Video: Palin on three reasons why McCain lost

posted at 11:45 am on November 11, 2008 by Allahpundit

Seventeen minutes with Lauer, with the most interesting stuff right up front in chitchat about why they lost and her thwarted plan to introduce McCain’s concession speech and “brag him up.” Note the very first reason she lists for their defeat — before Obama’s money advantage, before even the anti-Republican tide. (She adds a fourth, the financial crisis, later on.) If you think she’s going to jettison her position on amnesty now that she’s free of Team Maverick’s clutches, I think you’re kidding yourself.

No talk here about 2012 but she and Greta covered that last night. The video’s available at the FNC website but it runs 45 minutes so stick with the transcript instead. The part in the very middle, about abortion as the ultimate wedge issue among feminists, is worthwhile, as is what she has to say near the end about the McCain camp having researched her votes as a Wasilla city council member 15 years ago before she was asked to join the ticket. So much for “She wasn’t vetted.” Exit question: Whom does she have in mind here? Hmmm.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

On immigration, I think there is no politician is going to deport 12 million illegals, I think someone should explore the policy of informing these people that there is a path to residency; but they can NEVER, EVER become a U.S. Citizen and they could never live off of Government assistance as a punishment of breaking the immigration laws. This way, they won’t be allowed to vote and change the dynamics of the country. I’m not sure that there is anything you can do about their kids who were born here unless you currently change the existing immigration law.

tdavisjr on November 11, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Not to mention saying F-you to the candidate, McCain, who co-sponsored the bill in the first place. Sounds a bit self-defeating to me.
thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 1:44 PM

McCain was known as the co-sponsor of the bill to those of us who follow politics closely. Most people wouldn’t be aware of McCain’s history, and he made no effort during the campaign to spotlight immigration. Matter of fact, immigration never came up during the entire campaign season, except for Obama’s campaign to paint McCain as a jack-booted thug who went after immigrants. Again, the Republican party brand drug down the candidate.

Outlander on November 11, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Outlander on November 11, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Are you forgetting the Spanish language ads addressing it directly?

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 2:05 PM

How many of us can stand there making supper, in front of TV cameras, not be nervous, and still carry on one of the most coherent conversations about her campaign and how the media treated her and Republicans during the campaign, with such coolness and panache?

Look me in the eye and tell me that there is nothing special about Sarah Palin and what she believes and stands for…………… If you do, then you are a LIAR.

The Woman is outstanding among Men and Women in the US today. A Republican who practices what she preaches, and believes there is a place for God, fiscal conservatism, Truth, Justice, and Compassion for others in every part of our world. And all we have to do is reach out and take those principles when they are offered, and repudiate forcefully those who would deman those values, usurp that authority, and destroy those principles of Faith, Honor, and Courage in the world today. You’ve got to stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything.

If you can tell me with a straight face that you aren’t impressed by Sarah…. then you ain’t a conservative anyway. Go find your own leader somewhere else. She is the phenomenon for our future. Ignore her at your peril, Dhimmicrats. Cause she’s got your number. And the heart of the Republican party belongs to her now.

Subsunk

Subsunk on November 11, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Put me in the group of “Dudes who want to have a beer with The Dude.”

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 11, 2008 at 2:17 PM

The anti-McCain vote was massive in “Red State” SoCal, where anti-tax, anti-illegal candidate Schwarzenegger swept in 2003 and Bush won by big margins in 2000 and 2004.

The drop in turnout was massive — 41% in 2008 vs 55% in 2004, in Riverside county.

Bush won Riverside County, San Diego County, and San Bernardino County. McCain lost them all.

Call it the McCain Effect.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Isn’t anyone going to hold Mark Salter accountable as the “leaker” of the Palin smears?

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:19 PM

Whether Palin supports amnesty or not doesn’t IMO matter. By the end of Obama’s first term it will be a done deal or the SC will be stocked with judges who will make it so. Just like Roe v Wade it will be the law of the land and somehow Republicans have to figure out how to minimize the impact.

katiejane on November 11, 2008 at 2:22 PM

The huge anti-McCain vote in SoCal almost cost McCain ground zero of Reagan County — Orange County, CA — home of the most Republican zip code in all of the United States.

Bush won OC with large margins, Schwarzenegger won it running against taxes and illegal immigration with MASSIVE margins.

McCain squeaked by with a tiny margin, almost losing heavily Republican OC.

And note well, McCain’s open borders politics cost his huge in Red State OC, and gained him almost nothing among hispanics.

This is reality, folks. Make of it what you will.

(and I know irrationality and fake “facts” are the favorite generator of columns among the conservative “intellectuals” right now.)

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:23 PM

McCain almost lost Arizona, for “The One’s” sake.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:26 PM

On immigration, I think there is no politician is going to deport 12 million illegals, I think someone should explore the policy of informing these people that there is a path to residency; but they can NEVER, EVER become a U.S. Citizen and they could never live off of Government assistance as a punishment of breaking the immigration laws. This way, they won’t be allowed to vote and change the dynamics of the country. I’m not sure that there is anything you can do about their kids who were born here unless you currently change the existing immigration law.

tdavisjr on November 11, 2008 at 1:57 PM

You know, that is not a BAD IDEA! I was about to unload about the mantra “deporting 12 to 30 million illegals”, but then I read on.
They will self-deport when the teet is removed and those that are actually working will not be able to change the demographics.
We need to fix the bastardization of the 14th amendment. My parents live in a neighborhood that has been invaded by illegal aliens. Their neighbor pops out a kid a year like a Pez dispenser. She has six kids so far. We, the tax payer, shouldn’t have to support this mess.
I don’t see this happening with Obama and company. But, still, a GREAT IDEA!

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 2:27 PM

“If you think she’s going to jettison her position on amnesty now that she’s free of Team Maverick’s clutches, I think you’re kidding yourself.”

I actually agree with her position. Many conservative hispanics do.

latinchic on November 11, 2008 at 11:57 AM

Getting the hispanic vote is one of top 3 priorities of the GOP over the next 4 to 8 years. Are there any noted hispanic leaders in the GOP?

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:30 PM

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:30 PM

Well, there was Alberto Gonzalez, but that didn’t work out terribly well as far as PR goes.

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 2:33 PM

If Palin runs as the amnesty candidate she’ll likely won’t be the nominee in 2012, and certainly won’t be elected President.

McCain’s open borders position damaged GOP turnout across the country, and gained him nothing with hispanics. The “McCain Effect” will hit Palin as well, if she aggressively pursues the McCain strategy on immigration. I’m guessing she will back burner the whole issue, unlike McCain (prior to his latest run for President).

In many places, McCains’ pandering positions on open borders was part of the reason most Republicans had such a negative view of the man — and this was true even among many in Arizona, where McCain barely one.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:33 PM

Potential here for $25,000-a-plate Republican fundraisers with Palin home cooked Moose stew……

Rockygold on November 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM

“If you think she’s going to jettison her position on amnesty now that she’s free of Team Maverick’s clutches, I think you’re kidding yourself.”

I actually agree with her position. Many conservative hispanics do.

latinchic on November 11, 2008 at 11:57 AM

Then, maybe you should start thinking like an AMERICAN!
Just a thought from one American of Mexican descent to another.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 2:35 PM

Now that we’re doing all these post-election postmortems, when can we do one on THE PRESS?

kurtzz3 on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM

Note well that a large segment of the hispanic population oppose the open borders position, and this is especially true among those with the right to vote.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 2:35 PM

Ooh, snap!

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 2:37 PM

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM

Even more so among those with the right to vote who would not be swayed by Dem giveaways.

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Note well that a large segment of the hispanic population oppose the open borders position, and this is especially true among those with the right to vote.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM

Yeah. They believe in the rule of law. They are not about identity politics.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM

Does Sullivan blog in pajamas? I thought he blogged naked.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM

The best thing the Gov. Palin could do for herself and us is to govern Alaska well. If the times are going to be as tough as the MSM says (why I should believe them now is beyond me) then her state must be her first priority. After family, obviously.

Cindy Munford on November 11, 2008 at 12:08 PM

Right on Cindy.

She must focus on Alaska including the tough budget with oil prices down plus keeping the ball rolling on the gas pipeline. She should run for re-election in 2010 and keep her image as outside Washington. Going to the senate would be a terrible mistake.

If interested in 2012, keep doing interviews, start a PAC to help 2010 congressional candidates, and lastly, and I’m not kidding about this, learn Spanish of the Mexican style and Cuban style.

Top priority though is Alaskans, “Sarah’s People”.

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:39 PM

If you think she’s going to jettison her position on amnesty now that she’s free of Team Maverick’s clutches, I think you’re kidding yourself.
Using “amnesty” as a dirty word for any immigration stance not pre-approved by Michelle Malkin is a poor substitute for political critique. On the larger issue, AP is probably right. Indeed, I’d put the odds are extremely high that Palin would be happy to accept some practical (or practical-looking) compromise that would drive a lot of people here right up the wall.

Might want to start figuring out how you’re going to deal with that. Exit question: What are the odds that HotAir turns on Sara bigtime?

CK MacLeod on November 11, 2008 at 12:13 PM

I won’t. If the GOP pushes the Trail of Tears on illegals, I’ll leave the party forever.

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:44 PM

Note well that a large segment of the hispanic population oppose the open borders position, and this is especially true among those with the right to vote.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Yeah. They believe in the rule of law. They are not about identity politics.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM

Yep. Secure the border. Path to citizenship. NO federal benefits or driver’s licenses, work program. That would be a sort of compromise that keeps with the ‘rule of law’.

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:48 PM

Yep. Secure the border. Path to citizenship. NO federal benefits or driver’s licenses, work program. That would be a sort of compromise that keeps with the ‘rule of law’.

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:48

I don’t believe we need to “compromise” with lawbreakers. NO PATH TO CITIZENSHIP. It is not a right, it is a privilage and there are millions around the world that are waiting their turn, doing it legally. Citizenship should not be given or earned because of proximity to the border.
Also, we need to clean up the problem of visa overstays.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 2:51 PM

I won’t. If the GOP pushes the Trail of Tears on illegals, I’ll leave the party forever.

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 2:44 PM

I could never support that. If the GOP ever tries to uproot the Mexican people from Mexico, force march them halfway across the continent and allow settlers to steal their land, then I will happily stand up and fight it. If you really mean we should allow a third of Mexico to cross our border and occupy ours? Then I say feel feel to leave the party.

Dawnsblood on November 11, 2008 at 2:57 PM

It just has to be fair, presented and backed by fair minded people.
We were never given that bill, so most of us did say f-it…and in turn the Hispanics felt we were saying F them.

right2bright on November 11, 2008 at 1:40 PM

You got that right. We let the MSM paint us as bigots rather than people who respect the law. Now many hispanics think the GOP is the white party when it isn’t. Add to that Obama’s disgusting racism adds over a whole election and you can clearly see the Dems are trying to put hispanics permanently on the Dem plantation like they have done to blacks. Are we gonna stop them? At least Sarah realizes we cannot ignore a whole growing demographic and expect to win nationally.

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM

Dawnsblood on November 11, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Seconded. No Trail of Tears!

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 3:08 PM

Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM

Let’s see what the Dems do with amnesty and all that. The ball is really in their court.
If they fail to follow thru-they are screwed.
If they pass amnesty-they are screwed when they destroy the country.
The MSM and the Dems put the “Hispanics” in one monolithic group of voters. Most are law abiding citizens that worked hard to get here and worked hard to make a life here. They are angry that lawbreakers are being rewarded with something they worked so hard for. We need to work it from that angle. Lawbreakers…taking from those that work hard to attain the American Dream.
Lawbreakers that game the welfare system, the healthcare system….at the cost of American tax payers….
They are not victims…

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM

Sara can easily handle metrosexual Matt and Katie Cupcake on her own dime . Shilling for that dusty old RINO will make anyone look bad.

She has learned how to use their gotcha questions to make them look ridiculous.

To live outside the law you must be honest.Sarah has nothing to hide and plenty to offer her country.

Sarah 2012.

About midway through the campaign, she mentioned to Greta Van Susteren that she was tired of “gotcha” questions, and that she wanted to “pivot” and talk about her own proposals, not submit to a “stump the candidate” quiz.

Let’s face it–in Alaska, she won election at the TOP of the ticket, it was HER candidacy, about what SHE would do, not McCain’s. She told Greta last night that although she admires McCain, that McCain was too “humble” for his own good, and she was bragging about McCain more than HE was.

I’m beginning to wonder whether McCain’s handlers stifled and blunted her message in the early going, and those over-edited interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric left a lasting mark on the voters, which she could not subsequently erase.

By 2012, McCain will no longer be a candidate–why would the party re-nominate the previous loser at age 76? Sarah Palin will by then be a second-term Governor, and will probably have spent lots of time on interviews and speeches on national policy, and won’t have to defend the Bush Administration, and she can honestly portray herself as a “change” from the Obama Administration without jumping through intellectual hoops.

She won’t have to play second-fiddle to McCain any more, and even if she is the VP nominee under Bobby Jindal, the two get along famously, and would complement each other. After four years of Obama, she would look like a refreshing alternative, at the ripe old age of 48. Sarah will be back!

Steve Z on November 11, 2008 at 3:14 PM

She does need to stop defending John McCain. He is not defending her, he’s too busy consoling Lindsay Graham.

It is time that we know what SHE believes and waht SHE stands for. It will help her in the days ahead.

She was stifled by the old Rino, but now she is free to be herself. I hope she lives up to her ‘Cuda name. The campaign and McCain have cut her loose.
Let ‘er rip, Cuda.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:22 PM

Not to ignore the debate on immigration, but I’m interested in hearing her answer on ‘Obama as commander-in-chief’ that Lauer teased this morning.

meltenn on November 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM

SARAH AND TODD:

Don’t become part of the Republican Establishment. That would be the worst mistake you could ever make. The less control over they have over you, the better. Align yourself with decent God-fearing people who govern according to God’s Word, and everything will work out fine. Here is the BLUEPRINT: Following what God says is more important than folowing the professional conservatives and so-called experts who never get it right. The Bible is right! What GOD says is what’s right! He is the ONE with the power to seat and unseat kings (Psalm 75:6-7) and who causes blessings to fall (Psalm 145) on those He chooses. “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” (II Chronicles 7:14) This is the secret to change.

apacalyps on November 11, 2008 at 3:31 PM

Not to ignore the debate on immigration, but I’m interested in hearing her answer on ‘Obama as commander-in-chief’ that Lauer teased this morning.

meltenn on November 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM

I’d bet a whole mess of our soldiers would sooner give Obama the finger than a salute.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:35 PM

I think it is so funny now all of these guys are going up to Alaska to interview her. They are going to her, she’s not going to them. She’s on her turff now.

Brat4life on November 11, 2008 at 3:35 PM

I think it is so funny now all of these guys are going up to Alaska to interview her. They are going to her, she’s not going to them. She’s on her turff now.

I think that’s a smart move on her part as well. She’s in the position of power. I really enjoyed how cold Lauer looked during his live shots too. Seeing him look cold and miserable really brightened my morning.

meltenn on November 11, 2008 at 3:38 PM

I think it is so funny now all of these guys are going up to Alaska to interview her. They are going to her, she’s not going to them. She’s on her turff now.

Brat4life on November 11, 2008 at 3:35 PM

Take them ‘snipe’ hunting in the Alaskan wilderness. Open season on jell-o-spines.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:38 PM

I have nothing insightful about this, only to say, what a waste of time. Even for Sarah Palin. That was an incredibly boring interview, with no new information, and surmounted itself into nothing more then a snooze fest. No fault of Sarah’s mind you, but, there was simply nothing of interest in both the MSNBC interviews.

cabbageheat on November 11, 2008 at 3:40 PM

I like Palin and I think that she will probably take a view on immigration that she considers reasonable and just.

I think the immigration debate hurt Republicans. We are losing voters and hispanics are among them. I am not saying that we have to give up a secure border or anything like that, but sometimes the way you say things matters almost as much as what you say. And I think some folks on the right were too strident in their rhetoric and in the process they did not just alienate illegals, they alienated an entire demographic. I know people don’t like hearing that, but we have got to stop running people off. The Democrats just love to stir stuff like this up in the hopes that they can create divisions and exploit the situation. That needs to stop.

Terrye on November 11, 2008 at 3:41 PM

The figures I was given on turnout in Riverside were bogus.

Turnout was closer to 60%.

PrestoPundit on November 11, 2008 at 3:44 PM

I agree, Terrye. There has to be an angle that it is hurting hard working Americans. Stop making the illegals victims. They are lawbreakers and they are lowering wages, breaking our welfare and healthcare systems.

The thing is…..Democrats and Republicans BOTH agree on this idea that illegals should be forced to follow the rule of law.

Yes, they are here for jobs. But, at what expense. They are lowering wages, taking jobs from high school students and those not wanting to attend college.

They have taken over the construction, landscaping, hospitality, service industries. Americans would do these jobs if they paid a living wage. They need these jobs because they cannot be outsourced overseas. They are secure jobs.

If they came over and paid taxes, worked hard, and obeyed the law. Fine. But, they come over and overwhelm our medical system, don’t pay taxes and lower wages, and game the welfare system.

It is not fair for American tax payers and we need to work it from that angle. Americans can understand the bottom line. They can understand that they are hurting and these people are TAKING from their wallets!

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:48 PM

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:48 PM

Don’t forget other problems like identity theft.

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:48 PM

Don’t forget other problems like identity theft.

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM

Illegal immigration has its fingerprints all over the current problems of the United States. We cannot burden our economy with another country’s welfare seekers and uneducated. Oh, and their criminals.

HornetSting on November 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM

ThackerAgency on November 11, 2008 at 12:57 PM

You bring up one of the most important arguments regarding the entire issue.

How long has DC been telling us Social Security is going bankrupt?

Now we’re supposed to believe adding 20 million additional mouths
(most of whom have not paid into the system) is not going to make the SS issue more critical? Many of the hispanic immigrants are hard working; but every dime they make gets sent back to Mexico while they continue to bleed our health and social systems dry.

I live in NE Pa. I’m the granddaughter of Welsh immigrants. Legal immigrants. My father and his 2 brothers didn’t finish high
school because my grandfather was injured in a mine accident.
I asked my Dad why they didn’t hold on and at least finish high school. He said it was a matter of pride. If the family would have put out its’ hands for charity with 3 healthy sons in the family, they would have been shamed. He said in those days charity was for widows with children too young to work.

NE Pa. is still an area with citizens barely 2 generations from immigrant status; yet this area was very open with its’ disgust at the amnesty DC tried to foist upon us. These people played by the rules; many of them from eastern bloc countries where their lives were at risk. Their sense of fair play was being challenged.

A well run guest worker program would be acceptable to most of us. Uncle Sam showering its’ goodies upon one group while strictly enforcing immigration laws upon all other groups will always be met with resentment and resistance.

poodlemom on November 11, 2008 at 4:02 PM

…But rather than fight for a bill that made sense, we just said “aww, f— it” and condemned the entire effort. And that really turned Hispanic voters off.

Outlander on November 11, 2008 at 1:25 PM

Actually, No. Many of us tried to push for a little law enforcement, a la the Dec. 2005 Sensenbrenner bill (unfortunately with it’s Democrat-voted poison pill ‘felony’ amendment) and the almost successful SAVE Act, sponsored by a Democrat, Heath Schuler, but not allowed a vote by Pelosi and friends.

Attrition through enforcement is favored
by the vast majority of Americans, and it would have made a winning issue for either a Democrat or Republican presidential candidate. Just look at the numbers. Both native born citizens and legal immigrants respect the law. Mistakenly trying to out-pander the Democrats for “The (sic) Hispanic vote” by flaunting respect for the law earned McCain his loss of the Republican and Conservative base (including 40% of Hispanics!!), hurt his fund-raising, and eventually cost him the election.

fred5678 on November 11, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Palin on Couric interview bit

Phoenician on November 11, 2008 at 4:33 PM

The most critical issue in the immigration debate that should be getting the most attention at the moment before anything else is the need to ensure that the United States Borders are secure. That is not only an immigration issue but a vital national security issue. I mean whats the point in rounding up illegals and deporting them when porous borders allow twice as many illegals to sneak into the country each day as you can catch and kick out in a week.

Secure the borders first and then decide how to deal with the illegal immigrants already inside the country. In other words an ounce of prevention is much better than a cure.

Dreadnought223 on November 11, 2008 at 4:38 PM

If you think she’s going to jettison her position on amnesty now that she’s free of Team Maverick’s clutches, I think you’re kidding yourself.

Where the HELL do you get this from???

In Lauer’s interview, there is not one specific mention of immigration at all. Palin says early on in the first segment that one of the reasons they lost (of several) is that they didn’t get the Hispanic vote. That hardly translates to her saying “I’m pro-amnesty.” After that, not one other mention of immigration, or Hispanics in either of the clips with Lauer.

Searching the transcripts of the interview with Greta, one finds neither a single mention of Hispanics or the immigration issue. So you are basically basing your opinion of her as a McCain-like amnesty shill based on one mention of Hispanic votes in her interview with Lauer, and what was discussed on the previous post, in which she said:

As governor, how do you deal with them? Do you think they all should be deported?

There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant -there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants- not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.

So here you penalize her becasue she didn’t fall for the strawman of “you can’t deport them all” which was used by those who were pushing amnesty. Nice.

Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?
No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They’ve got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.

Here she comes out and directly says she does not favor amnesty. Probably not good enough for you, because she qualified it with the word ‘total’ – after which she directly state that those who are here legally should be first in line and that people should follow the rules. On balance, that’s hardly a pro-amnesty position – so where you get that she shares McCain’s lust for amnesty is still a mystery.

To clarify, so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?
I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.

Here’s the only quote where you really have anything, because of her “I do” at the beginning of her answer. But then she states nothing more than she can understand why people want to be in the US (hardly controversial) and then again goes back a second time to stating that it is important that people follow the rules, which could arguably be interpreted as anti-amnesty. This answer might need some clarification, but again, it hardly makes her pro-amnesty in the same manner as McCain.

You are simply being dishonest to portray her that way. Get a job at the NYTimes.

thirteen28 on November 11, 2008 at 4:39 PM

thirteen28 on November 11, 2008 at 4:39 PM

She’s basically parroting McCain talking points on the issue, which is where he gets the idea she agrees with him. I doubt its an issue that really effects Alaska so much, unless they have illegal immigrants sailing over from Russia. She should visit areas adversely affected by illegal immigration before committing to a side politically.

thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 5:16 PM

Are we really still talking about her? REALLY?

chiefeditor on November 11, 2008 at 5:20 PM

Unfortunantly it will be hard to win elections without the hispanic vote.

Last time I checked, Hispanics were still a minority. A growing one, yes, but a minority.

If a smart candidate can appeal to a person’s brain and not their skin color, the candidate can win the vote. It’s like a woman showing cleavage (intentionally or not) and having to say ‘hey, my eyes are up HERE!’ to the guy talking to her chest.

Have an intelligent dialogue with the citizenry regardless of their skin color and you will earn their trust. Pander to the race issues and you will lose.

Biffstir on November 11, 2008 at 7:21 PM

The one thing that comes through loud and clear through both segments is that Matt Lauer is such a transparent phony. He is a repugnant little man. He is sooo two faced. I would have drop kicked him down the driveway after 10 minutes. He went to Alaska for only one reason, to repeat ad nauseum all the clap trap that he knew was false hoping that she would screw up casting more doubt, so he could continue the smear back home. He never ever stops playing gotcha.

How does he even look himself in the mirror?

patrick neid on November 11, 2008 at 7:26 PM

I do wish Matt Lauer wouldn’t have interrupted her so much. But maybe that was due to editing.

irishspy on November 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM

Watch out!

She’s our Rock!

Oh, how they fear her…understandably.

She is the American Maggie Thatcher.

Saltysam on November 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2