Couric wins award for Palin interviews; Update: Why not the Biden interview? Update: Video added
posted at 9:29 am on March 14, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Well, if this thread doesn’t get 200 comments, it’s back to Anna Nicole Smith posts for the rest of the weekend. Katie Couric won USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center’s Walter Cronkite Award for her interview with Sarah Palin. The school noted the impact the interview had on the election:
Evening News anchor Katie Couric was honored for her “extraordinary, persistent and detailed multi-part interviews with Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin” which judges called a “defining moment in the 2008 presidential campaign.”
She was given the award for Special Achievement for National Impact on the 2008 Campaign.
The award was given by Reliable Resources, a group run out of the USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center at the University of Southern California. It’s mission statement says “Reliable Resources was created to help generate conversation and ideas on improving broadcast political coverage. Broadcast news, network and local, has declined significantly as a primary source for campaign news. Our project seeks to design and distribute tools which would make political news enlightening, informative and exciting to local and network broadcasters.”
For the conspiracy minded, some may remember that the man helped most by Couric’s gotcha moments worked for an Annenberg outfit at one time himself. Barack Obama ran the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, his only executive experience and a complete flop at improving education. Norman Lear also had an obvious political interest in seeing Couric torpedo Palin, as his “Born Again Americans” website proudly proclaims.
Did that have any impact on the decision to give Couric the award? I doubt it, at least not directly, but it certainly provides some context for the mindset of this particular slice of Academia.
Clearly, though, Couric didn’t win the award for journalism. Couric is busy defining “anchor” back to its original meaning. She has pulled CBS news to the bottom of the ratings for broadcast news programs, far back from her two competitors. All three networks have seen their audiences rapidly decline over the last 15 years, but Couric has made the trend line much worse for CBS since taking over in 2006, as this graph from TV By The Numbers shows:
Of course, quantitative analysis doesn’t address quality, which is the point of this award. Qualitatively, though, CBS falls into the same position, according to this Pew Research poll. CBS ranked dead last in both broadcast and cable news shows for informing their audiences. Viewers apparently realize this and have fled CBS as a news source. That’s what makes the name of the award so ironic; Cronkite was the most trusted name in broadcast news during his career and CBS the unquestioned king of the jungle. Now they’re a joke, and while that may not be all Couric’s fault, she’s at least a major part of the problem.
None of this comes as a shock to John Ziegler, whose new documentary Media Malpractice dissects the Couric interview and criticizes its hostility and advocacy. I’d send a copy to the USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center, but the advocacy is probably what they liked the most.
Update: I guess the USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center never saw Katie’s crack journalistic work with Joe Biden. CBS crabbed at YouTube and got the video taken down, but the flavor remains:
Joe Biden’s denunciation of his own campaign’s ad to Katie Couric got so much attention last night that another odd note in the interview slipped by.
He was speaking about the role of the White House in a financial crisis.
“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed,” Biden told Couric. “He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’”
FDR wasn’t President when the stock market crashed, and he didn’t get on TV until a decade later — but Couric never seems to notice either gaffe. Why? She wasn’t out to get Joe Biden.
Update II: Ed Driscoll found the video of the Biden interview and has more:
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 2 3 4 Next »
The midget bigot gets the respect she deserves….NONE. For a bigot to get an award from a group of bigots is reinforcement for what liberalism is all about. Being as smart as everyone else in the box is reassuring for liberals who cannot think outside the box. In fact, liberalism cannot exist outside the box where “independent thinking” is the norm rather than the brainwashed environment where all think alike and cannot comprehend any other way of thinking other than that of being “programmed”.
volsense on March 14, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Right. And Krauthammer and Will both have Pulitzers. Of course the point isn’t that Conservatives never win major awards, but only that their victories are few and far in between. Clearly there is a prejudice against them.
DarkKnight3565 on March 14, 2009 at 6:35 PM
ProudPalinFan on March 14, 2009 at 6:26 PM
When I made my argument at C4P about her not running for re-election but perhaps running for Murkowski’s seat I was trying to explain Sarah’s options to lay people who might not have a full understanding of American politics or politics in Alaska.
Actually I would prefer that Sarah not run for re-election or for Murkowski’s seat. That would allow her to free up her time and energies to devote almost full-time (remember she will still have her Governor’s duties to perform)to the 2010 mid-terms which she has declared through SarahPAC her intentions to support and/or fund conservative candidates who think like her.
Sarah needs to be on the ground in the lower 48 talking to the people in 2010. It’s as simple as that.
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 6:36 PM
Direct quote.
RobCon on March 14, 2009 at 6:42 PM
she is a skank
bill30097 on March 14, 2009 at 6:55 PM
By the way do you remember Katie’s question to Sarah about Kissinger’s position on Iran, and when Sarah disputed the accuracy of Katie’s assertion, Katie maintained it was accurate.
Well, do you remember McCain made the same assertion as
Sarah in the first debate and that Kissinger went on record to back McCain as to the accuracy of how he felt talks with Iran should be structured.
Well Sarah made the same assertion to Katie Couric. Did Couric or CBS ever apologize to Sarah for asserting a erroneous premise?
No!
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Somebody remind cr6 and crapitulus that Gov. Palin has written op-ed pieces that have appeared in major papers including the NY slimes. Or can they not read with their eyes full of Obama’s DNA?
OlympicLeprechaun on March 14, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Sweet ain’t it!———NOT!
So,Liberal Tip of the Spear,Search and Destroy Mission
good little Lefty Soldier ‘Perky’,Katie Couric gets a
‘Medal of Honour’,for her heroic dirty little verbal
ambush of Governor Sarah Palin,by her Socialist peers!
And yet,she’s orgasmicly so thrilled to interview Biden-
Gaffe,and allowes him all the time in the world,at his
leisure to answer Katie’s softball questions!–GACK!!
canopfor on March 14, 2009 at 7:26 PM
I wonder if Katie is celebrating on The Daily Kos blog. I am sure that She and the Kos kooks are partying over this.
Dire Straits on March 14, 2009 at 7:43 PM
Do you have any insider info that Sarah will run definitely for re-election?
Because if you don’t know for sure, I made an argument over at
http://www.conservatives4palin.com (open thread Saturday)
why she should NOT run for re-election if she intends to run for POTUS in 2012.
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 6:21 PM
Actually, I did read your excellent post at http://www.conservatives4palin.com about Sarah not running for re-election. I agree with you and I think that it would free Sarah up tremendously. She could travel the world, have more time to focus on writing her book(s), sit on influential policy boards and political “think tank” groups, etc. She also would be free of all those envious “ankle biters” from both parties in Alaska who are trying to bring her down (all the petty crap that Sarah has to deal with up there really ticks me off!). SarahPAC opens so many doors for Sarah.
I don’t know if Sarah will run for a 2nd term as Governor. Mitt Romney only served 1 term as Governor of Mass. and that has not kept him from advancing in the political arena.
I believe that Sarah does have a “servant’s heart” and will run for re-election if she feels it to be in the best interests of her constituents. She also has to consider her family’s well being.
From what I have observed, Sarah has a big enough following of loyal supporters that will back her in 2012 whether or not she serves a 2nd term as Governor.
sarahpalinfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Rode hard and put up wet.
JonRoss on March 14, 2009 at 8:04 PM
Katie Couric performed a huge service to America by exposing Sarah Palin for the fool that she is. From then on, she became, and will remain, a walking punchline.
“Can I get a lifeline? Can I phone a friend?” No way to rehabilitate that image!
capitulus on March 14, 2009 at 8:08 PM
And the funny thing was, that even though Archie Bunker was a caricature of a conservative, intended to give people something to laugh at, he was still the most popular character on the show.
Only reason I can see is because he was never politically correct.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on March 14, 2009 at 8:10 PM
A little wax on her upper lip would help, especially on the right side.
JonRoss on March 14, 2009 at 8:18 PM
I’m not exactly a Sarah Palin groupie, but I am impressed with her overall. I especially share your about the master slimers. One of life’s greatest pleasures is when they’re scratching their heads and saying, “How did this happen? Didn’t the American people hear what we were saying?”
I remember well the second Reagan term, where they couldn’t understand how people could have voted for the man after all the dirt they had thrown his way. Of course, they decided he was just too likeable. They just couldn’t wrap their heads around the idea that the people heard every word of the attacks, but didn’t buy them.
I’d also like to see a Sarah Palin/Jeb Bush ticket in 2012, just to ensure maximum heads exploding.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on March 14, 2009 at 8:18 PM
Damn, didn’t Tina Fey get an Emmy or something for portraying the big-eared version of Sarah Palin on SNL? Guess bitches that helped take Sarah down get lots of love from the lib freaks. Don’t Couric and Fey wish they were half the woman Sarah is.
RepubChica on March 14, 2009 at 8:42 PM
sarahpalinfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Unlike most politicians, Sarah Palin’s problems with running for higher office, when she encouters some bumps on the road, will NOT be her popularity dropping, poll numbers falling, whether she can raise boatloads of money or convince volunteers to work for her. It will be the Obama Alinsky-Goebbels propaganda tactics in collusion with the MSM that Sarah will have to be most concerned about.
That is why it is vital that Sarah build a team of streetwise, savvy, tough stalwarts who will fight the Fascist and slimy tacticians tooth and nail and not allow Sarah to be marginalized and demonized as she was in 2008.
But Sarah and her millions of supporters have an ace in the hole: Media Malpractice.
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 8:53 PM
capitulus on March 14, 2009 at 8:08 PM
Umm, then how do explain Obama’s 57 states and his other complete blunders? Explain that for us ass wipe.
Keemo on March 14, 2009 at 9:34 PM
katie who?
BHO Jonestown on March 14, 2009 at 9:45 PM
The interviews were pretty funny, but I don’t think anybody would have too much trouble stumping sarah palin.
benny shakar on March 14, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Lefties giving lefties awards. What’s next? Oscars and Emmy’s for Algore?
Oh… Wait…
trigon on March 14, 2009 at 9:54 PM
Nahhhh. You guys will be the punchline soon enough.
Unlike Obama, she at least knows what a “budget” is.
ddrintn on March 14, 2009 at 10:10 PM
One thing I remember is the sensible answer she gave to Gibson about the nature of the NATO alliance. On CNN, Obama groupie Toobin said Palin’s answer was, well, “odd”; Lou Dobbs then lit into Toobin with something like, “NOTE TO TOOBIN: Palin just explained very clearly what an alliance IS. There was nothing odd at all in her answer.”
I hope the bastards keep underestimating her.
ddrintn on March 14, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Grammies for Obama? Nah.
Jim62sch on March 14, 2009 at 10:15 PM
ddrintn alone accounts for 12% of the posts on this thread.
I bet your xbox hates sarah palin!
benny shakar on March 14, 2009 at 10:20 PM
Don’t have an xbox, so don’t know what your point is.
ddrintn on March 14, 2009 at 10:28 PM
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 8:53 PM
I can’t tell you how often I come across people who say they hate Sarah Palin because they think she is some hard right wing “fascist” neocon republican who wants to force her religious views on everyone. When I explain that Sarah is really a libertarian conservative and governs that way, it blows their minds. They can’t believe the MSM would deliberately distort Sarah’s record (“you mean she didn’t ban books and is smart enough to negotiate international multi-party energy projects?”). Sarah is a big fan of Ron Paul (I believe she was a supporter and also of Steve Forbes).
I was aware of Sarah’s record before McCain picked her as VP because I would read about all the bold things she was doing up in Alaska (fighting oil companies, ousting a sitting governor, taking on the federal government and suing for Alaska’s rights to develop and sell more of its energy resources, etc.). I just couldn’t believe the way the MSM distorted the truth about Sarah during the 2008 election. The MSM left me speechless many nights.
The MSM has great power. For example, my teenage cousins have to watch CNN Students News at school and they would tell me how the CNN coverage was negative against Sarah but not Obama. So it turned out that most of their fellow students had negative opinions about Sarah. A lot of schools do show CNN Students News so think of all the young minds that are being manipulated.
My copy of Media Malpractive just arrived! I can’t wait to see what John Ziegler and Sarah have to say.
sarahpalinfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Classic Palin Supporter Quotes:
“Perhaps I am an outlier, but I don’t WANT a super-smart president.” – Palin Supporter
“Socialism works within limits when there is enough prosperity to go around.” – Palin Supporter
“States are similar to businesses and when growth is possible you grow.” – Palin Supporter
Poptech on March 14, 2009 at 11:02 PM
Total Propaganda. She is not a Libertarian Conservative.
MODERATOR: “…do you support capping carbon emissions?”
PALIN: “I do. I do.”
Alaska Gov. Palin signs bill to hike oil tax to 25%(Reuters)
Poptech on March 14, 2009 at 11:04 PM
sarahplainfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 10: 58 PM
In a previous post I claimed that anybody who defined anybody (like Poptech) based on one sub-par interview with Couric and could not put it in the context of several interviews that Sarah had done before Couric and after Couric has either been deprived of a good education or become a Fascist or maybe a combination of both.
What do you think?
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 11:08 PM
You mean like the interview where she lied about reading the Wall Street Journal and the Economists and just magically forgot this in the Ziegler interview?
Palin Claims She Reads ‘The Economist’ (Video)
ROFLMAO!
Poptech on March 14, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Poptech on March 14, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Eric Dondero, editor of the Libertarian Republican Blog, is a fan of Sarah Palin and considers her a libertarian. That’s good enough for me.
As for being a conservative even the MSM wouldn’t deny that Sarah Palin is a conservative.
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Poptech on March 14, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Eric Dondero, editor of the Libertarian Republican Blog, is a fan of Sarah Palin and considers her a libertarian. That’s good enough for me.
As for being a conservative even the MSM wouldn’t deny that Sarah Palin is a conservative.
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 11:11 PM
William Ruger wrote the following in the Alaska Daily News
http://www.adn.com/opinion/compass/story/481970.html:
“But most important, Palin could do something few Republicans seem interested in or able to do these days: Help fuse the two pillars of the Reagan Revolution, traditional conservatives and libertarian Republicans.
Palin can win the hearts of conservatives, given her strong pro-life views — views that were backed up with action this year when she gave birth to a son with Down’s syndrome. It would probably also help with these folks that her oldest son recently enlisted in the Army. And she can excite libertarian Republicans, given her fiscal conservatism as governor as well as her reputation for anti-corruption, love of guns and the outdoor life, and moderation on social issues other than abortion.”
Sarah Palin received the endorsement of the Libertarian Party of Alaska when she ran for Governor in 2006.
sarahpalinfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 11:25 PM
In a previous post I claimed that anybody who defined anybody (like Poptech) based on one sub-par interview with Couric and could not put it in the context of several interviews that Sarah had done before Couric and after Couric has either been deprived of a good education or become a Fascist or maybe a combination of both.
What do you think?
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 11:08 PM
I think Poptech works for or is involved in promoting one of Sarah’s rivals. That’s ok – We have plenty of people who have Sarah’s back and will defend her this time around like you said.
sarahpalinfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 11:37 PM
sarahpalinfan99 on March 14, 2009 at 11:25 PM
There were 2 egregious errors made by the McCain campaign when they rolled out Sarah:
1)Cindy McCain on George Stephanopoulos claiming that Sarah Palin was knowledgeable on foreign affairs because of Alaska’s proximity to Russia; can you believe the idiot wife of a Presidential candidate going on TV and handing the Libs the gift of the century
–from that point Sarah was locked into that position and having to explain what it meant and why it was significant; and Tina Fey got rich off that theme.
2)the McCain campaign not emphasizing Sarah’s libertarian credentials and thus allowing the MSM to define Sarah as book-burning, abstinence-believing religious wacko and moron.
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Everyone knows Palin’s faults and why would a biased reporter like Couric get an award with her questions? She has no talent in asking leftist’s difficult questions or that I am not aware of any difficult questions were ever asked by her. Couric is simply a propagandist whether Palin is a fraud or not.
garydt on March 14, 2009 at 11:54 PM
What was even more disturbing is Couric going on Letterman’s program and mocking Sarah.
That’s like a quarterback telling the press that his star receiver is a piece of s**t.
Some things should stay in the locker room. How unprofessional Katie!
technopeasant on March 14, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Its funny that you blame cindy mccain, when crazy sarah herself said:
“We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia… They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska… I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries.”
And:
“Our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of.”
There’s no denying, she sounds pretty much like Miss Teen South Carolina.
benny shakar on March 15, 2009 at 12:07 AM
I saw Couric’s Letterman interview after the election and she sure looked like a fool sitting there because David just kept going on and on about how hot Sarah Palin was and how Sarah was the only VP candidate that ever got him “aroused.” David must have a secret obsession for Sarah (I think Olbermann does do in a sick, twisted way)! That’s all he was focused on instead of Couric who was his guest. The whole thing was so LOL – Couric seemed so envious and small.
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Ooops! – I meant “…Olbermann does too in a sick, twisted way…”
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 12:15 AM
Please show me where the Libertarian supports capping carbon emissions. I love how social conservatives try to spread propaganda about a political ideology they don’t even understand.
Palin Gibson Interview (Video)
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 12:16 AM
benny shakar:
Cindy McCain appeared on George’s show on Aug. 31, 2008 and revealed that McCain talking point.
Sarah Palin said the above on Gibson’s program on September 11, 2008 because she was locked into that point by the idiots at the McCain campaign.
technopeasant on March 15, 2009 at 12:17 AM
She was also right. From a Slate article (no friend of Palin):
I mean, it’s not like she’s going around saying Afghans speak Arabic, now, is it?
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 12:16 AM
You are living in the past. McCain’s 2008 campaign is over. Sarah was John’s running mate and had to support John’s positions. Just like Joe Biden had to reverse his positions on clean coal, Iraq war and surge, Obama’s readiness for being President, and many other issues when Biden became Obama’s running mate.
That is why we always hear the famous story of how Bush I had to flip from calling Reaganomics “voodoo economics” when he became Reagan’s VP.
Part of the VP candidate’s role is to support the Presidential candidate’s policies (whether you sincerely believe it in your heart or not). It’s called politics. You can not remain on the ticket if you are undermining the top of the ticket.
In 2012 if Sarah runs for President, she will campaign on her own ideas and policies and that is what voters will evaluate her on. She and other Presidential contenders will have more time to study and evaluate the merits/pitfalls of cap and trade policies (which may already be in place under Obama and the Dem Congress). We will find out her opinions and that of the other candidates then.
As Mitt Romney has demonstrated it is possible to have a particular opinion an issue at one time and later change your mind after evaluation and thought (like Romney’s change of position on abortion, for example).
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 12:37 AM
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 12:29 AM
If only Sarah would have said “The RESIDENTS of Little Diomede can see the island of Big Diomede which lies in Russian territory and they are only 3 miles apart.”
technopeasant on March 15, 2009 at 12:48 AM
Then it would’ve been, “She was obviously coached”.
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 12:49 AM
I also think that the lovely Governor, unlike our Communist-in-Chief, has sense enough to know how many terms the President serves and that asthmatics are not treated with breathalyzers, though I think Benny and Pop should be.
Lagging behind, aren’t you Pop? You haven’t posted the obligatory resumes yet. Or did your owner not wind you up this morning? Be careful that the key in your back doesn’t tear the upholstery.
OlympicLeprechaun on March 15, 2009 at 12:58 AM
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 12:49 AM
At least that would have taken her out of the equation and provide a point of reference one could see Russia from and by specifying the residents of the island she would be taking herself out of the equation by saying later “I don’t live on Little Diomede.
technopeasant on March 15, 2009 at 1:06 AM
Please show me where Palin does not support capping carbon emissions, months and month and months and no evidence to dispute her own words.
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 1:09 AM
I disagree with Sarah Palin’s position on cap and trade; sort of like you disagree with Romneycare. But yet apparently idolize the man.
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 1:15 AM
This is a position Palin took in her debate with Biden in order to comply with McCain’s talking points. Not before or after have I heard this comment echoed. As you might know the VP candidate has to parrot what the Presidential candidate runs on. That’s just the way the game is played. Even Mark Levin, a fan of Palin acknowledged this on National Review after the debate.
technopeasant on March 15, 2009 at 1:36 AM
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 1:09 AM
As I said in my post above, Cap and Trade was McCain’s big deal. He and Joe Lieberman along with Barbara Boxer tried to get Cap and Trade legislation passed last year but it failed big time in Congress. Sarah was being a good soldier and supporting McCain’s policies (just like all good VP candidates do for their running mates). She can’t just come out now and say McCain is an idiot for believing in Cap and Trade.
By 2012, Sarah will have had time to study and develop her own policy positions regarding Cap and Trade. Cap and Trade policy is for President Obama and Congress to decide. It is not a priority for Sarah as Governor of Alaska nor is such legislation under her control. She has her hands full governing her state. However, you can trust that she will fight Obama and the Dem’s Cap and Trade policies if they are burdensome and detrimental to Alaska’s economy. The same way she went after the Bush administration when it placed the polar bear on the endangered species list which negatively impacts Alaska’s ability to develop and profit from its natural resources.
That’s why I love Sarah. She has her principles but she is open minded and willing to study and decide policy issues based on common sense and facts. I don’t expect Sarah to always be right on all issues but I like her approach to governing which is fair and pragmatic.
It seems that you are inclined to not support Sarah for POTUS which is your prerogative. However, none of us can say what her positions will be on Cap and Trade in 2012 with certainty until she has had time to develop such positions on her own apart from McCain’s influence. Cap and Trade just has not been a major focus of her current duties as Governor.
As I also stated above, candidates can be wrong about an issue and later change their position after learning more about and reviewing that issue (like Mitt Romney and others have done on certain issues).
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 1:40 AM
Please show me where Palin does not support capping carbon emissions
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 1:45 AM
I don’t know what Couric’s contribution is. She happened to be in the same room with a patented illiterate moron. It’s not like she exposed an extremely skillful and articulate politician. Outsmarting an amoeba shouldn’t be rewarded with a prize.
radiofreevillage on March 15, 2009 at 2:02 AM
So she is, even when she’s alone. And if you ever find yourself in the same room with Ms. Couric, then you’d be two.
notropis on March 15, 2009 at 2:50 AM
Why, exactly, do you think Palin’s an “illiterate moron?” Because she flubbed some interviews? Or because she doesn’t hold to your own particular political philosophy?
Because I don’t see how you’ve got the evidence to reasonably assert that she’s that dumb.
Although I agree that Couric’s role there wasn’t particularly impressive.
TheUnrepentantGeek on March 15, 2009 at 2:54 AM
Please show me where Palin does not support capping carbon emissions
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 1:45 AM
From the pro-liberal and pro-environmental Minnesota Independent publication:
http://minnesotaindependent.com/9799/palins-alaska-environmental-policy-no-way-no-how-no-science-and-no-polar-bears
“Indeed, when Palin came into office, her administration retained its predecessor’s opposition to a multi-state lawsuit that accused the EPA of failing to regulate emissions standards in new vehicles. Fearing that a successful case might bode poorly for the oil and gas producers on which the state’s economy depends, former Governor Frank Murkowski had filed a respondent’s brief in Massachusetts, et. al., v. Environmental Protection Agency, arguing with several other states — Michigan, Ohio, Texas and South Dakota among them — that the Clean Air Act does not permit federal curtailment of greenhouse gases. As a candidate, Palin had endorsed the filing; in the spring of 2007, the Supreme Court ruled against the EPA.”
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 3:17 AM
Sorry that does not refute her more recent comments about supporting capping carbon emissions.
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 3:26 AM
Please show me where Palin does not support capping carbon emissions
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 1:45 AM
From the pro-liberal and pro-environmental Minnesota Independent publication:
http://minnesotaindependent.com/9799/palins-alaska-environmental-policy-no-way-no-how-no-science-and-no-polar-bears
“Indeed, when Palin came into office, her administration retained its predecessor’s opposition to a multi-state lawsuit that accused the EPA of failing to regulate emissions standards in new vehicles. Fearing that a successful case might bode poorly for the oil and gas producers on which the state’s economy depends, former Governor Frank Murkowski had filed a respondent’s brief in Massachusetts, et. al., v. Environmental Protection Agency, arguing with several other states — Michigan, Ohio, Texas and South Dakota among them — that the Clean Air Act does not permit federal curtailment of greenhouse gases. As a candidate, Palin had endorsed the filing; in the spring of 2007, the Supreme Court ruled against the EPA.”
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 3:17 AM
Sorry that does not refute her more recent comments about supporting capping carbon emissions.
Poptech on March 15, 2009 at 3:26 AM
As I have posted in my comments above, Sarah had to support Cap and Trade because it was part of McCain’s platform in his 2008 campaign and she was his selected VP. All VP candidates have to take positions that are sometimes contrary to what they would have campaigned on their own. You can believe what you want but no one not even the MSM is alledging that Palin is some enviro activist wacko bent on Cap and Trade (that was McCain’s baby just like opening up drilling in Anwr is one of Palin’s pet project). In fact, she is slammed by the left and MSM as an anti-environmentalist which is also not true. Other people can say the same about your candidate, that because he once supported a certain position on an issue then we must judge him by his old stances.
Cap and Trade may not even be a relevant issue in 2012 depending on the state of the economy and new energy technologies and other factors. I know it hasn’t worked in Europe so maybe the US will learn lessons from that. However, we need Conservatives who can clearly articulate the reasons against or for Cap and Trade. Too often GOP and Conservative candidates are viewed as being in opposition to policies without being able to explain why to the average voter. It would behoove all Conservative candidates to research issues like Cap and Trade instead of having knee jerk reactions which leave voters in the dark. 2012 is a long way from now. I’m not going to hold Sarah to positions she took while McCain’s VP in 2008. I will judge her on what she says in 2012 (if she runs for Prez then).
That’s all I can say on this topic. Let’s wait for 2012. The world may look a lot different then.
sarahpalinfan99 on March 15, 2009 at 4:19 AM
Oopsie. Video is no longer available. Rahm must be working late tonight.
Mr_Magoo on March 15, 2009 at 4:38 AM
Katie Couric is the best they have !!!…
.
philly_nj on March 15, 2009 at 8:51 AM
Walter Cronkite Award
Aptly named. It was old Walter who declared that the Tet offensive was a complete disaster for the US (it wasn’t – not even close – but it was for the enemy) and inspired the North Vietnamese, who were on the verge of really talking peace, to instead continue fighting.
Managed to (along with others like Jane Fonda) to get a lot of additional Americans killed (not to mention some half-million-odd Vietnamese).
In which case I think its well deserved – Couric is the embodiment of everything which is wrong with ‘Journalism’ today.
CrazyFool on March 15, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Because that’s the only “argument” moonbat cretins have at their disposal. You know their repertoire is a tad limited.
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM
It’s appalling that this interview won an award. Both Couric and Gibson are the two reasons that I turn off all of the network news stations. They are on permanent ban. Any journlist who thought that was “great” is simply untrustworthy.
AnninCA on March 15, 2009 at 10:53 AM
I see Joe Biden as Obama’s “protector”.
After all, if something happens to Obama, Joe takes over. As bad as Obama is, Joe… holy cripes!
rogersnowden on March 15, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Poptech wanna cracker?
OlympicLeprechaun on March 15, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Neither. She didn’t flub interviews. She proved she was an illiterate moron who had no personal interests to speak of. You cannot flub a question about what you read. Or… You can but here’s how it will sound like:
- Well, WSJ for example, and maybe NYT. And Washington Times… I think they… uhm, they have nice editorials and also I like their columnists, but their names are escaping me now.
You can ask me anything you want about what I ACTUALLY DO in my life, and I can start responding immediately. The presentation may be horrible but I will have something to say. She didn’t. That tells me everything.
When it comes to the area of my professional expertise, the bar rises significantly. I (like you, I’m sure) have had so many chances to think, write or speak about these things, that “prepared answers” to at least most general questions should just fly out of my mouths.
Her answers on economy or foreign policy revealed she she’d never thought of those issues. Let alone had any coherent answer. Total incompetence together with the audacity to present yourself as an expert is the very definition of a moron.
radiofreevillage on March 15, 2009 at 11:41 AM
The acorn people are becoming very boring. They use such big words to make the point they hate someone… Is there a spray or something? I am just saying.
lexa on March 15, 2009 at 12:14 PM
How about if I ask you and allow you to respond then then horribly edit and re-arrange the video to make you out to be a complete and total moron in your own field?
That is what I mean by Couric and Gibson being the embodiment of everything that is wrong with ‘Journalism’ today.
CrazyFool on March 15, 2009 at 12:50 PM
http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/090312_sellout.htm
RealDemocrat on March 15, 2009 at 1:25 PM
how come National Enquirer did not win any awards for their excellent investigative journalism re: John Edwards ?
runner on March 15, 2009 at 1:33 PM
You mean that when she was asked what she reads, she gave a list, which was subsequently redacted?
radiofreevillage on March 15, 2009 at 1:49 PM
And let me guess…you voted for Obama anyway. LOL It must’ve been that authoritative pronunciation of “Pah-kee-stahn”.
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 2:02 PM
So she won an award, big deal
Did she gain any views? I think NOT!
Kini on March 15, 2009 at 3:15 PM
CRAP
Viewers! Did she gain any Viewers. NOPE!
Kini on March 15, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Ahh. The Norman Lear award is only for liberal ‘journalist’ who attack Republicans.
National Enquirer wasn’t considered even though they broke the story of the Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards cheating on his wife as she is dying of cancer. Leaving his young children (when they needed him most) to have an affair with Reile Hunter.
TN Mom on March 15, 2009 at 4:11 PM
You mean that when she was asked what she reads, she gave a list, which was subsequently redacted?
radiofreevillage on March 15, 2009 at 1:49 PM
The Governor of Alaska’s job is to read magazines and books?
Never said she was a good interviewee. I don’t want someone who is a good ‘interviewee’ but someone who would be a good executive and leader. Obama is a good ‘interviewee’ (especially when he knows the questions ahead of time) and puts on an excellent show – but so far hen does not seem to be a very good executive or leader. And he had his share of -er- clarifications.
CrazyFool on March 15, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Anybody who wants to be Vice-President has to read a lot. Yes.
radiofreevillage on March 15, 2009 at 5:38 PM
Joe Biden’s probably not gone through his Dr. Seuss stuff yet.
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 5:46 PM
All I can say is that Couric better not expect any more interviews with Governor Palin in the future. Which has got to suck for her because if and when Governor Palin runs for President I can pretty much guarantee that Couric will most probably be excluded and locked out of any press events for the Governors campaign.
Dreadnought223 on March 15, 2009 at 6:20 PM
A reporter’s job is facts, not to have a “National Impact”.
HotWeaver on March 15, 2009 at 9:28 PM
I would hope that the Vice President of the United States has a little better clue what’s going on then getting their news from a magazine or newspaper – filtered through the eyes of the MSM. They better be reading the actual national security reports (and not just the ones the NYT leak).
Something I don’t think Biden has. Hell he didn’t even know what the Vice President’s job is nor where its defined in the constitution. (I guess it would have helped if he had read it…).
CrazyFool on March 15, 2009 at 9:29 PM
See Media Malpractice….it expalins a lot.
cajunlady on March 15, 2009 at 10:11 PM
That’s the problem the Palin-bashing moonbats have. They have to demonstrate their guys are that much more brilliant…which, of course, is impossible.
ddrintn on March 15, 2009 at 10:18 PM
How proud you must be of your
hatchet job.
Enjoy your blood money Katie.
PaddyJ on March 16, 2009 at 8:45 AM
She is an idiot, her editor however is a genious for making her seem at least a bit intelligent.
workingforpigs on March 16, 2009 at 9:08 AM
If she were performing a service for America, why did she not expose Joe Biden as the fool he is? He is a gaffe a minute kind of guy, making idiotic statements and showing his idiocy every time he opens his mouth.
I don’t think I’d begrudge a news anchor exposing a candidate for their lack of understanding, education, or experience. But, if they do it to only one side of the aisle, then it isn’t “a service” to anyone, its a hack job.
Also, the “image” can be fixed when the media is on your side and dresses you up pretty. One only needs observe the 2008 election to see that much, Obama’s gaffes and lack of experience were never put in the spotlight.
You don’t need to agree philosophically with my political views to understand that a partisan media makes a huge difference to how a candidate is portrayed. In this sense, the MSM has failed America by failing to provided an unbiased presentation of the candidates from BOTH parties. The primary reason for freedom of the press/media is for it to expose the government and its agents, to the citizens, to act as a spotlight on its actions and your representatives. Instead, its transformed into a body *representing* a party of the government. You probably don’t comprehend the ramifications of this, do you?
sigh
Geministorm on March 16, 2009 at 9:41 AM
For what, creative editing?
MarkTheGreat on March 16, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Everybody seem to be OT. Let’s get on point.
Would you or would you not hit it?
connertown on March 16, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Katie Couric?
Yes, but then I’d kick her out before she could express her demented opinion about anything to me. I wouldn’t be able to handle her idiocy, and there is some kinds of stupid you just can’t fix.
Geministorm on March 16, 2009 at 10:26 AM
Definitely This. It wasn’t entirely McCain’s fault though. Social conservatives in general were too eager to make her one of them when she clearly wasn’t.
Speedwagon82 on March 16, 2009 at 10:40 AM
1. They were on the Republican ticket:
The MSM weren’t going to give them fair treatment regardless. Note that Obama was running for two years and did not get the kind of scrutiny that the VP candidate got in 3 months.
2. McCain is a RINO:
McCain sealed his fate with conservatives with both McCain-Feingold (CFR) and McCain-Kennedy (Amnesty). Without strong support from social conservatives, McCain couldn’t possibly capture the strength of the American majority because he couldn’t espouse conservative values.
Conservativism is a philosophy, not a policy. You don’t need to see the poll numbers to know what you should do in a situation because the philosophy guides all decisions. That is why Reagan was so great, he let the philosophy guide the policy. Plus, Reagan could articulate the philosophy well, so that people could make smart decisions about difficult topics. Palin has the conservative philosophy, and she has a charisma that wins over people. Her problem is communicating the philosophy better, she should have responded to Katie by saying that she didn’t need to read a lot of magazines to know her position on an issue. When a “situation” occurs, your philosophy guides your decision and if the belief in the philosophy doesn’t waiver, then the people can depend on the person making good decisions.
Go back and look at how the media/newspapers treated Ronald Reagan, he was called to stupid too and too right-wing/conservative, its very similar to how Palin has been treated. Two landslides showed that the media are the ones that are too extremist and out of touch.
Geministorm on March 16, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Couric looks like a guy.
ex-Democrat on March 16, 2009 at 11:12 AM
ex-Democrat on March 16, 2009 at 11:12 AM
My eyes!!! The goggles, they do nothing!!
DaveC on March 16, 2009 at 12:21 PM
You don’t need to agree philosophically with my political views to understand that a partisan media makes a huge difference to how a candidate is portrayed. In this sense, the MSM has failed America by failing to provided an unbiased presentation of the candidates from BOTH parties. The primary reason for freedom of the press/media is for it to expose the government and its agents, to the citizens, to act as a spotlight on its actions and your representatives. Instead, its transformed into a body *representing* a party of the government. You probably don’t comprehend the ramifications of this, do you?
sigh
Geministorm on March 16, 2009 at 9:41 AM
This chillingly reminds me of 1984!
sarahpalinfan99 on March 16, 2009 at 12:56 PM
I hate that this came out from USC Annenberg, but it’s not surprising. My undergrad degree is from USC Annenberg. I now work at the business school, same campus.
joe_doufu on March 16, 2009 at 1:00 PM
Radiofree, I’ve got a question for you. Several actually:
When Al Gore thought that women underwent sonograms for breast cancer, thought that Michael Jackson played for the Bulls, thought that a million billion equalled a trillion, thought that a zebra had spots, couldn’t identify statues of our Founding Fathers and mistranslated our national motto, did you feel that he was a moron too?
What was your reaction when Bill “Rhodes Scholar Clinton flirted with a mummy, mistook a Romanian flag for a poncho, equivocated on the meanings of “alone” and “is”, said that the phrase “government by the people, of the people, and for the people” was from the Constitution AND the Declaration of Independence? Or when his wife gave a speech in ebonics to an NAACP meeting?
A little selective condemnation there don’t you think?
OlympicLeprechaun on March 16, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »