioner define what he meant so she could not be taken out of context.
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 7:24 PM
ABC just spent a lot of time and a ‘Plan 9 From Outer Space’ editing budget to make the next Vice President look like a neophyte and failed…. badly!
I imagine Charlie’s and ABC’s E-mail caches are going to explode before ‘Nightline’ airs. Loaded with comments about Gibson’s failed attempt to come off like and arrogant William F. Buckley. Some guys can rock a pair of nose glasses and a calm demeanor while ‘interviewing’ a guest.
Charlie Gibson ain’t one of them!
Jack.
Jack Deth on September 11, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Strength and courage are wonderful qualities that Sarah has and it showed tonight. These same qualities, because they are authentic will propel her to victory as she faces these challenges.
Fuquay Steve on September 11, 2008 at 7:25 PM
I don’t know if tougher would describe it, it was just framed differently with the “gotcha” questions – which she answered rather skillfully – but bottom line, the editing was the worst I’ve ever seen – especially for such an important “first impression” to many people.
I don’t think that was an accident, either.
So, no, Barry’s never been subjected to quite the same type of interview. Even Bill O’Rs questions were more straight-forward.
tru2tx on September 11, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Megadittos, econavenger. Megadittos!
petefrt on September 11, 2008 at 7:26 PM
You could see the level of concentration on her face. No doubt Gibson was trying to pin her down with “yes or no” answers to complex problems.
And the “what if” questions?
If a frog had wings he wouldn’t bump his butt when he jumped.
She did well, she caused no damage to the ticket, and for crying outloud she didn’t endorse someone else to be McCain’s Vice President. Pretty good for the first time evening news interview.
Hog Wild on September 11, 2008 at 7:26 PM
No TV, but it looks like Governor Palin did herself no harm, which is good. I presume the Obamanation (including MSM) will negatively distort this to the maximum extent feasible. I hope I can get to see the whole thing on line soon and make my own judgment.
Top two questions based on my scan of this thread:
1) Anybody found out yet what AP had? Heart attack, baby, kittens or cow?
2) Why does Jim Treacher enjoy… wearing… women’s… clothing? (Exact quote.)
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 7:26 PM
I forgot about the “blizzard of words” comment- my mom was calling screaming into the answer machine. He did look like an ASS!
kareyk on September 11, 2008 at 7:26 PM
Liberal Media Hatchet Job!
Is this guy a debate moderator?
If so maybe he needs to be removed…
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 7:27 PM
OK…excellent works for me also.
Karmi on September 11, 2008 at 7:27 PM
I wasn’t particularly pleased with the questions, but the only real “gotcha” question was the one about the “Bush Doctrine.” She looked a little confused on that one, but I think she recovered well, especially since the media are the only ones who know what the hell the “Bush Doctrine” is anyway.
I thought her answers maybe should have been a little more succint (though they weren’t quite a “blizzard of words”), as Damiano said, the questions were all yes or no, where yes or no is the wrong answer.
What I liked was how she stayed professional and intense, and did not argue with the interviewer, even when coaxed. She stated her position and stuck to it. She did well for a first time at bat in the big leagues. A+? No, but a solid B.
Oh, and did I hear her say ‘nuculer?’ How long before the libs pick that up to add to the Bush III meme? Get her a diction coach, stat!
Jezla on September 11, 2008 at 7:27 PM
So what did you think AP?
ninjapirate on September 11, 2008 at 7:27 PM
this just in intercepted text messages between gibson and old joe
Joe ” what did you think”
Gibson ” your so finished at the debate next month ”
Joe” really”
Gibson” you might want to drop out now “
Mojack420 on September 11, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Considering Charlie only stated one part of the generally accepted three part doctrine, he has nothing to criticize. She was correct in asking him which part. And he was wrong to act as though she was stupid for asking.
It was obvious he wanted her to agree with the President so they could say she would be “more of the same.”
Deanna on September 11, 2008 at 7:28 PM
I agree, but the problem there was in the question and editing, not her answer.
What little of her answer they played was correct in content and intent. After the fact, Gibson reframed the question into his definition to push the gotcha.
Again, it was an unanswerable question where he tried to force a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ when both answers are wrong.
It was the same with the “cross boarder invasion” question. He was asking a yes or no question, she reframed it into ‘it depends’ (which is the right answer. If she’d said ‘yes’, she would be violating US policy on sovereignty, if she said ‘no’ then she’d be allowing countries and terrorists to dictate US policy.
The only thing she could have done better is to more clearly reframe the question as unanswerable instead of just pushing her answer… but then again, that could also be on the cutting room floor.
Damiano on September 11, 2008 at 7:28 PM
Anyone have the email addresses handy?
tgharris on September 11, 2008 at 7:28 PM
I know what the Bush Doctrine is but even I was at a loss about what he was asking about. It was the way he put the question. His demeanor, coupled with how we have become conditioned by the MSM and Matt Damon to automatically associate George W. Boooosh with negativity resulted in a loaded question. As if he was being sarcastic.
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 7:28 PM
The interview text is going up here
as it comes in.
faraway on September 11, 2008 at 7:29 PM
It… relaxes me…
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Am I right ?? Tonight’s showing will be a repeat of this one ? (with new stuff tomorrow ?)
Must know; gotta set my DVR .. hehe
pambi on September 11, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Well, she didn’t stutter. But, wow, she’s mad I think. And Gibson was going on with it cause he knew he had her.
Uh…now I’m reading the rest of your comments and wondering if we were watching the same video? I think she doesn’t like to be questioned on her religion.
But, worse, I think the interview set up had her in a defensive position. I mean that physically. She looks hunched over and she pointed at Gibson a bit to much.
Crap. He used that to rock her up front I bet so he could get the “rehearsed” out of the way. I hope the rest of the interview goes a lot better than that!
Kat_Mo on September 11, 2008 at 7:29 PM
I very much noticed Charlie’s tone of voice. Very low, quiet, unenthusiastic, chin down.
When I watched his You Tube interview with the One, Charlie was upbeat and sounded eager in voice.
I cannot stand him. I yell Chuck you Farlie at the TV at least a couple times a night.
13Girl on September 11, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Like shampoo, this deserves repeating!
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 7:30 PM
SHE WILL NOT BLINK
SHE HAS NOT BLINKED
can the same be said of Obama or biden. hell biden is even second guessing Obama’s decsion.
SHE WILL NOT BLINK. the 30 sec ad needs to come out soon. That was priceless TV. She will not blink. She just defined herself in 4 words. She captured her whole personaility.
She will not blink
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 7:30 PM
There’s already an AP story out, linked to on Drudge, called “Palin leaves open option of war with Russia”.
Unbelievable. The article is accurate in that she said IF a country were in NATO and IF Russia attacked THEN, when asked if it would mean war with Russia, she said “perhaps so”.
Frankly, there is no right way to answer that question. If she said “no, no war with Russia even if the country is in NATO” the headlines in the AP would probably read “Palin Not Willing to Support NATO” or “Palin Doesn’t Know What Article V of the NATO Treaty Is!”
Watch for the nutroots to start calling her a war monger when she said noting of the sort, but was rather repeating a simple factual statement about NATO treaty obligations.
Makes me mad.
nemecizer on September 11, 2008 at 7:30 PM
What I like is that everyone is going to be comparing her to Obama. Can I say that again?–they’re going to be comparing her to Obama.
Don’t ya just think that plays exactly into the hands of the McCain Team? They have to be happy as hell about this interview.
labwriter on September 11, 2008 at 7:30 PM
Yeah… that was not good. She did it in her “welcome home” speech too and I groaned.
The libtards are going to have a field day with that.
Damiano on September 11, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Yeah, BOR asked BHO tough questions but couldn’t stop himself from interrupting the stammering, so it made it sound as though they’d been answered.
This was a much more professional and tough interview, and I think she did just fine. There’s a bit too much emphasis on her hair and makeup and camera angles but I guess female pols always have to put up with that. Put her up in a debate against Biden ( or hell, Obama!) answering the same questions and you’ll see, she’ll hold her own and then rock them back on their heels…
Fortunata on September 11, 2008 at 7:32 PM
ROFLMAO
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Gibson lying about what she said, and the hatchet job editing wasn’t needed.
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 7:33 PM
I thought Gibson’s interview with Obama was hard-hitting. “Why is it so awesome that you’re multiracial?” [bats eyes coquettishly]
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 7:33 PM
The Lady is not for turning.
Mayhem on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM
nucular is the way a lot of people in the “non elistist class” say it. Pesonally, I love it- I’ve heard it all of my life.
kareyk on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM
I think she survived with no major damage. It sounded to me like her advisers hadn’t prepared her very well for follow ups. Sarah would repeat her first response instead of elaborating. I’m sure with time, she will get better at this.
Also didn’t think she looked comfortable and confident. I’m talking about how someone looks when they know they are the master of the subject. Again, with time and practice she will get better.
I also thought she used her “speech” voice too much. I’m sure when she builds up a little more confidence, she will relax and her voice will relax a little.
First part I would give her a C+. Later part I would give her a B. Not bad for her first major interview, but she and her advisers have some major work to do before the debate.
huckleberryfriend on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM
I didn’t see any mention of makeup and hair style. Comments about camera angle only had to do with the fact that the focus was on Gibson’s face and the back of Palin’s head.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM
She was in control, and Gibson knew it. That threw him off his ‘game’, i.e. she looked and sounded sharp, which made Gibson look confused…at best.
Karmi on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM
Seems like they tried to put her at her most uncomfortable with the stuff out of context first off in order to lead people watching (secondary targets) to get uncomfortable as if we were also in her chair.
But what began as clever manipulation designed to set a certain mood backfired because Charlie was trying to be a hero.
When we shook off that initial portion-just as she did-then we see she did great. I’m thinking stand up double off the top of the wall now. The blue collar moms of America should come out of this liking her and HATING Charlie. Joe6pack guys should see Charlie as a punk and give Sarah the credit she deserves.
econavenger on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM
Not knowing the Bush Doctrine = Not Bush four more years .. cuts the libs talking points .. what’s wrong with that ?
redrock on September 11, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11 Next »