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 | regular view
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 ... 7 8 9 10 11 Next »
SHE DID NOT BLINK…
She did not blink..
She has never blinked in her life…
She did not blink
SHE DID NOT BLINK..
Think about it.
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
OK, call yourself a troll then :)
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 8:53 PM
Regarding Sarah’s accent, it is a VERY BIG plus. That midwestern Scandinavian accent is a huge plus in MI, MN, and WI along with many in the moutain states too.
Just like the FARGO state trooper from the movie.
All of you from those states: Is that accent a plus to you too?
Sapwolf on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Here is the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ALsjhDDdaA
mad saint jack on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
Your perception, agreed, is different from mine, and I certainly won’t argue that.
However, what the so-called Bush Doctrine, as opposed to the Monroe Doctrine, Jackson Doctrine, oBambi Doctrine, etc. is –
It is somewhat his worldview, but more narrowly how he and his administration think the US is justified in using force.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
BLINK
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 8:57 PM
FOAD, buddy, FOAD.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 8:57 PM
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 8:45 PM
Gosh, I didn’t see troll anywhere in my post. Your as thin skinned as an Obama supporter, you might want to settle down a touch.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
BLINK
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 8:57 PM
point?
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Don’t play innocent, Cindy, your inference was clear and present.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Here’s the YouTube video of the entire interview without the breaks. Sarah did very well. Biden better do some more studying before the debates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ALsjhDDdaA
bobsunshine on September 11, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Stay classy, who knows, maybe the Democrats will win and you will have the last laugh. If that is what you want.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
My understanding of the Bush doctrine, such as it is, is the following:
1) Prememption: We reserve the right to pre-emptively respond to possible threats by terrorists or rogue nations
2) Terrorist Support: We will make no distinction between terrorists and the nations that support or harbor them
3) Democracy: The best long-term response to terrorist rogue nations is to foster democracies in developing countries
4) International Cooperation: The fight against terrorism will include international cooperative efforts with our partners and allies.
I should note that the Bush Doctrine has not been formally defined, but if we equate the Bush Doctrine to the Bush Approach in the War on Terror, those would be the essential components.
Now Charlie Gibson only quoted the part about preemption, so he wasn’t accurate; but of course, he’s not running for office. Sarah could have handled this question better. As it was, she looked bad in her initial response and, as a result, was defensive throughout that entire question. Not good.
PackerBronco on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
I didn’t know what you meant.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Gee, compares to Obama’s stinker on O’Reilly she did great. Oh, and she’s not running for slot #1 like Barry.
hestrold on September 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
At least you know what I meant in that post. Now, go back and try to understand what I meant in the others before you trip over yourself again judging my intentions.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:04 PM
There is no agreed upon definition of “the Bush doctrine” even among diplomats. It is a slang term that the news media throws around for a number of things they don’t like.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
Just be careful before you judge others or you might find others judging you.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
Hammer, meet nailhead.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:06 PM
Yeah, I noted in my post. I would have preferred her to respond along these lines: “Which part of the Bush Doctrine do you want me to address?” and then go from there. It would have been better.
PackerBronco on September 11, 2008 at 9:06 PM
Thanks. I’ve formed my opinion about Palin — how she performed in an interview with Charlie Gibson won’t change that. I think I’ll read the transcripts for her opinions and save myself the irritation of watching ABC.
Y-not on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:01 PM
What, you didn’t like the tone of my font? I think the inference is all you. Very silly, are you twelve.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
Right back at cha’.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
didn’t know what you meant.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
I meant this:
She will not blink….
What more do you want in a leader….when the call comes she did not blink…she answered the call to serve…she did not blink….I’m sorry but that phrase just keeps going around in my head…like a bee buzzing….It was so strong, steadfast, it raised goosebumps on my arms when I heard it….It soo captured her persona.
She did not blink…when faced with a life changing option she stood up to it and accepted the responsibility…when faced with a DS baby she did not blink…when her daughter was pregent she did not blink…when her son joined the army…she did not blink…when faced with a speech of a life time…she did not blink…when faced with a hostilepress she did not blink…when faced with a last second shot for the championship she did not blink…when faced with all of lifes challanges she did not blink…
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 7:43 PM
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Thanks.
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
OK, just heard the 1st part of the interview. She did fine. Her “Bush Doctrine” response was fine. No problems.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Saw the interview now and the Blink comment makes sense to me now.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
I think I’ll pass on getting into a fight over intentions and interpretations. I interpreted what I thought were your very clear intentions to dismiss me as an outlander.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
1000 or bust!!
lsutiger on September 11, 2008 at 9:11 PM
Hand-wringing? I didn’t see any hand-wringing.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 9:12 PM
This forum is such a sham, they keep saying, “this is what we asked, McCain”, Obama knows because he watched..
McCain kept this as bi-partisan as possible and with 2 liberals attacking.. sheesh.. what a stupid forum.
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 9:13 PM
unseen-again- LOVE IT-
kareyk on September 11, 2008 at 9:13 PM
Not clearly defined, in some circles. Historians it seems make the final call. But it is pretty clear from GWB’s speeches and policy decisions what he means by it. The quote from wikipedia is pretty darned close.
And no, Sarah still didn’t come across well on that.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Saw the 2nd part about Iraq and her son. She did fine there too.
No problems.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Saw the interview now and the Blink comment makes sense to me now.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
To me it just seems to capture her whole personility in a 4 letter phrase. It boils down everything to those words. she will not blink. No matter what…she will not blink…can the same be said of Obama or biden. McCain is the same mold…he didn’t blink with toture, with serving his country, even duriong the keating 5 he did not blink..he defended himself, yes even during immigration reform he stuck to his guns to the last tand didn’t blink because he thought he was wrong. We need that quaility in a leader. Gov Palin has it, McCain has it…obama and biden don’t. Simple yes but that I think more than anything will be the deciding factor in my vote..
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:15 PM
No it isn’t clear at all, and the Wikipedia entry shows a number of definitions for the term. You can take some of them, all of them or make up your own definition for the term that is how undefined it is. So Palin wanting clarification from Gibson makes sense before she would answer. She did the right thing. With vague terms you need to ask the person to clarify. No problem with that.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
Obviously referring to the McCain/Obama forum..
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
There was no way she was going to come across well on that open-ended, obvious trap question.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
lsutiger- GEAUX TIGERS!!!!!!
kareyk on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
That’s exactly correct; there is no definition for that term at all.
I was a little suspicious at first. Journalists are by no means known for their non-idiocy, but I thought these lamebrains spent a whole week coming up with this stuff. So I actually went and looked it up. And yes, of course, “The Bush Doctrine” is just a liberal catch-phrase they use among themselves.
Seriously, this is the best they could do? Between this retarded “pop-quiz” on foreign policy, and Gibbons maceration of Governor Palin’s OWN QUOTE, we’ve already got enough ammo to take this clown down. And it’s a safe bet that the second interview will be even worse!
Man, this is a great time to be alive.
logis on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
Yes, and no. She is nervous now. As time passes and she gets use to the role, she won’t be a “full steam ahead” as she is now.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
You betcha, don’ ya know….
BobMbx on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
No, I didn’t do that. Besides if you were you would still be allowed to post you thoughts. It’s America. If Gov. Palin didn’t instill faith in you, then you have choices. That’s all I was saying. I think way too much is being put on this interview. There are going to be a lot of interviews between now and Nov. 4.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
Where?
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
I know wth he got to hear all the questions and McCain’s answers.
Obama “Listening to his presentation…”
artchick on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Here y’all go!
SARAH PALIN
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
I believe, in part, she means she takes action when needed. My hope is that it doesn’t mean she won’t think completely through a situation before taking action.
Blinking is needed sometimes.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
I just started watching the interview that was leaked in You Tube and saw a condescending piece of crap that is not even able to look at her in the eyes. This will bring more female votes to McCain.
Ropera on September 11, 2008 at 9:21 PM
BobMbx on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
I love ALL accents and I am sad when I think that television is homogenizing our language.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 9:21 PM
No, I don’t agree. I don’t think it was a trap question, just a probing one, and she flubbed. Doesn’t mean she isn’t VP material, but it does raise legitimate questions as to her current state of preparation.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
my apologies.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
Yes, and no. She is nervous now. As time passes and she gets use to the role, she won’t be a “full steam ahead” as she is now.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
I’m not talking about her energy level. I’m talking about her character and what that means about her decsions she will make…She is a true leader. She is a Churchhill not a chamberlian. Chamberlian blinked…churchhill did not..
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
Anyone notice how many Anti-Palin stories ABC has online???
mad saint jack on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Blinking is needed sometimes.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Yeah because Blinking worked so well for Chamberlian, for Carter, for Clinton, for Bush on is read my lips no new taxes, etc….
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Obama and his “civilian army” supported by the government!
Obama’s brown shirts! Obama’s SS Generals
Pretty scarry stuff.
Having KOS kids running around, and Obama outlawing all your guns..
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 9:30 PM
What I find most interesting is this – for months, AP and posters at HA have remonstrated that both Palin and Jindal are the future of the GOP, but are not seasoned enough for the stage, yet. Let them age, like a fine wine. On to 2012!
Well, here we are, the bottle has been uncorked too early, and we see the result.
Ok, truth be told, I miss Mitt. Yes, he would not have electrified the base, but I had confidence in him. Not there yet with S. Cuda.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
As near as I can tell, these are the Obamananation’s critiques:
1) She’s dangerous ideologue, willing to go to war with Russia over Georgia. This is false and taken completely of the context of the question that was based upon Georgia being a NATO member when invaded by Russia
2) She’s out of her element because she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine meant. That might be true or not true. But to me, the key is that when Gibson said how he interpreted it, her answer was appropriate and strong.
So she is being criticized simultaneously as a dangerous, violent extreme right-winger AND a weak airhead, unprepared to be President. This is an ideological, sexist and illogical response. I think she is more prepared than Obama to BE President, but Obama is more prepared than Palin to RUN for President. And she is a big enough threat to Obama that she draws out all of his acolytes to seed as much doubt and dissension as possible.
Could she have done better? Sure. She wasn’t perfect.
Did she fail? Absolutely not.
Based on the limited clips & transcripts I’ve seen so far, I would give her an A- or B+ at worst.
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
timing is everything…
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
Nuance, my friend, is not necessarily a bad thing. And thinking before acting is a virtue. Churchill had decades in the Wilderness to think through his positions. Palin, well, not yet.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Yeah ok, so she talks about a plan and how it is “GOD’S PLAN” so how is this NOT a holy war then if God wants this happen? You see how fast she limped away from THAT question? You hypochristians are such spineless whimps.
DanKenton on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Gibson wanted to do a hit job and got smack down & around more than one time .Charley you forgot pitbulls bite
thmcbb on September 11, 2008 at 9:35 PM
Finally was able to watch the whole interview and one thing is clear. Despite the brainy, vixenish demeanor, Charlie is not quite ready to be Katie Couric’s Vice President.
GreenBlade on September 11, 2008 at 9:35 PM
cs. (chuckle softly)
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:37 PM
barely worthy of your last name there friend….
The question was based on a willful misquote….
she wants us to be in line with His pla not him with ours….
hardly a thrown bomb
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:37 PM
Vote for Obama. He wants to make government Cool again.
artchick on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Hitler had a “Civilian Army” called the SA(Sturmabteilung) that played a key role to Hitler rise in the 30’s, then you have the Night of the Long Knives, and then you get the SS..
(Just a question , Who is would Obama’s SS be that would take out his SA?)
Now that question is freaky..
Chakra Hammer on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
A Vice President who prays for our country.
Oh, the horror.
The Ugly American on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
But on a positive note, Allah seems to really be on board finally. Thanks for the optimism!
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Nuance, my friend, is not necessarily a bad thing. And thinking before acting is a virtue. Churchill had decades in the Wilderness to think through his positions. Palin, well, not yet.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
And yet again you miss the point…By chance are you a metorsexual..There is a difference between Nuance and leadership.
We asked to run she said yes..she didn’t take 30 days to decisde. when faced with corruption she quit her job and fought it…she didn’t nuance her way into accepting it, when faced with earmarks becoming a danger to the country she cut them, when faced with a direct threat to the USA or our allies she will not blink. Just like JFK did not blink during the missle crisis, like Truman did not blink during the airlift, during North Korea, like Reagan did not blink during the cold war, like Bush has not blinked on the Iraq war. This is a characteristic of leadership. Obama has blinked on guns, on taxes, on wiretaps, on public fianacing, on his first response to Russia invasion of Georgia, on Rev Wright, on his grandmother, etc. In fact there is not one thing that I can think of that BHO has not blinked on when confronted..
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Where did you read that? I thought he was having a heart attack or cow or something. Has he had an epiphany instead?
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
I just saw the first part. Gibson is condescending and rude i.e. “I got lost in that blizzard of words”, because he didn’t get the answer he wanted which she couldn’t give because it would make no sense… Can someone link to the YouTube video(s) of Charlie’s interview with Barack so I can see his answers to all these questions???
CCRWM on September 11, 2008 at 9:45 PM
Oh I get it now, Charlie. You think that a presidential race needs to be scored by applying handicaps.
Watch these two interviews by ABC’s Charlie Gibson. And while your watching them, remember Obama is on the top of the Democrat ticket, and Palin is on the BOTTOM of the GOP ticket.
This clearly demonstrates that Obama is a fabrication of the establishment media, while Palin is the salt of the earth.
ABC’s Charlie Gibson introduces Obama to the nation.
ABC’s Charlie Gibson introduces Palin to the nation.
Saltysam on September 11, 2008 at 9:48 PM
http://www.madcowssteakhouse.com/viewtopic.php?t=21566
barry’s “civillian national security force”
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM
I think it was actually good for her not to know off the bat the “Bush Doctrine”…hard to say you’re Bush III this way… That was too broad of a question …it could have been a trap. She could have answered that and then he could have pointed to another Bush position and acted like she got it wrong…her look was priceless though…sort of like alright c’mon please…
CCRWM on September 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM
Re Bush Doctrine: Didn’t Charlie Gibson ask for a yes or no answer to a multiple choice question? Isn’t that why Governor Palin had to ask him what he meant?
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
yes she wanted clarification. Very skillfull politician…was not aware of the trap he was setting but aware a trap was being set. She avioded it very well.
unseen on September 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
I am not from any of those states but I really like her accent. I am from Western NY State and don’t exactly have a posh-sounding accent either.
Of course, her accent is fodder for the media and Saturday Night Live.
senrab on September 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Saltysam on September 11, 2008
Watched the Obama love fest interview.
What a difference!
JellyToast on September 11, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Thanks for posting that. What a difference…no condescending tone…no questions about anything but himself… Obama controlled the narrative. Somehow I don’t think Gibson would have not followed up if Sarah had said she did drugs… it would have been the lead in…
CCRWM on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
I was being sarcastic Loxo. Sorry.
He really frustrates the hell out of me.
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Terrye, you may be right, but quite a number of us got the impression she didn’t get the reference and was floundering a bit. She did not give the impression that she was in command of foreign-policy issues, though Gibson’s questions were clearly designed to put her on a spot that a more seasoned candidate would not have permitted.
I do reckon that after a few more of these, and she’ll give as good as she gets. She’s a spunky gal, and a quick study.
MrLynn on September 11, 2008 at 10:03 PM
BTW I caught it when Obama said something to the effect of”like John McCain just stated”… He was listening to all Mac’s answers… he gave that much away… He probably had the quetions in advance too…
CCRWM on September 11, 2008 at 10:09 PM
If you have to resort to name calling to defend your position, you haven’t thought your position through thoroughly enough.
You give good examples of not blinking, and I think I understand what you mean. However, Mao never blinked either, nor did Pol Pot. They should have. Neither did General Haig; he never blinked at throwing a million men to their deaths in suicidal frontal attacks on the Siegfried Line.
Now, hear me out. I hope she is not into staking out a position without understanding the implications for herself and especially for the country. Just doing a gut reaction and never looking back isn’t good policy, and isn’t necessarily good leadership.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 10:11 PM
if Russia needs bear-whospered we need a leader they know will do that.
Ron did not back Ivan into retiring from “communist 2d power” by playing nice and avoiding scaring them.
He joked in a famous clip about thanking congress for outlawing them.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 10:14 PM
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
.
Everyone has a differing opinion of what the Bush Doctrine is.
GIBSON got his own answer to his own question wrong.
.
When he said what HE thought the “Bush Doctrine was, he mentioned an addendum that was added much later.
.
I’ve already seen four TV pundits disagree on what the Bush Doctrine was/is.
.
This was totally unfair.
shooter on September 11, 2008 at 10:14 PM
*bear-whispered
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 10:14 PM
No problem. But if you ever find a clue to anything, anything at all, I could sure use at least one.
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 10:15 PM
well by his demeanor back when Gibson was teaching Bush what the Bush doctrine would be in “world affairs 101″….it was a junk interview by a guy ODing on Keef’s Murrow pills.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 10:16 PM
“NATO country” – your ears need a checkup.
upinak and JT, I was not sarcastic, but rather sincere about just one of each of you, because you are both so special. Sorry if that was written poorly.
Didn’t watch the interview and am counting on all your commentary.
Entelechy on September 11, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Heard some of it on the car radio. Most missed the NATO part and I’m pretty sure the media did too, purposely.
Entelechy on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
I realize that there are different opinions, it was in Palin’s reaction to the question that I sensed she was out of her league. And it was mildly embarrassing. But it is what it is. Like I said earlier, it is easy to demonize Gibson, but it is Palin who we must evaluate honestly.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
by “honestly” you mean “with more scrutiny than the other sides’ Presidential candidate ever gets because he is the Black ManChild”?
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Thanks for clearing that up. Whospered is a new one to me.
Puty needs some kind of whispering – dog, horse, bear, nukular…
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Yes, and by a much different standard than the “One”, of course.
Saltysam on September 11, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 Next »