Sarah Palin Interview with Katie Couric

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Hey Js did you somehow miss the fact that every single person who knows one dam thing about politics knows that the media favor Obama?

Remember the Saturday Night Live skit on the Obama/ Hillary debate? How they threw Obama softballs and Hillary got the tough questions.

Even Hillary is not liberal enough for the press they dumped her in favor of the most liberal Senator in Washington Barry Obama.

I guess everyone knows this but you Js…Do you live in a box?

Climb out of your box and watch this:

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/election08/77752/

[/quote]

I’m not saying there’s no favoritism of Obama. Most of the media is liberal. Or at least left of center if not liberal. Personal ideology inevitably influences coverage. It’s evident in the favoritism McCain gets from what conservative media organizations and pundits exist. What is your proposed solution? What I am saying is that McCain and Palin have not been treated harshly or unfairly. At all. There’s been no concerted effort of the ‘liberal mainstream media’ to abandon journalistic ethics and portray McCain and Palin in a bad light and Obama and Biden in a good light.

102

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

No. And Time and Newsweek have unquestionably been fair. [/quote]

You are completely clueless. I highly doubt you read these. I have a subscription to Newsweek and read the times a couple times a week. It’s a struggle.

103

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
You didn’t address this is it a coincidence?

Obama shows up on the cover of TIME 7 times…McCain only 2.

[/quote]

Perhaps it’s that TIME is in the business of selling magazines and having an ancient skeleton on the front only sells if it’s Tutankhamun.

104

[quote]dhickey wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

No. And Time and Newsweek have unquestionably been fair.

You are completely clueless. I highly doubt you read these. I have a subscription to Newsweek and read the times a couple times a week. It’s a struggle.[/quote]

And you are inevitably influenced by your very conservative positions. While I am a moderate. I don’t deny that there is media bias and that personal views inevitably influence what’s covered and the way it’s covered. I reject that there is a concerted liberal conspiracy and the conservative candidates are victims. There are just SO many instances where the ‘mainstream liberal media’ could’ve been so much harder on conservative candidates where they’ve given them a pass. Just stop whining already. Conservative news organizations have responded by being even more partisian and less objective. You have to watch both. And read both. And look at the actual voting records and statements as much as possible.

105

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
hokiehess wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Hey I wonder when Obama is going to sit down with someone in the mainstream liberal media and have a tough interview…Oh wait…I forgot they love him so that won’t happen.

Oh please. Compared to the kind of shit Hillary routinely dealt with, that was a ridiculous softball question. You really expect ANY reporter to not address the assertion that proximity to Russia qualifies as foreign policy experience?

Katie was nice to not press further and let it go when she failed to answer whether she had any negotiations or interaction with Russia whatsoever. Please try to achieve some semblance of credibility.

Did I mention Hillary? NO. Now answer the question. WHEN IS OBAMA EVER GOING TO FACE A TOUGH INTERVIEW FROM THE MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA?

He won’t huh? HUH?

The extremely liberal Bill O’Reily, not only giving somewhat difficult questions, but leading the interviewee, Barack Obama.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=obama+o'reilly&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=2#

Wow…you don’t get it either huh?

Answer this question:
WHEN IS OBAMA EVER GOING TO FACE A TOUGH INTERVIEW FROM THE MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA?

[/quote]

Here is the loop of bullshit that I think has been created people on this board.

Obama gets interviewed - Obama does well - Media must be liberal - Liberal media is bias on the side of Obama - Palin gets interviewed - Palin looks like an ignorant moron - oh, I forgot the media was liberal because I myself could not answer those questions

By no means, do I think the questions, from the Couric Interview, were easy to answer for me or anyone on this board. But, I do expect quality comprehensible answers from these questions as a vice presidential candidate.

106

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

Did I mention Hillary? NO. Now answer the question. WHEN IS OBAMA EVER GOING TO FACE A TOUGH INTERVIEW FROM THE MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA?

He won’t huh? HUH?[/quote]

We can talk about Obama in a different thread. We can talk about media bias in a seperate thread. However, was this a fair question? Yes, I think it was. She should have been honest and said that she didn’t have much foreign relations experience. What governor does (save a Governor of a state, like California) I, personally, don’t think that is that big of a deal. After all, how much foreign relations experience did Bill Clinton have? Going to Oxford (or was it Cambridge) as he did as a Rhodes scholar doesn’t count.

However, her response to the bail out was extremely muddled. Let’s face it, she might have been a good small-town mayor (I will give her the benefit of the doubt on that one) but she is over her head. She doesn’t have the academic background. Did she even take Econ 101? If she had some experience to off-set that it would be different, but she doesn’t. It would appear from the following article in the Seattle Times that she might have had some opportunities to engage with foreign governments, but she passed them up:
http://tinyurl.com/4svem6

110

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

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

[/quote]

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?

111

POLITICAL FAIL !!!

112

[quote]bald eagle wrote:
At least she knows who the pres was in 1929 and that there was no tv then. More than I can say for Joe Biden.[/quote]

Excellent point!!! I am now voting for Palin/McCain. Im almost fairly certain that Palin probably knows who the President was in 1929, and Joe Biden DEFINETLY does not.

You sir are profound.

113

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
theOUTLAW wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
lixy wrote:
She did seem clueless. I don’t think that’s much of a scoop. It’s not like anyone thought she was a Nobel Prize laureate or anything of the sort.

What surprised me, is this supposedly die-hard conservative defending up to a trillion from the taxpayers’ pockets to bailout the rich and powerful. Can anyone explain that to me please?

Because we are in a financial crisis. And many financial experts feel it is unfortunately necessary to avoid a depression. It’s one thing to support deregulation in the first place.

It’s another to cling to a hands-off position at all costs when the damage has already been done. And it’s not a true bailout. Many financial experts, including Warren Buffet, believe the government is likely to reap a profit from the arrangement in the longrun.

There’s other ways to do this, like cutting corporate taxes, but the Dems would never go for it since they need their hands in everything. Bush is just pushing this because he wants to feel important unlike the lame duck he is supposed to be.

…And you’re right. Most likely, Buffett and the Government will make a killing when values go up if they print off this $700 billion. And if Obama wins, he can use this money to fund all of his socialist programs! (and we can get right back into this mess again).

Cutting corporate taxes might help. It ain’t gonna be enough. This has nothing to do with Obama. The profit has nothing to do with printing the money. That only causes inflation. If realized, the profit will come after Obama is out of office. Even if he went two terms. Read up on the issue.[/quote]

I know profit has nothing to do with printing the money. I said printing the money meaning once they buy up these things with their printed money and values can be ascertained.

The government can hold on to them or sell them. You don’t know when this gain can be realized, and neither do I. I was being hypothetical.

114

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Hey Js did you somehow miss the fact that every single person who knows one dam thing about politics knows that the media favor Obama?

Remember the Saturday Night Live skit on the Obama/ Hillary debate? How they threw Obama softballs and Hillary got the tough questions.

Even Hillary is not liberal enough for the press they dumped her in favor of the most liberal Senator in Washington Barry Obama.

I guess everyone knows this but you Js…Do you live in a box?

Climb out of your box and watch this:

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/election08/77752/

I’m not saying there’s no favoritism of Obama. Most of the media is liberal. Or at least left of center if not liberal. Personal ideology inevitably influences coverage.

Okay…at least you are now man enough to admit it. That’s all I wanted to read.

Thanks for your eventual honesty.

[/quote]

I never said otherwise. I said that there was no targeted conspiracy by the mainstream media. And that McCain and Palin have been treated fairly.

115

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
rainjack wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
It is obvious she is not a typical politician with a bullshit nonanswer to every question all ready to go.

Cmon, Zap. I usually respect what you say. It makes sense whether I agree with it or not. But not this time. Almost ALL her answers are bullshit nonanswers.

How is that different from ANY politician? I watched the interview, and at the very least she does not have a speech impediment like Opie does without a teleprompter, and is far more at ease in a far more hostile environment than Opie has ever been since he decided to run for President.

You are looking for substantive answers from Palin, but allow Opie the retard to stammer and stutter through every single scriptless situation he has been in.

Where are your critiques of Opie?

Why the double standard?

I think they are terrified of Palin, not because of what they perceive has her ineptitude, but because of her philosophic principles. The woman is an old-fashioned conservative and these values might light a fire with the American people. Her philosophy might just crush them, and they know it.

WRONG. I actually like many of her principles though I disagree with some of her social policies. But she needs to come back 20 years from now after she’s educated herself on the economy and foreing policy.[/quote]

Why? Opie has less experience in both of the economy and foreign policy. Would you give him the same advice?

You seem to be bending backwards to point out Palin’s shortcomings. If you think 143 days in the Senate gives Opie any sort of edge in experience over Palin, you are delusional.

116

[quote]theOUTLAW wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
theOUTLAW wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
lixy wrote:
She did seem clueless. I don’t think that’s much of a scoop. It’s not like anyone thought she was a Nobel Prize laureate or anything of the sort.

What surprised me, is this supposedly die-hard conservative defending up to a trillion from the taxpayers’ pockets to bailout the rich and powerful. Can anyone explain that to me please?

Because we are in a financial crisis. And many financial experts feel it is unfortunately necessary to avoid a depression. It’s one thing to support deregulation in the first place.

It’s another to cling to a hands-off position at all costs when the damage has already been done. And it’s not a true bailout. Many financial experts, including Warren Buffet, believe the government is likely to reap a profit from the arrangement in the longrun.

There’s other ways to do this, like cutting corporate taxes, but the Dems would never go for it since they need their hands in everything. Bush is just pushing this because he wants to feel important unlike the lame duck he is supposed to be.

…And you’re right. Most likely, Buffett and the Government will make a killing when values go up if they print off this $700 billion. And if Obama wins, he can use this money to fund all of his socialist programs! (and we can get right back into this mess again).

Cutting corporate taxes might help. It ain’t gonna be enough. This has nothing to do with Obama. The profit has nothing to do with printing the money. That only causes inflation. If realized, the profit will come after Obama is out of office. Even if he went two terms. Read up on the issue.

I know profit has nothing to do with printing the money. I said printing the money meaning once they buy up these things with their printed money and values can be ascertained.

The government can hold on to them or sell them. You don’t know when this gain can be realized, and neither do I. I was being hypothetical.[/quote]

Gotcha.

117


.

118

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
I never said otherwise. I said that there was no targeted conspiracy by the mainstream media. And that McCain and Palin have been treated fairly. [/quote]

If you can’t see the effort on the part of the MSM to put Opie in the White House - you have to be blind.

The press was blatant in their bias toward Opie during the primaries. Just ask Cankles.

Nothing has changed. Watch Olberman sometime.

119

[quote]rainjack wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
rainjack wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
It is obvious she is not a typical politician with a bullshit nonanswer to every question all ready to go.

Cmon, Zap. I usually respect what you say. It makes sense whether I agree with it or not. But not this time. Almost ALL her answers are bullshit nonanswers.

How is that different from ANY politician? I watched the interview, and at the very least she does not have a speech impediment like Opie does without a teleprompter, and is far more at ease in a far more hostile environment than Opie has ever been since he decided to run for President.

You are looking for substantive answers from Palin, but allow Opie the retard to stammer and stutter through every single scriptless situation he has been in.

Where are your critiques of Opie?

Why the double standard?

I think they are terrified of Palin, not because of what they perceive has her ineptitude, but because of her philosophic principles. The woman is an old-fashioned conservative and these values might light a fire with the American people. Her philosophy might just crush them, and they know it.

WRONG. I actually like many of her principles though I disagree with some of her social policies. But she needs to come back 20 years from now after she’s educated herself on the economy and foreing policy.

Why? Opie has less experience in both of the economy and foreign policy. Would you give him the same advice?

You seem to be bending backwards to point out Palin’s shortcomings. If you think 143 days in the Senate gives Opie any sort of edge in experience over Palin, you are delusional.

[/quote]

He does NOT have less foreign policy experience. I can’t have a conversation with you if you can’t at least admit that. I think you actually did in another thread.

Obama has met with numerous foreign leaders. Is on committees that focus on foreign policy. And has worked on bipartisian bills. Palin lives near Russia.

120

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

Obama has met with numerous foreign leaders. Is on committees that focus on foreign policy. And has worked on bipartisian bills. Palin lives near Russia. [/quote]

Nah. They want to make the flipfloppin pig out to be their saviour.

If that’s all they can manage, then it’s lookin up for us.