Was Charlie Gibson "fair" with Gov. Sarah Palin?

[mikemck]

Was Charlie Gibson "fair" with Gov. Sarah Palin?

Did you see the interview? Mr. Good Morning America has interviewed many people. Do you feel there was another Charlie Gibson behing the microphone or like Fox news, was he fair and balnaced?

I don't think he was fair at all. In fact, in two instances, he purposely took her statements out of context in order to paint her as a religious fanatic.

Mostly, I thought it was odd that he wouldn't shut up about President Bush.

For some reason, the left just doesn't seem to understand that President Bush is not running for re-election.

[LIPH]

For some reason, the left just doesn't seem to understand that President Bush is not running for re-election.

They have nothing else to run on so they have to hammer away at the "We're not George Bush" theme.

[citcat]

For some reason, the left just doesn't seem to understand that President Bush is not running for re-election.

They have nothing else to run on so they have to hammer away at the "We're not George Bush" theme.

I'm sure if a democrat were in office, the democratic candidate would get the same questions about the incumbent's stuff. Life sux and then you get hemorrhoids. or whatever.

[mikemck]

For some reason, the left just doesn't seem to understand that President Bush is not running for re-election.

They have nothing else to run on so they have to hammer away at the "We're not George Bush" theme.

I'm sure if a democrat were in office, the democratic candidate would get the same questions about the incumbent's stuff. Life sux and then you get hemorrhoids. or whatever.

But if a Republican did it, it would be just as wrong.

It's not a matter of Republican vs. Democrat. It's a matter of good journalism vs. biased cheerleading.

We get it: President Bush is unpopular and the Democrats want to exploit that unpopularity. Of course, they fail to mention that they're running two members of the Senate who's approval rating is even lower than the abysmal approval ratings of President Bush, but why quibble over details.

But why not just stick to the issues? Why not "Governor Palin, what do you think about the war in Iraq", and not "Governor Palin, what do you think about what President Bush thinks about the war in Iraq"?

Why the guilt by association? Republicans are wrong for trying to demonize Obama by associating him with Wright and Ayers, and Democrats are just as wrong for trying to associate McCain and Palin with President Bush.

The reason they don't want to talk about the issues is that they know that Obama hasn't done anything. He hasn't authored any legislation. He hasn't served on any committees. His own running mate, Joe Biden, admitted that he's not fit to lead the country.

They love to point out Palin's short time as governor of our nation's largest state, but they never seem to want to address Obama's only slightly less short time in the Senate, or the fact that he's missed most of his term in the Senate because he's been out on the campaign trail and not in Washington where he should be.

And not only that, why don't they seem to have a problem with the fact that he first announced his intentions to run by establishing an exploratory commitee only 143 after taking his oath?

They love to say, "Oh, well, Sarah Palin was just the mayor of a small town in Alaska". Well, what in the world was Obama before he was a senator, but a Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton-style street agitator, leading boycotts and trying to "stick it to the man" or anybody else who didn't cave in to his way of thinking?

Like Palin said, "I guess being a mayor is kind of like being a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities".

He hasn't done a damned thing as a senator and his own followers can't even tell you what he's done that would make you want to vote for him.

They just say "change, change". And, in a sense, they're right because when this guy gets through with you, the only thing you'll have left in your pocket is change.

[Lightning Bolt]

For some reason, the left just doesn't seem to understand that President Bush is not running for re-election.

They have nothing else to run on so they have to hammer away at the "We're not George Bush" theme.

I'm sure if a democrat were in office, the democratic candidate would get the same questions about the incumbent's stuff. Life sux and then you get hemorrhoids. or whatever.

But if a Republican did it, it would be just as wrong.

It's not a matter of Republican vs. Democrat. It's a matter of good journalism vs. biased cheerleading.

We get it: President Bush is unpopular and the Democrats want to exploit that unpopularity. Of course, they fail to mention that they're running two members of the Senate who's approval rating is even lower than the abysmal approval ratings of President Bush, but why quibble over details.

But why not just stick to the issues? Why not "Governor Palin, what do you think about the war in Iraq", and not "Governor Palin, what do you think about what President Bush thinks about the war in Iraq"?

Why the guilt by association? Republicans are wrong for trying to demonize Obama by associating him with Wright and Ayers, and Democrats are just as wrong for trying to associate McCain and Palin with President Bush.

The reason they don't want to talk about the issues is that they know that Obama hasn't done anything. He hasn't authored any legislation. He hasn't served on any committees. His own running mate, Joe Biden, admitted that he's not fit to lead the country.

They love to point out Palin's short time as governor of our nation's largest state, but they never seem to want to address Obama's only slightly less short time in the Senate, or the fact that he's missed most of his term in the Senate because he's been out on the campaign trail and not in Washington where he should be.

And not only that, why don't they seem to have a problem with the fact that he first announced his intentions to run by establishing an exploratory commitee only 143 after taking his oath?

They love to say, "Oh, well, Sarah Palin was just the mayor of a small town in Alaska". Well, what in the world was Obama before he was a senator, but a Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton-style street agitator, leading boycotts and trying to "stick it to the man" or anybody else who didn't cave in to his way of thinking?

Like Palin said, "I guess being a mayor is kind of like being a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities".

He hasn't done a damned thing as a senator and his own followers can't even tell you what he's done that would make you want to vote for him.

They just say "change, change". And, in a sense, they're right because when this guy gets through with you, the only thing you'll have left in your pocket is change.

You really should put your text in quotes if you're simply going to parrot the slogans from FauxNews or that Little Green Footballs site.
Practically every line of your post, I've seen written elsewhere in right wing attacks/excuses.
For REAL change right now, I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

c'mon... try to name just one.

[mikemck]

You really should put your text in quotes if you're simply going to parrot the slogans from FauxNews or that Little Green Footballs site.
Practically every line of your post, I've seen written elsewhere in right wing attacks/excuses.

This is a good example of what I'm talking about. "Lightening Bolt" knows that he can't refute what I said, so he tries to attack it by implying that I plagiarized it from somewhere else (which is ironic, given that Joe Biden was forced to withdraw from his run for the '88 presidential nomination because of plagiarism...but I don't expect LighteningBolt to be honest enough to mention that).

Let's say for a moment that I did plagiarize it from FOX News (which would be pretty difficult, given that I don't even own a TV, but that's another story). So what? No matter what the source, the question remains: is it true or not.

I didn't attack anybody, as LighteningBolt claims and I didn't make excuses for anybody. In fact, I don't normally post political things here because I come here for fun, not to argue, but if Lightening Bolt had bothered to ask me what I thought about McCain, rather than assuming, he would have found out that I've been a pretty harsh and consistent critic of McCain's. But why let the facts get in the way of a good smear?

In fact, several times, I called for fairness and honesty from both sides.

My post wasn't inspired by any support for McCain (although I do like Palin a lot, I'm probably going to vote for a 3rd party candidate) but just out of hating this kind of childish crap that we see every four years, turning the political process from an honest and in depth examination of the issues and the best candidate to seeing how much mud we can throw on our oponent.

Ironically, Lightening Bolt has just illustrated the very thing I was posting about.

Like I said, the issue isn't whether or not my opinion is similar to somebody else's, but whether or not what I've said is correct.

For REAL change right now, I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

Why don't you start by telling us what Obama plans to do.

[flyboy55]

Was Charlie Gibson "fair" with Gov. Sarah Palin?

Did you see the interview? Mr. Good Morning America has interviewed many people. Do you feel there was another Charlie Gibson behing the microphone or like Fox news, was he fair and balnaced?

I don't think he was fair at all. In fact, in two instances, he purposely took her statements out of context in order to paint her as a religious fanatic.

Mostly, I thought it was odd that he wouldn't shut up about President Bush.

For some reason, the left just doesn't seem to understand that President Bush is not running for re-election.

Thankfully there is a two term limit, but as we've seen, a guy can do a lot of damage in eight years.

But wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that there would be some continuity between one Republican administration and another? Especially in the case of a guy (McCain) who has been such a consistent supporter of the current administration's program?

Also, Sarah Palin is being billed as a Republican 'reform' candidate, so it might be pertinent to ask her to define how she might differ from the current Republican administration. In that case, George Bush's name would be sure to come up.

Someone needs to ask the pertinent questions.

In a way, all the distraction of Sarah Palin's candidacy is doing the Republicans a favor. Nobody is talking about the disastrous Bush administration and McCain's support for its policies.

Why don't you start by telling us what Obama plans to do.

Discussing the issues takes some investment of time and effort. Rather than a large 'cut and paste' try reading some of his policy positions and plans to take the nation in a different direction than the one the Republicans launched us on eight years ago?

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

[mikemck]

But wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that there would be some continuity between one Republican administration and another? Especially in the case of a guy (McCain) who has been such a consistent supporter of the current administration's program?

John McCain has already laid his platform out on the table. Why can't they just discuss John McCain's platform?

Also, Sarah Palin is being billed as a Republican 'reform' candidate, so it might be pertinent to ask her to define how she might differ from the current Republican administration. In that case, George Bush's name would be sure to come up.

Someone needs to ask the pertinent questions.

But the things you're suggesting aren't pertinent. All they are is a way for liberal leaning so-called "journalists" to hammer home the perceived notion of a connection between the two.

Nobody is talking about the disastrous Bush administration and McCain's support for its policies.

Again, nobody is talking about it because President Bush isn't running.

[Lightning Bolt]

For REAL change right now, I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

Why don't you start by telling us what Obama plans to do.

...and that's the EXACT response I get every time. ...no answer to the question.
I'll give you another chance.

[Wino you know]

I can't speak for anyone else, and he wasn't my first choice, but I'M supporting McCain because we NEED a president with a COWBOY MENTALITY for a change.
GUNS, GOD, & GUTS!
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES.

Now-WHAT will Obama do that has you all wetting your panties?
(Other than the fact he isn't President Bush)?
I'll give you one more chance.

[mikemck]

For REAL change right now, I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

Why don't you start by telling us what Obama plans to do.

...and that's the EXACT response I get every time. ...no answer to the question.
I'll give you another chance.

So, let me get this straight: you asked specifically for John McCain supporters and then you get mad because somebody who's not a John McCain supporter doesn't answer?

But anyway, thanks for illustrating my point that Obama's own supporters can't give any reason to vote for him.

Like I said, Lightening Bolt, if you really want to put me in my place, then the answer isn't in falsely accusing me of plagiarism or attacking anybody. If you really want to put me in my place, then refute what I said.

[Lightning Bolt]

I can't speak for anyone else, and he wasn't my first choice, but I'M supporting McCain because we NEED a president with a COWBOY MENTALITY for a change.
GUNS, GOD, & GUTS!
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES.

Now-WHAT will Obama do that has you all wetting your panties?
(Other than the fact he isn't President Bush)?
I'll give you one more chance.

sorry, Garry. I asked the question, I put out the challenge.... first. Go for it.

[Lightning Bolt]

For REAL change right now, I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

Why don't you start by telling us what Obama plans to do.

...and that's the EXACT response I get every time. ...no answer to the question.
I'll give you another chance.

Why are you asking me? You said you want John McCain supporters.

But anyway, thanks for illustrating my point that Obama's own supporters can't give any reason to vote for him.

that's a smart response to my question... to not answer it... or somehow deflect it.
Can't answer it , can you?

[flyboy55]

I can't speak for anyone else, and he wasn't my first choice, but I'M supporting McCain because we NEED a president with a COWBOY MENTALITY for a change.
GUNS, GOD, & GUTS!
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES.

Now-WHAT will Obama do that has you all wetting your panties?
(Other than the fact he isn't President Bush)?
I'll give you one more chance.

That wouldn't exactly qualify as 'change', unless you mean to say that George Bush wasn't sufficiently possessed of "GUNS, GOD, & GUTS".

Are you saying you think George W. Bush is a dove?

[mikemck]

that's a smart response to my question... to not answer it... or somehow deflect it.
Can't answer it , can you?

OK. Let's recap. Here is what you said:

I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

c'mon... try to name just one.

Please pay special attention to the highlighted part. You asked specifically for McCain supporters. How many times do I have to tell you that I'm not voting for McCain?

I'm not voting for McCain. That means I am NOT a McCain supporter.

[Wino you know]

I can't speak for anyone else, and he wasn't my first choice, but I'M supporting McCain because we NEED a president with a COWBOY MENTALITY for a change.
GUNS, GOD, & GUTS!
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES.

Now-WHAT will Obama do that has you all wetting your panties?
(Other than the fact he isn't President Bush)?
I'll give you one more chance.

sorry, Garry. I asked the question, I put out the challenge.... first. Go for it.

That's my answer, Brad.
We NEED a cowboy president.
Someone about 20 miles to the right of Ghenghis Khan.

No, I'm NOT running, so McCain will have to do.

[Wino you know]

Are you saying you think George W. Bush is a dove?

YES!

FINALLY!
A smart liberal who GETS it.

I always KNEW there was something I liked about you, flyboy.

[Lightning Bolt]

that's a smart response to my question... to not answer it... or somehow deflect it.
Can't answer it , can you?

Dude, here is what you said:

I'd like to see ANY of the McCain supporters post what they think he WOULD do that doesn't duplicate or extend the administration's current policies.

c'mon... try to name just one.

Please pay special attention to the highlighted part. You asked specifically for McCain supporters. How many times do I have to tell you that I'm not voting for McCain?

I'm not voting for McCain. That means I am NOT a McCain supporter.

Fine.
If you're not defending or supporting John McCain, that's fine by me.
I'm debating with anyone out there who's voting for the next eventual President,
because it makes the conversation so much more relevant.

Good luck with your 3rd party choice, and have a nice day

[mikemck]

If you're not defending or supporting John McCain, that's fine by me.
I'm debating with anyone out there who's voting for the next eventual President,
because it makes the conversation so much more relevant.

Good luck with your 3rd party choice, and have a nice day

OK. Just to recap: you never were able to refute what I said, you never were able to back up your claim that I plagiarized my post and "attacked" anyone, and you never were able to name one thing Obama has done.

It's interesting that you admit that John McCain is going to be the next eventual president, though.

[Lightning Bolt]

I can't speak for anyone else, and he wasn't my first choice, but I'M supporting McCain because we NEED a president with a COWBOY MENTALITY for a change.
GUNS, GOD, & GUTS!
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES.

Now-WHAT will Obama do that has you all wetting your panties?
(Other than the fact he isn't President Bush)?
I'll give you one more chance.

sorry, Garry. I asked the question, I put out the challenge.... first. Go for it.

That's my answer, Brad.
We NEED a cowboy president.
Someone about 20 miles to the right of Ghenghis Khan.

No, I'm NOT running, so McCain will have to do.

I hear ya' Garry!
It's just that, to borrow a Reagan line, I don't understand people that somehow feel that, economically, we're better off now than we were 10 years ago??