Red meat: Palin on abortion, guns, stem-cell research, and balancing work and career
posted at 8:15 pm on September 12, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Everything was better tonight: The setting, Gibson’s demeanor, and of course her comfort with the subject matter, as most of these are gimmes. His question about whether homosexuality is genetic or learned is a stupid gotcha, which she handles reasonably well — although I would have savored a barb at The One about how the matter is above her pay grade. As it is, her response ought to mellow out centrists worried that the “Christianist” menace is descending. If she’s a fundie at heart, as governor she’s kept that heart pretty well concealed.
Her best moment thus far comes at the end, when she refuses to take the bait and whine about sexism. Hillary feminists won’t like that, everyone else in America will. Exit question one: What little matter of domestic policy did Gibson conspicuously neglect to ask about? Maybe Hannity will get to it next week amid tough questions like, “How hard is it to be you?” Exit question two: How’s the abortion answer going to play? Opposing exceptions even in the case of rape and incest is, needless to say, emphatically not a centrist position, but stressing that she wants to leave the matter to the states and bending over backwards to express her respect for other opinions might be enough to defuse it.
Don’t forget: The rest, including an exchange on book-burning, will air on 20/20 at 10 p.m. ET.
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: « 1 2 [3]
Newsbusters has a transcript of Gibson’s first interview with Obama. Hannity talked about it today. As you might guess…Charlie takes quite a different tone.
Any chance we can get a link to that interview???
bagadeez04 on September 12, 2008 at 11:18 PM
I think Gibson has enough hubris for the both of them.
Terrye on September 12, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Yesterday was a 6. Today was a 9, maybe 8.5. But last is remembered best so take home is 7.5+.
Spirit of 1776 on September 12, 2008 at 11:19 PM
Hell yeah.
Good take.
I’m a right winger and a conservative but not a Christian. While I respect the Christian faith, I think it is important for people to know that you can be a conservative and not guzzle the Kool Aid on gays and abortion. I’m not saying I’m on the opposite side of either, just that I don’t feel those two issues should be in the top 2. I think they are issues that should operate in the realm of social taboo more than in the juridical realm.
Roe v Wade was a legal abomination. That’s my main argument against it. I find it offensive, yes, but I don’t VOTE ON IT. If a candidate is pro-choice, that alone will not get my vote.
I totally agree with the Cuda. Abortion should be legislated by the states and government should keep out of the gay issue. Give the gays civil unions and be done with it, OR, make that a state issue too. But then you have the constitutional issue of states recognizing each other etc….. whatever, that issue should be like 12th on the list.
For f’s sake let’s shrink this behemoth government before we go poking into the social issues.
my $.02
Metro on September 12, 2008 at 11:20 PM
Thank you for all who participated in my little survey. There’ll be a little bit extra in your checks this month.
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 11:21 PM
She’s campaigning. The goal is to help the ticket get enough electorals to win. With that in mind, she got an 8.0.
She needs to come across stronger on foreign policy in a future interview or in the debate with Biden. A lot of voters will ask if she can step in if McCain lasts no longer than Tippecanoe. In that event foreign policy will be weighted more heavily than domestic issues.
dedalus on September 12, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Good point.
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 11:24 PM
Well, The Bride of Monster used to work with identical twin brothers, one of whom is straight as an arrow and the other queer as a $3 bill. They have the same genes. I’m sure the “explanation” is that the straight brother is a “latent homosexual” who is denying his desire for man meat.
The Monster on September 12, 2008 at 11:24 PM
I don’t understand why foreign policy is so difficult. Really. Why did she flub that? All she has to do is go rah rah rah USA.
Defend the country.
Get the terrorists - even limited strikes in pakistan as we are doing
Defend our allies. Encourage nato membership.
I’d also add that we need to get europeans more involved in their own defense. we’ve carried their water for far too long.
lorien1973 on September 12, 2008 at 11:26 PM
I’ll add, that after seeing both her interviews, I’m perfectly okay with personality driven VP trumping their personality driven P any day of the week.
lorien1973 on September 12, 2008 at 11:28 PM
“Hunting” moose is like shooting a barn. It’s not like they run away. What a “sport”. They can be hard to find, if you’re from out of town, but otherwise it’s about as challenging as shooting your car.
PootyPoot on September 12, 2008 at 11:28 PM
Some people seem natural at delivering that message. Like I bet you could wake Rudy up in the middle of the night and he’d start talking about being on offense instead of defense. It’s been Rudy’s area of focus for the past 7 years though. Palin seems a natural at selling positions. She just needs to absorb the foreign material to the point where she is fluid with the arguments–hope the learning curve is weeks not months. I’m optimistic.
dedalus on September 12, 2008 at 11:35 PM
I’ve long been of the opinion that journalists who throw out nonsensical statistics like “70% of Americans support a ban on semiautomatic assault rifles” should be corrected publicly at every opportunity. (As if being semiautomatic had anything to do with a rifle being an “assault rifle.” Semiautomatic just sounds like automatic, which is what real assault rifles are, and automatic rifles are already tightly controlled.)
Practically, of course, politicians being interviewed are concentrating on getting their message out, and just let a lot of half-truths slide.
But I’d love to see these half-truths confronted directly for a change.
theregoestheneighborhood on September 12, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Hitting the moose may not be too hard. Killing it takes some doing.
If you think hunting moose comes down to just making contact with a broad target, you’re likely to find out what a wounded moose is capable of doing.
But thanks for your armchair quarterbacking on moose hunting.
TexasDan on September 12, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Heh. I’ve aways thought the same of trolls, except that, unlike moose, they are easy to find - in fact they pop up and announce themselves…as you have done.
ManlyRash on September 12, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Obama-Gibson. Pretty sure its his their first interview.
What a laugher lol!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzecb7Qe6vo
bagadeez04 on September 12, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Yah, reports come in almost every day about some irate wounded moose antlering some mighty hunter who was down to his last bullet to death. Maybe it would be safer to shoot the vicious beasts from a helicopter with a 50 caliber. Probably better call up the National Guard too.
PootyPoot on September 12, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Well now a moose probably would get you if it so decided if the caliber of your rifle is as small as the caliber of your wit.
PootyPoot on September 12, 2008 at 11:56 PM
I’m sure you think the average hunter needs twine to tie his jaw shut to keep from drooling. Could it be that you don’t hear about it much because most hunters are careful and conscientious, and therefore it doesn’t happen?
Nah. Let’s be serious.
Truthfully, how many moose have you seen? Any? I’ve not hunted them, but I’ve been within 10 yards. They’re immense.
Or, maybe they shoot them from far away, making it a difficult, sporting shot. But then, it can’t possibly be a sport, so we can rule that out too.
TexasDan on September 13, 2008 at 12:01 AM
You’re sick!
.30 cal from a mini-gun ANY day.
Sarah is SO stinkin’ likable in this clip. She’s such a perfect pick for Juan to make. Go Johnny Go!
Mojave Mark on September 13, 2008 at 12:02 AM
PootyPoot on September 12, 2008 at 11:56 PM
PootyPoot? Really?
Cindy Munford on September 13, 2008 at 12:03 AM
So homosexuality is really genetic. They’re just not attracted to women the same way that straight men are.
But straight men are homophobic because they fear their own latent homosexuality, which explains why they hate homosexuals, who are only different because of their genetics.
So apparently, if you are homosexual, it’s not your fault, it’s because of your genes.
And if you are a homophobe, then you are (genetically?) a latent homosexual who fears his own homosexuality, and therefore hates homosexuals because he fears that tendency in himself.
Here’s some real genetics for you: there are two sexes in the human race, male and female. Homosexual men are male, and straight men are male. Homosexual women are female, and straight women are female.
Males are normally attracted to females, and females to males. If males are attracted to males, both religion and culture say something’s wrong with you, either sin or sickness. If you reject religion and culture and decide to live by science and your own moral code, then you presumably accept evolution, which says there’s something wrong with you, because you’re not contributing to the survival of your race.
But the biggest problem with the genetics argument is the fact that it’s relatively easy for a straight man to engage in gay sex, or vice versa. If I’m not mistaken, Judy Garland had several children by gay men.
So is it really that hard to believe that a straight man — or boy — could engage in gay sex and learn to prefer it? After all, some men engage in sex with animals. Others with very young children. Surely those are more extreme behaviors than gay sex.
And then you have bisexual men and women, who apparently prefer both. That is, the sexual enjoyment of the opposite sex doesn’t seem to interfere with the sexual enjoyment of the same sex.
Maybe the fact of the matter is that we all have the capacity to derive sexual enjoyment from members of the same sex as well as the opposite sex. Which kind of destroys the “born different” theory.
Consider all that, and the “genetically different” argument gets pretty thin.
theregoestheneighborhood on September 13, 2008 at 12:09 AM
You’ve been within 10 yards? Wow. I’m surprised that you lived to tell about it.
Immense? I think we covered that earlier.
Shoot them from far away? That could be it. Maybe Sarah Oakley stands in Alaska and shoots them over on the property of her close next door neighbor, Russia.
I will give you this much - shooting a moose has got to be a lot more of a challenge than you turkeys inhabiting this locale are.
I think I better go look elsewhere in search of some kind of challenge anyway as there does not seem to be any here at all.
So good night and don’t anyone here have any nightmares about a scary man eating moose.
PootyPoot on September 13, 2008 at 12:13 AM
I believe if Palin had the chance, she’d appoint the most ignorant, backwards people to ever sit on the Supreme Court.
Advantage:Godless China and Russia…
alphie on September 13, 2008 at 12:15 AM
Just one more response and I am really on my way as you seem to be a Lady. Yes, PootyPoot. You know the one your idiot President saw as having such a great soul. That’s the one.
PootyPoot on September 13, 2008 at 12:17 AM
We’ll be up all night, too scared to sleep and lonely for you to come back.
TexasDan on September 13, 2008 at 12:18 AM
I see. So you aren’t really paying attention to the judicial appointments she has made in Alaska. Just drinking some kool aid?
And you’re supporting the guy, whose initial response to the invasion of Georgia was to spew Kremlin talking points. Whether you agree with McCain’s response, do you honestly believe that the president should be agreeing with the Kremlin?
lorien1973 on September 13, 2008 at 12:20 AM
It’s sexual attraction. Some gay guys have attractive women available to them. In some cases theses women complain that they wish their straight boyfriend dressed as well, kept his apartment as neat and worked out as often as the gay friend.
Seems odd that these guys would have the attention of hot women but then go out and have sex with other guys. Most men would naturally choose the attractive woman.
dedalus on September 13, 2008 at 12:26 AM
“70%”? Site your source Charlie - or did you pull that one from DU? Or your hindend? Puhleeze.
Does Charlie not understand that a lot of people hunt to put food on the table? If not, I’ve got a freezer full of venison I’d love to show him - even put up a pot of venison chili, if he thinks his delicate tummy can handle it.
Blue-eyed Infidel on September 13, 2008 at 12:26 AM
The main legal problem with the Roe decision was not the “its my body” argument, it was its usurpation of the States right to decide for themselves whether their citizens felt that abortion itself was to be legalized. Truly, abortion will always be available in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, but perhaps the people of Georgia don’t or Arkansas, or Alabama, or Kentucky. In the Constitution, all powers not given in it to the Federal Govt were exclusively reserved for the states.
Now why is Roe so important on a state level? Because the people can vote against it or for it and the battle can be fought on a more confined level. The founders knew, that eventually, NO ONE can ever beat the Feds save a few rare circumstances. Instances such as Roe, give communities time to flesh the issue out and seriously debate it. Much easier to debate life issues locally than trying to scream above the rabble in SF, which is far far away from moi.
JP1986UM on September 13, 2008 at 12:27 AM
Non-religious. Never had it growing up and probably never will. So I think of the issue of abortion from a purely logical perspective.
How can I be a human with rights today but not a human in the womb of my mother and void of rights? That just makes no logical sense to me.
The willful and intentional termination of a human is called murder. Therefore abortion is murder. We don’t allow murder in civilized society. Palin and every other logical human being (religious or otherwise) knows this to be true.
watson007 on September 13, 2008 at 12:32 AM
A moose walked up to once when I was standing alone, miles from anyone, in a wilderness area. Then she bent her head down, and leaned her side into me while she was plucking tasty greens from a ground-running raspberry patch. When she was done with her treat and moved along, there was nothing left but the thorny raspberry vines and one wonder-struck and terrified idiot.
Loxodonta on September 13, 2008 at 12:40 AM
China and Russia now control Asia, lorien.
The only reason they allow us to rube around there is that it is bankrupting us.
In other words, America is impotent in Asia, so it doesn’t really matter what the President says about Putin.
alphie on September 13, 2008 at 12:57 AM
Must read. Enough said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
SheetAnchor on September 13, 2008 at 1:03 AM
Just heard Bush give a speech about the 90 civilians the U.S. military killed in Afghanistan last week, watson.
He said dead civilians are a natural result of an out of control military-industrial complex…er freeeeeedom fightin’.
If the right accepts the murder of civilians in order to achieve one of their dubious foreign policy goals, shouldn’t they support the same think to keep America free of unwanted children?
alphie on September 13, 2008 at 1:08 AM
alphie,
It’s Friday the 13th, go play with Jason
Gohawgs on September 13, 2008 at 2:21 AM
Now, I know I am just one of those bitter clingerers and all that here in Ohio, but … a … semi auto’s and “assault weapons”(self loading mid caliber rifles)are alive and well, kept not for hunting, but for the original purpose of the 2ndA.
I do not know anyone in my circle who supports any such ban.
Benjamin9 on September 13, 2008 at 2:41 AM
Gibson asked Obama about hubris, too.
Hubris is a great word for insulting the unwashed masses who do not know what the word means.
As Krauthammer notes:
slp on September 13, 2008 at 3:42 AM
You know Whoopi Goldberg after the first segment said..paraphrase..”I still dont know what she thinks or believes, and I didnt get questions answered from that interview.”
What the hell would she ask?? Gibson just threw the kitchen sink at her and is looking for the microwave.
malkinmania on September 13, 2008 at 6:38 AM
Gee FDR and Churchill bombed the hell out of Dresden and other civilian targets. It’s unfortunate but sometimes to break the enemy’s spirit/fighting, you have to make it so politically unacceptable to them that civilian centers become bombing targets it is truly regrettable but sometimes unavoidable, especially where terrorist take shelter in civilian areas. However, with respect to Iraq, not a single body has been produced to date to verify the ‘90 killed’ meme. The UN Ambassador is running against Karzai for President of Afghanistan and so has an interest in trumpeting anti american slanders there. He should have been sacked as soon as he announced it as his loyalties are now completely compromised.
eaglewingz08 on September 13, 2008 at 9:10 AM
Because in the case of the former, we are not specifically targeting civilians. In the case of the latter, the whole purpose of abortion is to snuff out a human life.
Imbecile.
ManlyRash on September 13, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Even Churchill distanced himself from the bombing. The use of a firestorm in a city that had increased in civilian population due to people fleeing the Russians is now questioned, since the civilian toll seems disproportionate to the strategic military gain.
dedalus on September 13, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Your weak arguments are still destroyed by the gloryhole. No attractiveness, no sweet talk, no eye contact, no body language, no gender, no nothing. It’s just a hole where you can place your genitals and recieve instant genital manipulation from whoever or whatever is on the other side.
TMK on September 13, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Dresden was a nightmare, no question about it. By that point in time, I suspect, Britain was determined to completely destroy Germany. When you consider what the Germans did to London and Coventry, I can’t say I blame them.
ManlyRash on September 13, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Really? Is anonymous sex unique to the gay world? What about straight men paying a streetwalker for oral? Is that based on having a girlfriend for a few minutes or is it more about genital manipulation?
One difference between straights and gays is that with a male/female relationship females provide a constraining factor–or at least some measure of decency and judgement. In an environment where the men are attracted to each other, there really is no restraint against vulgarity.
My original point was that sexual attraction tends to be formed before adulthood by a combination of factors. In some cases there may be contributing genetic factors, but if you were born and developed as a straight guy, and always liked girls, it would be difficult, and probably repulsive, to try and be stimulated by another male. In most cases for men physical attraction to the opposite sex is limited by criteria that varies among men–some men prefer women who are young, slim with large round boobs, maybe tall, or maybe a certain ethnicity. A man might be more attracted to a woman like that than an overweight woman in her 70s. The attraction would likely be immediate and natural and not something you needed to model in a spreadsheet or discuss with advisors before making your choice.
dedalus on September 13, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Well said and point made!
Here is what Barracuda’s SPEECHWRITER, Matt Scully, who wrote the excellent speech for her big convention debut, has to say about hunting. It’s revolting!
http://www.matthewscully.com/sportsman_politics.htm
Shelby on September 13, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Yeah, and some “adorable and sweet” hunters just shoot up some caribou and leave their babies trying to suckle milk from their DECOMPOSTING MOTHERS TWO WEEKS LATER!!!
http://www.adn.com/wildlife/story/478088.html
BTW, I am not a lib, but rather a pro-life right-leaning independent and vegetarian. I just hate cruelty, that’s all!
Shelby on September 13, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Loxodonta….very cool story! I’m glad neither you nor the moose were harmed.
Shelby on September 13, 2008 at 3:35 PM
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/06/29/questions-for-pooty-poot/
Shelby on September 13, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]