Sarah Palin Interview with Katie Couric

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
185

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
ryanjm wrote:
Wow. I just watched this interview. A few things stood out:

  1. I don’t think Palin is stupid. In fact I’d say she is probably a pretty smart person.

  2. She is not ready to lead on a national stage. She simply does not have the knowledge base about national issues. Maybe she was a great leader/reformer in Alaska, but I don’t think she has the macro-level knowledge to shape national policy.

  3. She definitely had prepared answers for certain topics (like the first about the payments to McCain’s advisor from fannie and freddie). But anything beyond surface level questions she had trouble with.

If McCain keels over in office I would be very hesitant to have her running the country. Definitely sways my vote away from McCain if he thinks she’s the most qualified person he can find to be at his side.

Funny you’re all over these threads claiming that “you’re not sure who your voting for yet” in one line and then the next line you’re extolling the virtues of Obama.

It was entertaining for a while, now I just want you to shut the fuck up.

Why is it that liberals think they can play these stupid games?

Anyway, modern day Governors who had no foreign policy experience BEFORE they were elected to the Presidency:

Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
Bill Clinton

BUT…now it’s an issue when someone is running for VP…who just happens to be a woman and on the republican ticket.

[/quote]
I don’t believe Palin’s foreign policy experience would be that big a deal had she and other republicans not emphasized it.

I also want to add that she isn’t educated on McCain’s senate history, evidenced by the Couric interview. This is not something you would expect to know about a future boss being in a non-public position. But, in Palin’s case, not knowing McCain’s career record (at the drop of a hat) is not acceptable and frankly it shows her incompetence for the position she is running for.

186

[quote]hokiehess wrote:

I don’t believe Palin’s foreign policy experience would be that big a deal had she and other republicans not emphasized it.

I also want to add that she isn’t educated on McCain’s senate history, evidenced by the Couric interview. This is not something you would expect to know about a future boss being in a non-public position. But, in Palin’s case, not knowing McCain’s career record (at the drop of a hat) is not acceptable and frankly it shows her incompetence for the position she is running for.

[/quote]

brilliant. Well, on the bright side your posts can only get better from here.

187

[quote]hokiehess wrote:
<<<<<>>>>>>>

I don’t believe Palin’s foreign policy experience would be that big a deal had she and other republicans not emphasized it.

I also want to add that she isn’t educated on McCain’s senate history, evidenced by the Couric interview. This is not something you would expect to know about a future boss being in a non-public position. But, in Palin’s case, not knowing McCain’s career record (at the drop of a hat) is not acceptable and frankly it shows her incompetence for the position she is running for. [/quote]

I’d take Forrest Gump with her character and views over Einstein with Obama’s. At least what it appears we know about her to this point.

188

"
Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin.

The campaign has held a mock debate and a mock press conference; both are being described as “disastrous.”? One senior McCain aide was quoted as saying, “What are we going to do?” The McCain people want to move this first debate to some later, undetermined date, possibly never. People on the inside are saying the Alaska Governor is “clueless.”
"
~Ed Schultz

189

[quote]dhickey wrote:
hokiehess wrote:

I don’t believe Palin’s foreign policy experience would be that big a deal had she and other republicans not emphasized it.

I also want to add that she isn’t educated on McCain’s senate history, evidenced by the Couric interview. This is not something you would expect to know about a future boss being in a non-public position. But, in Palin’s case, not knowing McCain’s career record (at the drop of a hat) is not acceptable and frankly it shows her incompetence for the position she is running for.

brilliant. Well, on the bright side your posts can only get better from here.[/quote]

I think you’re being a bit optimistic ^

190

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
dhickey wrote:
hokiehess wrote:

I don’t believe Palin’s foreign policy experience would be that big a deal had she and other republicans not emphasized it.

I also want to add that she isn’t educated on McCain’s senate history, evidenced by the Couric interview. This is not something you would expect to know about a future boss being in a non-public position. But, in Palin’s case, not knowing McCain’s career record (at the drop of a hat) is not acceptable and frankly it shows her incompetence for the position she is running for.

brilliant. Well, on the bright side your posts can only get better from here.

I think you’re being a bit optimistic [1]

Why do you post if you don’t want to discuss anything?

  1. /quote ↩︎

191

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

Funny you’re all over these threads claiming that “you’re not sure who your voting for yet” in one line and then the next line you’re extolling the virtues of Obama.

It was entertaining for a while, now I just want you to shut the fuck up.

[/quote]

A few weeks ago I was undecided. Before Palin was interviewed and before the debates. As time wore on I was swayed towards Obama, and right now I’d say I’m about 90% sure Obama. I’m registered independent, but I guess if anyone votes for Obama this year they must be liberal in your world. Sorry if that’s hard for you to understand.

It’s fine if you’re Republican and look at everything through red-tinted glasses, but try not to lose sight of reality. You thought McCain won that debate? Every respectable poll disagreed with you. If you want to know what’s actually going on, ask people that can look at both candidates without funny colored lenses. I thought Obama won, and I was right.

193

[quote]hokiehess wrote:
"
Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin.

The campaign has held a mock debate and a mock press conference; both are being described as “disastrous.”? One senior McCain aide was quoted as saying, “What are we going to do?” The McCain people want to move this first debate to some later, undetermined date, possibly never. People on the inside are saying the Alaska Governor is “clueless.”
"
~Ed Schultz[/quote]

I wouldn’t doubt this.

194

[quote]ryanjm wrote:
Mick28 wrote:

Funny you’re all over these threads claiming that “you’re not sure who your voting for yet” in one line and then the next line you’re extolling the virtues of Obama.

It was entertaining for a while, now I just want you to shut the fuck up.

A few weeks ago I was undecided.
[/quote]
liar

Let me correct you here. If you vote for Obama you want our country to be more liberal. You like the idea of Socialism more than free market capitalism. These are the only valid reasons to vote for Obama. If this is not why you are voting for him then you are ill informed or ill equipped to make the correct vote.

[quote]
It’s fine if you’re Republican and look at everything through red-tinted glasses, but try not to lose sight of reality. You thought McCain won that debate? Every respectable poll disagreed with you. If you want to know what’s actually going on, ask people that can look at both candidates without funny colored lenses. I thought Obama won, and I was right.[/quote]
What if you look at the two candidates in the context of the constitution and the values and ideals that formed this country? Would that be a valid “slant”. Maybe you should try it?

196

I didn’t just consider Obama’s and McCain’s past voting record, I also consider their plans for the future.

Maybe a lot of people my age don’t vote, but even people not my age who voted republican in the past are voting for Obama this time. My stepdad and mom being two of them. They both voted for Bush both terms, and they’re both well into the range that Obama wants to increase taxes on. But I guess they feel that other issues such as getting America’s international respect back and investing in renewable energy are important. My dad is also voting Obama this year, and he’s been republican/independent for a long time. He voted Perot a while back, and Bush his first term. Also, as a former east cleveland cop, he’s dealt with a ton of black criminals, and being able to vote for a black guy is a pretty big step for him.

Anyway, you’re republican and obviously you just love to spit hatred at anyone who isn’t, so I’ll leave you to it. I think it shows a low level of maturity and intelligence when you can’t talk about two presidential candidates without resorting to name calling and telling people to shut up. Last I checked you don’t own this message board.

Also, I don’t know where you got your poll numbers from, but I got mine here (at the very end of the article are the hard numbers):

Please show me where “some had him winning, some losing.” I’m pretty sure the only polls you’ll find McCain winning that debate is on a heavily republican biased website (similar to if you tried to get poll numbers from msnbc.com for obama), because no major news organization that conducts these regularly found what you said.

197

Tina Fey strikes again.

Not as good as the one with Hillary, but still fun.

199

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
hokiehess wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
entheogens wrote:
Mick28 wrote:

Not quite…More like: Obama gets intereviewed with softball questions - Obama does well - Media IS liberal.

Very nice at turning the original topic around. Were Katie Couric’s questions fair? Are they questions that should be asked of a Vice President?

Are liberals generally slow? Is it that they don’t like the truth shoved down their throat repeatedly? Or…is it something else?

WHEN WILL OBAMA EVER BE ASKED TOUGH QUESTIONS BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA?

Now…I know that answer to that question, do you? I bet you do you’re a bright guy.

Please explain, what truth, liberals aren’t digesting?

If it is the questioning from mainstream media, did you watch the O’Reilly videos? He was leading the interviewee, and stating his opinions or actually telling Obama how he is going to handle foreign affairs in office.

It was ridiculously unfair and Obama kept his composure and gave eloquent well thought out answers.

Please, just tell me directly that I am wrong about this.

First of all O’Reilly is NOT part of the mainstream media.
Secondly, I can only ask this again:

WHEN WILL OBAMA EVER BE ASKED TOUGH QUESTIONS BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA?

I already listed many in the mainstream media.

By the way how many gaffs do you think Biden should be allowed before someone from the mainstream media point out that he’s not a good candidate?

If Palin made that many mistakes they would be all over her…not in a good way. :wink:
[/quote]

Palin’s made 10x the gaffes Biden has made. More than just gaffes. Evidencing fundamental failure to comprehend crucial issues. And the ‘mainstream liberal media’ has let most of them go with little criticism. What bothers me more is that the media has allowed her to portray herself as a fiscaly conservative reformer. Which was what appealed to me about her in he first place but is not actually reflected in her record, her tenure as mayor and governor, and reality.

And the media has criticized Biden for his temper and being a jerk. Rightly so. And it may prove his undoing at the vice-presidential debate. While it’s inarguable that the media is pro-Obama and that’s reflective in its reporting, it’s amazing to me that anyone could not watch the coverage and marvel at the fairness with which McCain and Palin have been treated. And just how much the media has let go. Even when it would’ve been legitimate journalism to pursue certain avenues that would’ve made them look REALLY a lot worse. Not so much McCain. But certainly with Palin.

200

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
While it’s inarguable that the media is pro-Obama and that’s reflective in its reporting, it’s amazing to me that anyone could not watch the coverage and marvel at the fairness with which McCain and Palin have been treated. And just how much the media has let go. Even when it would’ve been legitimate journalism to pursue certain avenues that would’ve made them look REALLY a lot worse. Not so much McCain. But certainly with Palin.
[/quote]

You’re kidding, right?

201

[quote]dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
While it’s inarguable that the media is pro-Obama and that’s reflective in its reporting, it’s amazing to me that anyone could not watch the coverage and marvel at the fairness with which McCain and Palin have been treated. And just how much the media has let go. Even when it would’ve been legitimate journalism to pursue certain avenues that would’ve made them look REALLY a lot worse. Not so much McCain. But certainly with Palin.

You’re kidding, right?

[/quote]

Not at all. You have heard Palin speak, right? She’s been pressed on almost none of her bullshit in he Couric interview or otherwise. And the media’s been nearly silent on the fact that she ran up billions in deficit during her tenure as mayor. And far from saying ‘Thanks but no thanks’ to congressional funding for the Bridge to Nowhere, she said yes until she faced scathing, intense criticism. Scratch even just a little below the surface and she’s hardly the fiscally conservative reformer she likes to portray herself as.

202

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
While it’s inarguable that the media is pro-Obama and that’s reflective in its reporting, it’s amazing to me that anyone could not watch the coverage and marvel at the fairness with which McCain and Palin have been treated. And just how much the media has let go. Even when it would’ve been legitimate journalism to pursue certain avenues that would’ve made them look REALLY a lot worse. Not so much McCain. But certainly with Palin.

You’re kidding, right?

Not at all. You have heard Palin speak, right? She’s been pressed on almost none of her bullshit in he Couric interview or otherwise. And the media’s been nearly silent on the fact that she ran up billions in deficit during her tenure as mayor. And far from saying ‘Thanks but no thanks’ to congressional funding for the Bridge to Nowhere, she said yes until she faced scathing, intense criticism. Scratch even just a little below the surface and she’s hardly the fiscally conservative reformer she likes to portray herself as.[/quote]

I’ll have to address coverage of her a bit later but wanted to address the fiscal part of your statement.

what was the state budget before Palin and what was it after?
How much pork did Alaska receive before Palin, and how much after?

203

[quote]dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
While it’s inarguable that the media is pro-Obama and that’s reflective in its reporting, it’s amazing to me that anyone could not watch the coverage and marvel at the fairness with which McCain and Palin have been treated. And just how much the media has let go. Even when it would’ve been legitimate journalism to pursue certain avenues that would’ve made them look REALLY a lot worse. Not so much McCain. But certainly with Palin.

You’re kidding, right?

Not at all. You have heard Palin speak, right? She’s been pressed on almost none of her bullshit in he Couric interview or otherwise. And the media’s been nearly silent on the fact that she ran up billions in deficit during her tenure as mayor. And far from saying ‘Thanks but no thanks’ to congressional funding for the Bridge to Nowhere, she said yes until she faced scathing, intense criticism. Scratch even just a little below the surface and she’s hardly the fiscally conservative reformer she likes to portray herself as.

I’ll have to address coverage of her a bit later but wanted to address the fiscal part of your statement.

what was the state budget before Palin and what was it after?
How much pork did Alaska receive before Palin, and how much after?[/quote]

She inherited a city with zero debt and left Wasilla $20 million in debt and increased the budget by about 1/3. She pushed through a sales tax increase to fund a $15 million sports complex. Borrowed much more money. Under her management, Wasilla spent $1.7 million in legal shenanigans surrounding the deal. As a lawyer, in a move that baffles me, Palin failed to secure and make sure that the city had title to the land. The result was 7 years of litigation. The property would’ve cost about $125K if the city closed a deal to buy the property outright. At the same time, Wasilla was in great need of infrastructure improvements such as a sewage treatment plant. Not the things she decided to rack up debt for. She extensively remodeled and redecorated City Hall during her tenure as mayor of Wasilla. Her ‘Thanks but no thanks to the Bridge to Nowhere’ is beyond a joke. As far as her anti-pork reputation, it’s mostly an accident. As mayor of Wasilla, she hired a well-connected law firm to lobby for $27 million in earmarks (aka pork). As Governor, she gave the Legislature no budget guidelines. And she gave it no direction. Then she made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action RESTORED most of these projects–which had only been vetoed in the first place because she didn’t understand their importance. With the unobservant she had gained a reputation as anti-pork. But the State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. And other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative. As far as overall pork/earmarks coming into Alaska, it did go down under her leadership. Not all that much. And Alaskan politicians, especially Stevens, are notorious for pork. She’s no anti-pork crusader. If anything, she’s somewhere in between.

I’m looking at her statements regarding national issues, her conduct as a small town mayor and governor, and the discrepancy between her public statements and her actually actions. And from me she gets an F. Anyhow, this is really beating a dead horse. But I do urge everyone to dig a little deeper and look at her much more closely. McCain gets a big minus from me for choosing her as a running mate.