Amazon.com Widgets

« John Oliver's Literature Rodeo: Apocalypse Edition | Main | Leaving the Secret Magical Church of Oprah »

McCain - Palin Meet Katie Couric

Now Sarah brings her Daddy to the interviews to protect her.




Quicktime Video 5.5 MB | Duration: 03'45
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.


 

Comments

This is ridiculous: asking a crucial foreign policy question, and trying clarifying the sheer incoherence of the response, is now a "gotcha" question. And "gotcha" journalism apparently concerns those issues affecting the real world.

The long-time Republican media strategy--accusing them, groundlessly, of bias for any scrutiny of patently false claims--has now reached self-parody with the McCain/Palin campaign.

McCain always looks like he is about to explode.

Gotcha journalism to the McCain ticket is asking questions.

Was that it? When do we get to ask her questions on her record? Could she explain the "thanks but not thanks" about the bridge. Can she explain her view of foreign policy outside of good guys and bad guys?

Also, she made a tactical blunder in my mind, she needs to admit that she will have a learning curve, that she was super nervous or something, she cannot say she is ready and have anyone watch that interview.

What i do thinkMcCain should do is to get her in some interviews alone before the debate. Otherwise the pressure on her for this one debate will be ridiculous.

Put her in interviews alone , this not letting her talk thing, well it is insulting to her, and frankly seems insulting to women.

Finally I suspect she won't be that bad at the debate, she WON an election in Alaska which had multiple debates, I have seen her interviewed in Alaska and she does not seem stupid. She gives good if snarky speeches. Does she know enough foreign policy, of course not. Do I like her, no way, I cannot stand her

But it was 'gotcha' journalism. It was widespread reporting of a private conversation about a specific issue, framed as if it were the same thing as Palin saying on a stage "We will bomb Pakistan without notifying them". The two are completely different. In fact, here is the exchange, from CNN:

"It's working with [Pakistani president] Zardari to make sure that we're all working together to stop the guys from coming in over the border," she told him. "And we'll go from there." Rovito wasn't finished. "Waziristan is blowing up!," he said. "Yeah it is," Palin said, "and the economy there is blowing up too." "So we do cross border, like from Afghanistan to Pakistan you think?," Rovito asked. "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin responded, before moving on to greet other voters.

Note that there is no mention of unilateral action, no framing of it as "we do this without Pakistan". Just "we do cross border". Historically we have crossed Pakistan's border many times, with the support of Pakistan.

That said, I don't like Palin. I've never been a Palin supporter. But I do think McCain made a very adept comparison of her to Clinton - Clinton had very little foreign policy experience when he took the job and he was President, not Vice President.

And certainly Obama has very little foreign policy experience. It was a sheer joy watching McCain mop the floor with him on this angle in the debate. This was the source of almost all of Obama's "I agree with John!" moments.

If you're going to apply the critique, it seems only fair to apply it equally. But then again, that would require unbiased media, wouldn't it? I'm still rolling my eyes over that CBS interview where Biden said Roosevelt went on TV to explain the Great Depression. Seriously, folks, it's not like Biden is some great brain trust either. He directly contradicted Obama on clean coal and nobody picked up on that. He chided Obama for his "McCain can't use a computer!" ad, that passed with barely a whisper. But Palin said something in a deli that superficially doesn't jibe with something McCain said! Full court press!

And I don't know where you guys keep getting the nonsensical "That hothead McCain looks like he's going to explode!" stuff. He's just smiling and looking down, waiting for his chance to talk. In my book, any candidate who can take thirty minutes of partisan bullshit from those hags on "The View" without resorting to murder is Presidential material.

Could she explain the "thanks but not thanks" about the bridge.

Sure, if you ask Obama and Biden to explain why they voted for it.

Or ask Obama to explain his record on earmarks.

Or, hell, ask Obama anything.

user-pic

Did she or did she not say "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," after he asked whether they should cross the border into Pakistan or not?

Did John McCain make a huge deal about Obama saying the same thing last Friday on the most important night so far in this election?

I do not think this is "gottcha journalism". Using that phrase is the same bullshit Rove tatic of adding doubt to any argument so eventually the truth is completely clouded.

And all of the "I agree with John" remarks exactly what Obama stands for. Finding common ground and working together to accomplish whats in the best interest for the country. I think it shows a lot of courage and respect to agree with you opponent on a few issues.

So its ok for McCain to be bi-partisan but when Obama does its perceived as weak or ineffectual?

Joe

Did she or did she not say "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," after he asked whether they should cross the border into Pakistan or not?

Did John McCain make a huge deal about Obama saying the same thing last Friday on the most important night so far in this election?

I do not think this is "gottcha journalism". Using that phrase is the same bullshit Rove tatic of adding doubt to any argument so eventually the truth is completely clouded.

And all of the "I agree with John" remarks exactly what Obama stands for. Finding common ground and working together to accomplish whats in the best interest for the country. I think it shows a lot of courage and respect to agree with you opponent on a few issues.

So its ok for McCain to be bi-partisan but when Obama does its perceived as weak or ineffectual?

Joe

I feel embarrassed for you that you can still support this train wreck of a campaign. Never in my life have I seen a more unprepared candidate than Sarah Palin. How can you compare her to Obama or Bill Clinton? Seriously!? Can you even imagine President Bill Clinton giving the clusterf*ck of a response Sarah Palin gave to the bailout or foreign policy experience questions!??

Palin makes GWB look like a freaking genius. I feel sorry for her, she is in way over her head.

But it was 'gotcha' journalism.

hahaha...Come now Calli.

What is bitter gate?

What is remarkable is that Palin is really right here although in eloquent.

McCain is even agreeing with Obama on this point. He only thinks you shouldn't announce it. Which by saying he agrees he is actually announcing it.

This issue is hypocritical nonsense.

If we knew Osama Bin Laden was walking down the street in London and GB wasn't actively pursuing him, we would launch an operation. McCain is only making this belabored argument because Hillary did in the primary.

Sad that McCain can't get his VP to read her talking points or even remember what he said in the debates a few days earlier.

I wonder if perhaps she isn't ready for prime time?

Biden says dumb things, yes. Welcome to 1988, calli. This is not anything new.

However, He's got smart things he's said too. I've yet to see Palin say anything smart or even with a tinge of intelligence tied to it. It's a vomit of dumb spewing forth on every point she makes (or regurgitates, as is becoming obvious). You can tell by her Katie Couric answer on the bailout that there isn't a synapse firing other than the "Which Talking Point was I supposed to repeat here?" Synapse.

Ah, and this is, um, strange..

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.

WTF.

She's a goner. I have a strange feeling "family issues" are going to show up after the vp debate on thursday (because a smart campaign would drop her Before the debate, and McCain's Campaign is NOT smart).

Yo - there are NO 'gotcha" questions for this gig. There just aren't. Palin's Q and A for this gig has been miserable, when it hasn't been shrouded. Her answers tend to be all sound bites with little connection.

Sure, Clinton was only governor when he ran for president, but he had a grasp of the issues of the day. This is similarly the case with Obama who has only a few years in national office, but guess what? He can actually respond to policy issues with more than talking points, faux news type crticisms, slogans.

I think you should ask Obama anything calli. Just go to a campaign stop and ask him, listen to his response, then go from there.

Or just move to Alaska after O is elected.

RE the pakistan thing. I agree with Calligraph that the whole thing is stupid politics and it is basically 'gotcha journalism".

But the original McCain attack against Obama was "gotcha" and silly politics. McCain did not like Obama sounding more hawkish than him. If McCain thought you should be more careful with your words, then why his not very measured response to the Russia/Georgia crisis prior to knowing the facts "we are all georgians", while Obama gave a more measured response.

we are all georgian

But I agree this is gotcha journalism.

Who cares, what is clear is that McCain DOES not even trust his running mate. Finally what I have trouble with, is not that she lacks experience, it is that the campaign is not giving the voters a chance to see if she is qualified and knows enough for the job. Worse McCain's impulsive decision to pick her. His campaign was not prepared for her selection, they threw her to the wolves, they should have been prepping her for months. I mean McCain had the nomination by when? February? If she really was in the running why no, well foreign policy training in that time.

If she was being vetted, she should have been preparing herself. A lot. A real lot. I am glad I am for Obama, cause what would I do if I wanted to vote for McCain, ( who i actually like) but had to worry about getting Palin for president if he dies in office.

I predict it will be all over for Palin by week's end.

Hell, it may be all over for the US and world economy for that matter . . .

must be in the stars ...

Jeezus! How can the whole nation not be completely repulsed by the sheer creepiness of this ticket!?! I guess the campaign is going back to the brilliant strategy of having Grampa McCrankypants standing (or I guess in this case, sitting) beside her twitching and nervously picking his nails. That is, when he's not staring at her ass.

I have to say, I'm impressed with Couric in these interviews. Her response to McCain is dead on - How can this be gotcha journalism when its a question from a voter?

And Caligraph, you're absolutely right that this is small piece of information the media is clamoring over. But they are forced to do so because she has refused to converse openly with the public about her beliefs and positions.

See what I did there? I said I agree with your point but then went on to show thats because your point was simplistic and purposefully distracting from the nuances that come with seeing a bigger picture. And those nuances undermine your previous conclusions.

It's a very effective debate technique.

Republicans don't do nuance.

Good Guys, Bad Guys.

Period.

Conservatives, on the other hand, do it very well.

Calli, do you agree that Palin should give more interviews? Do you think she should do them ALONE?

Can you explain where she learned her American History, which some would say is essential to keep from repeating mistakes on OUR dime?

Can you explain why it took her 5 colleges and 6 years to graduate?

And McCain. He drags Palin to his campain stops to add attendance. (He admitted it)

Hurry. Give Palin the Bomb. Let's get out the weenies and sing "until the end of the world" around a campfire.

"...you're absolutely right that this is small piece of information the media is clamoring over. But they are forced to do so because she has refused to converse openly with the public about her beliefs and positions."

This is EXACTLY the point! Well said. How do you have the balls to run for VP and then deny the American public the right to review and question your credentials? If your not prepared to do interviews, then your not prepared to be VP of the United States of America. It's really that simple.

Jeezus! How can the whole nation not be completely repulsed by the sheer creepiness of this ticket!?!

I'm repulsed.

I feel like I'm being gaslighted by a bully and his giggling sidekick. He puts out campaign ads that are completely based on "gotcha" moments - trying to actually mislead the public as to someone's position and goals and then he calls out gotcha when Katie C. (one of the only people given the opportunity to talk to the insultingly elusive candidate for VP) tries to clarify one of the few specific positions we've heard from Palin on anything. Palin had a perfect opportunity to respond but made a statement and then had to wait for Daddy Warbucks to remind her of the company line.

They are truly making Obama look like grace under pressure - he can look nothing less than reasonable, rational and sincere next to this bad comedy routine.

Yuck - yes, I'm very repulsed.

The only thing more disturbing than this ticket is the fact that so many are willing to vote for them, no matter how laughably incompetent these two wackjobs prove themselves to be — well, as long as they say they love Jeebus, of course...

Just so you know, EVERYONE I know is laughing at Palin these days.

Her name alone is a punch line.

Her only supporter (that I could find, anyhow) was an 80 year old white woman from Mississippi who said "Well, I'm from Miss. so you know my opinion of Palin, and there ain't NO WAY I'm voting for no O-Bam-Ah."

So, calli, you are in good company.

Pfff, i finally figured it out! Calligraph IS Norman! But what a sneaky way of boosting your comments traffic, Norm!

Did McCain just provide the most long-winded, unnecessary, blank, superficial, content-less, stupid, "FUCK YOU TOO!" to Couric?

I mean, "...being questioned by some, quote 'expert'". Ouch. I don't like Couric particularly, but that was uncalled for.

Then again, these two have perfected the art of saying absolutely nothing with the highest amount of words possible. I can't fathom people are so stupid as to believe the bullshit these two are spouting.

Why do you think they did this interview now? What had they agreed to talk about? I wonder if the McCain campaign wanted to talk about the pakistan statement, and also felt he needed to show support to his VP candidate as he seems to be dissing her otherwise (ie not available to press or public)

Biden is going to destroy her in the debates. And who could honestly compare her to Clinton? He was a Rhodes Scholar, Yale Law grad, and a brilliant public speaker (still is). She is a moron, palin and simple.

I am not sure Biden will destroy her in the debates. We will think so, but some folks will see her as the Mr Smith goes to washington persona, the person that really understands them, who is not some intellectual elite with piles of cash and connections. In addition he needs to go after McCain and not her, so I am not sure if she offers a bunch of clever one liners that he will be able to attack HER back. She in some ways has the advantage, she is the Washington outsider and he the insider.

Biden needs to dial up his down homeness, he really can be charming. I love Biden, and so does my mom. He needs to somehow charmingly show that having a nuanced knowlege of things like the economy and foreign policy is the way to be, intead of a good guy, bad guy mentality. Sort of like the issue with Georgia/Russia. Sure Georgia are are allies, but we WANT to start a war with Russia? Hopefully the moderator will not let her off the hook when she does not answer questions.

Finally the real way Biden should attack her, is point out that the American public needs to get to know her views. That not talking to the press is an insult to the american people. When she cries "bad reporters and biased media" , he should suggest that the reason she is getting bad press is that she is not out there fighting back. That realistically the press will fill a vacuum with whatever they can get. (this by the way is WHY she is getting so much bad press, she is not out there).

I agree - I'm really not sure he will bury her. Who knows what ground rules they've set up, who knows what they've been rehearsing her on. She managed to carry off that speech to the Republican convention pretty convincingly, Obama's people said she is a great debater which I think is a way of raising expectations on her since everyone's are so low but...I don't trust anything to happen the way it should.

I think all of the debates this time around are set up so that the candidates are supposed to respond to each other. In this way, Biden can try to pin Palin down on specifics of policy and say why he'd do otherwise and why it's more effective strategy or solution.

If the debate is set up as during the W campaigns, and all she has to do is deliver sound bites, Palin might fare OK.

As I remember when Bush was up against Gore - Bush barely pulled through, but expectations were so low, that it was considered a draw, maybe even a win.

I think many people (in the media first, no idea how this stuff registers with voters) are going to see anything better than a total meltdown by Palin as a big success for her

My position still stands: she never said anything about unilateral force against Pakistan, nor did she imply that we would do such things without Pakistan's knowledge. So there's no substance to this bizarre partisan attack by CBS. Those who think so are purposefully misconstruing McCain's words to somehow mean "You never say anything about Pakistan in the open!", which is of course not what he said.

I liken what McCain said about Pakistan to what Bill Maher said about torture: everyone knows you do it if necessary, you just don't say that. True, McCain could have found a better way to express that thought, but again the liberal hypocrisy shows up in that somehow you're not outraged by Obama's position - you're outraged by McCain's response to Obama's position. Why? Because you refuse to challenge your own candidate.

As for Biden, the Independent did a nice job of skewering that self-aggrandizing moron:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-why-should-anyone-trust-joe-biden-946127.html

And I'm still waiting for Couric to stop drooling on Obama's shoes and do a follow up question or two with Biden. She was there when he made a number of stupid, ignorant, and willfully misleading comments. There has been no follow up.

Palin will explain her stance on positions during the debate, as will Biden. The media have clearly shown they have no interest in reporting on Palin, just in mocking her, so no I don't think her cutting off media access is inappropriate.

The focus on Palin derives from the fact that the feminist, liberal media hates nothing more than a conservative woman. Michelle Malkin has an excellent piece on this called "The Four Stages of Conservative Female Abuse".

It's a very effective debate technique.

Minus one for lack of content. Minus five for smug self-congratulation.

"Minus one for lack of content. Minus five for smug self-congratulation."

Exactly. Now how is it that these flaws earn a random commentator more demerits in your mind than they do the person running for Vice President of the United States?

"I predict it will be all over for Palin by the weekend."

But:

"how is it that these flaws earn a random commentator more demerits in your mind than the...[same or similar flaws] do the person running for Vice President of the United States?"

Good point, and it shows that Calligraph is not exactly passing the Turing test.

"the feminist, liberal media hates nothing more than a conservative woman"

I thought they hated unborn babies more.

"Michelle Malkin has an excellent piece..."

Yep, that freaking feminist liberal media needs Malkin to put some REAL perspective on the issues.

Sorry - I think feminists would have drooled all over Nancy Kassebaum-Baker, but McCain didn't pick her for a running mate, he picked a numb-nut.

That people think the media is gorged with liberals just shows how right wing they are. I think that our media have no spine, that's what I feel. they are so fucking afraid of being called liberal if they dare make a subject actually answer a question any more - ugh. I'm hoping that the recent debate format will change this.

I'd really love it if the media would wear the words "liberal" and "elite" emblazoned on their chest - in scarlet. Then do a Hester Prynne and turn these new epithets back into the good ideas of "open to new ideas" and "upper echelon."

Here's where I'll agree with you: the press needs question and follow up question any time they don't feel an interviewee hasn't answered what they are asking. Sure, sometimes a subject will go off on a tangent, but they're just as likely to evade the question of spew programmed information. Basically, I just want journalists to do their job again, and be proud of doing it.

As for O, it depended which Democratic debate you watched. Some were more cordial to HRC and others to BHO.

As for defending Palin, just keep spending your energy that way. And as I said, you can always more north....

Palin came across better that time, agreeing with Couric that it was a question from a voter, and thus valid despite it being in what McCain referred to as a "pizza place" (liberal european socialist elitist eating den, apparently). Meanwhile McCain came across, again, as fidgety old crotchetychops with his "liberal media" whine, accusing them of 'Journalism'. I can't refute your statement, so I'll just whine about bias instead! Stop pointing out our flaws and contradictions! WAAHHHH!

McCain is not a statesman and not a leader.

There you have it. Couric does not question them on the right of the US to bomb a sovereign country, only if we should talk about it before we do it.

Aren't we missing the underlying significance of this question/answer routine? We have all 4 candidates arguing about whether we should be talking about bombing Pakistan--not whether or not we have the right.

The arrogance of imperialism has become so ingrained that nobody even at onegoodmove has pointed out how reckless the very premise of this post is.

user-pic

Barack Obama= Socialism, be careful what you wish for.

Barack is hardly a socialist. What do you mean exactly by socialist? Someone who thinks Social Security is a good idea, or Medicare. We need more socialism not less.

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives