Sarah Palin interview
Here is ABC’s Charlie Gibson’s interview with Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin last night, in 4 parts.
See parts 2, 3, and 4 on page 2…
What did you think?
Sep.12, 2008 9:45 am |
Political anti-life bias |
Commenting Rules
Do's
- “Criticize ideas, not people.”
- Create one original moniker and stick with it.
- Please use a unique name.
- Be civil and considerate.
- Read fully and consider carefully before responding.
Do Not's
- Blasphemy will not be tolerated.
- No swearing or slandering of others.
- No deliberate inflammatory comments.
- Do not violate another’s privacy.
- Do not threaten fellow commenters or anyone else.
- No personal, racial, ethnic or gender-based insults/slurs.
- Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I think Sarah Palin is the person for “such a time as this”.
No question, abosolutely.
The one personality trait that MUST be present in our leader is character.
Was Bill Clinton ready to lead? I say NO. He had character issues that resulted in huge damage to this country that led to 9/11.
Character and integrity is EVERYTHING.
Barack Obama may be an intelligent guy, but a person who does not combine that intelligence with character has no wisdom. His lying on the BAIPA and his changes in position from everything to energy, the war, and taxes means he will say anything to get elected. Why, so he can put his true agenda of high taxes, big government, a severly crippled military, and a disastrous energy policy in place when he gets in.
Very simply, he has demonstrated that he cannot be trusted.
Look, this is not just about someone who can read a book, take a test, appear great, stir a crowd, make a great speech. This is about a person who can weigh the issues at hand and make tough decisions and that without hemming and hawing and then make that decision based on sound moral values.
Let’s give a woman a try for once at least at the VP position, a godly woman, a woman with demonstrated leadership skills and a woman who has dmonstrated that she can be trusted with our lives and our families.
There’s something else that the Dems are trying to do here which is very subtle and do not be decieved at this. In questioning Sarah Palin so extensively on her qualifications, they are giving the impression and sending a subliminal message that John McCain is going to get elected and just drop dead. I know that’s what they hope for if he get’s elected, however, did anyone see John McCain’s 96 year old and vibrant mother?
Know this. These Liberal vultures are expert and extracting info from focus groups and then crafting a strategy and “image” based on that info.
Not only do the Dems want to create class warfare and envy, they want to re-create the generation gap. Do not fall for any of it.
This election is about Barack Obama versus John McCain. Where’s Curt Gibson’s questioning of Joe Biden on his influence peddling with lobbyist, payoff’s, etc. Joe Biden is a scandal waiting to happen.
I’d like to hear Charles Gibson ask those same questions to Obama, in the same condescending tone. Especially about Obama’s quote about “doing the Lord’s work”, and Obama’s qualifications for presidency.
Palin did very well despite having to deal with all of the loaded questions and assumptions. She is one smart cookie!! The more I learn about her, the more I like her!
She looked like a 7th grader trying to BS her way through an oral quiz she hadn’t studied for.
She was absolutely clueless about what the “Bush Doctrine” was-which is the foundation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the most significant foreign policy of this decade.
Her statement that she “didn’t think twice” about whether she was qalified to be VP was priceless, and true, I am sure.
In all fairness, it is not Palin’s fault, it is McCain’s lack of judgment in picking someone totally unqualified, and then lying about her “qualifications”.
She is very articulate!! Um…ah…er…oh…um…unlike someone else I have seen being interviewed.
Dear Matt Damon,
Take your mouse, move it ever so slowly on the mousepad until you get to the black triangle on the left hand side of each video. Click your mouse. The little circle will move towards the right until the interview is over. Repeat this process for all four videos. Watch. Listen. Learn.
LOL Carla, 10:31
LTL, you are sounding more and more desperate every time you post. It’s kind of like music to my ears.
Sarah was put in the same “defensive” position as Obama was when he was interviewed by Bill O’Reilly (except that Bill didn’t speak in a sexist, condescending way to Obama).
She came through that ordeal very well, as did Obama. I can’t say that Charles Gibson looked anywhere near as professional as Bill O’Reilly did, though.
On “Bush Doctrine”
That’s a liberal talking point. Not some official policy. Also, it incompasses a wide range of Bush’s foreign policy, and “in what respect?” was a perfectly reasonable clarification to make.
As for Palin’s interview in general, she did a great job. I could not believe the biased questioning that she stood up to. Can you imagaine if Obama were drilled like this? She did great, and didn’t miss a beat or fall into any of Gibson’s “traps”.
My reaction? I was stunned at the condescending tone and body language of Charles Gibson. He towered over Governor Palin which made her look like a little girl.
All I can say is – she has her work cut out for her! If she can survive the scrutiny and trickery of the liberal MSM, then she will make a great VP and President (if the need should present itself).
You go, girl!
“She was absolutely clueless about what the “Bush Doctrine” was-which is the foundation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the most significant foreign policy of this decade.”
—————————————
If you think this is true, then why do liberal/ Democrats INSIST that she and McCain are “more of the same”?
My reaction? I was stunned at the condescending tone and body language of Charles Gibson. He towered over Governor Palin which made her look like a little girl.
All I can say is – she has her work cut out for her! If she can survive the scrutiny and trickery of the liberal MSM, then she will make a great VP and President (if the need should present itself).
You go, girl!
Posted by: Valerie at September 12, 2008 10:51 AM
Ha ha!! I haven’t read all the comments so forgive me if this was already mentioned…did you notice how they were sitting knee to knee. It was like an interrogation. I would have said “wait a minute Charlie, let’s back up a few feet”. I loved how she said the name “Charlie”, like he was a little child. Quite the juxtaposition.
Just a curious note:
How come a liberal MSM host had a chance to have a 2-day no-holds barred interview with VP candidate Palin BUT there’s no equivalent interview of Biden (or even Obama, for that matter) by a conservative host that asks the right questions AND follow-up questions ?
“I loved how she said the name “Charlie”, like he was a little child.”
Hehe. I don’t know if she did that on purpose, but that’s my favorite kind of humor; that kind of subtly sarcastic, flippant humor. Just thought I’d share that :)
Oliver @ 10:50,
On “Bush Doctrine”
That’s a liberal talking point. Not some official policy. Also, it incompasses a wide range of Bush’s foreign policy, and “in what respect?” was a perfectly reasonable clarification to make.
As for Palin’s interview in general, she did a great job. I could not believe the biased questioning that she stood up to. Can you imagaine if Obama were drilled like this? She did great, and didn’t miss a beat or fall into any of Gibson’s “traps”.
I caught that immediately and thought Sarah was very astute in making sure she knew what Charlie’s question was. Obama would have spouted off something with no clue as to what the question referred to.
. . . . . . . . . . .
LtL @ 10:27,
In all fairness, it is not Palin’s fault, it is McCain’s lack of judgment in picking someone totally unqualified, and then lying about her “qualifications”.
It’s very kind of you to try to be fair but the rest of your comment failed in that regard.
Bobby @ 11: 06,
“I loved how she said the name “Charlie”, like he was a little child.”
Hehe. I don’t know if she did that on purpose, but that’s my favorite kind of humor; that kind of subtly sarcastic, flippant humor. Just thought I’d share that :)
Thanks for sharing. Great minds think alike. :o)
LTL again makes a fool of himself.
“PALIN IS DUMB LOL”
Did Bush ever say “Hey this is the Bush Doctrine dudes, lets go!”
Im glad Gibson said “as I know it” because in fact it refers to many different aspects to his foriegn policy.
I cant wait till she faces Biden.
RSD’s comment:
“How come a liberal MSM host had a chance to have a 2-day no-holds barred interview with VP candidate Palin BUT there’s no equivalent interview of Biden (or even Obama, for that matter) by a conservative host that asks the right questions AND follow-up questions ?”
Because the McCain/Palin campaign chose it. The media outlets all pitch interview packages to the campaign (host, format, location, etc.). The campaign thought this one would best suit their interests.
Too bad Sarah did not rely on Wikipedia, her usual source of foreign policy knowledge, as it has an extensive article on the Bush Doctrine.
If she had relied on Wikipedia, it would not have been updated this morning to reflect that she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is.
It’s insulting to us women that McCain would choose a woman to mop up the undecided female vote; it’s disheartening to see that it appears to be working. Voting for a woman because she is female is sexism. Voting for her because “she is just like us” is scary. Us, the vile, temperamental, grudge holding, secret keeping, flag waving in a sports bar chanting USA dumb****s who’ve never met another with a different perspective, never cared to travel and learn about other cultures; what they hold dear, what they fear. Never any compassion about why people to what they do. God himself said in Jesus Christ that the measure you use to judge others is the same measure He will use to measure you (Matthew 7:2). The Lord’s Prayer says the same thing, “..forgive us our trespasses AS WE FORGIVE those who trespass against us”
“Because the McCain/Palin campaign chose it. The media outlets all pitch interview packages to the campaign (host, format, location, etc.). The campaign thought this one would best suit their interests.
Posted by: DanT at September 12, 2008 11:21 AM”
————————————–
So, the McCain/Palin camp is confident enough to face a no-holds barred interview by the “other” side but the Obama/Biden camp is not?
L Livingstone…????
LTL said “Whomp whomp whomp whomp”
Keep on trucking friend. As soon as you actually respond to someone instead of firing off the typical BS blogging points, maybe we can take you seriously. Right now you are a joke.
Remember when LTL was pushing the photo of Palin in a bikini with a gun? Thats good posting! It wasnt obviously fake or anything!
“Too bad Sarah did not rely on Wikipedia, her usual source of foreign policy knowledge, as it has an extensive article on the Bush Doctrine.
If she had relied on Wikipedia, it would not have been updated this morning to reflect that she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is.
Posted by: LTL at September 12, 2008 11:36 AM”
—————–
LTL:
But isn’t Wikipedia where most if not all of you Libs get your info when you are searching for truth?
Too bad Sarah did not rely on Wikipedia, her usual source of foreign policy knowledge, as it has an extensive article on the Bush Doctrine.
If she had relied on Wikipedia, it would not have been updated this morning to reflect that she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is.
Posted by: LTL at September 12, 2008 11:36 AM
Were you the “updater” at WIKI or are they a liberal bastion as well?
How can wikipedia be reserved for liberals? Anyone can update as long as they cite the source for the information, and if it is not cited it can be, and often from what i seen, is deleted.
Second, this is a bit off topic but relevant to the election:
is anyone else getting sick of these campaign ads? I’m starting to get annoyed by both to be honest, and the ones that are total B.S. tick me off even more. The new McCain ad is absurdly misleading and takes statements wholly out of context and the new Obama ad focuses a little too much on how technology has changed since McCain started. Granted you could argue the concern as valid, but in the scheme of things as long as he knows what buttons not to push(like leading the world into a nuclear holocaust) I don’t mind so much.
HisMan,
Great first post. Very well said. I think Sarah did a wonderful job.
I would love to see some footage from some of Obamas first interviews 19 months ago. Sarah was under extreme extreme pressure and IMO Charles Gibson looked like an old fool. She would have gotten better treatment from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. If anything Sarah came off as a strong woman who was willing to challenge Charlie on a couple occasions and didn’t back down from anything she stated unlike Nobama. Nobama is a spin master and spews out verbal garbage so that noone can understand his true positions.
I didn’t think for a moment she wasn’t aware of the Bush Doctrine. I believe she was trying to clarify the question so she wouldn’t get caught in a trap. I felt her answer before Charlie tried to correct her like a an old school marm addressed his question.
Also, why is it ok for the libs to try and use religion when it serves their purpose, ie. Jesus was a “community organizer” but then label Christian conservatives like they are nutcakes.
Just another hypocritical stance.
HisMan,
I think LTL gets most of heshe’s information from the dregs heshe hangs out with at the head shop.
Seriously, l. do you see the insane amount of irony in this statement. You say “those people are so judgemental!” right after you call them the “vile, temperamental, grudge holding, secret keeping, flag waving in a sports bar chanting USA dumb***s who’ve never met another with a different perspective, never cared to travel and learn about other cultures”
Wow.
Sandy-
there’s a difference in trying to use the Bible alone to justify laws and quite another to point out the hypocrisy of a woman of faith demeaning community organizers when that is incredibly close to what Jesus Christ actually was in this world. He organized people and got them active in their own spiritual salvation, it may be a different organization, but I’d certainly consider it a type of community organizing.
“It’s insulting to us women that McCain would choose a woman to mop up the undecided female vote; it’s disheartening to see that it appears to be working. Voting for a woman because she is female is sexism. Voting for her because “she is just like us” is scary. Us, the vile, temperamental, grudge holding, secret keeping, flag waving in a sports bar chanting USA dumbs***s who’ve never met another with a different perspective, never cared to travel and learn about other cultures; what they hold dear, what they fear. Never any compassion about why people to what they do. God himself said in Jesus Christ that the measure you use to judge others is the same measure He will use to measure you (Matthew 7:2). The Lord’s Prayer says the same thing, “..forgive us our trespasses AS WE FORGIVE those who trespass against us”
Posted by: L.Livingstone at September 12, 2008 11:41 AM”
______________________
DeadWhileSheLivithStone:
Can I ask you a theological question? What in heaven’s name are you talking about?
Exactly who are we to forgive? I think forgiveness is a process whereby the offender asks for forgiveness and the offended forgives. You cannot forgive someone who has not asked for it. Yes, I can interanlly forgive for my own sake and mental well-being. However, God is a perfect example of the forgiveness process. He does not forgive people who do not confess their sin, repent of it and ask to be forgiven for it. He would, in a twinkling of an eye forgive if they fufilled those conditions, however, not until they do. Are you advocating universal salvation?
Do you think going to war with Irag was an act of vengeance or an act of self-preservation? I have absoltutely no interest in taking revenge on any terrorists, however, it would be equally wrong not to protect innocent human beings agasint their murderous ways. Have you ever read Jesus’ statement on what would happen to a person if they hurt a child? You know, “better that they would have never been born and cast into the sea with a millstone around their neck.” Guess that’s real forgiving, huh?
God’s word also says, “My people perish for lack of knowledge”. Oh that is so, so true and they bring so many down with them.
I recommend that you actually spend some time reading, meditating on and understanding God’s Word before you start using Bible verses as support for you warped thinking.
Oh, by the way, you think God supports abortion? Let’s see…He causes conception and knows all of the life circumstance of the woman getting pregnant and then He says, “sure, it’s OK, kill it. I really didn’t know what I was doing.”
There are two kinds of people on earth. There are those that actually hunger and thrist after righteousness and spend the time seeking God with all their hearts, souls and minds and are filled and then, there are those who settle for crumbs.
And this statement of yours is quite, quite telling, “the vile, temperamental, grudge holding, secret keeping, flag waving in a sports bar chanting USA dumb*** who’ve never met another with a different perspective,”. My, my DeadWhileSheLivethStone, how compassionate, how forgiving, how understanding you are.
Dan Says:
“there’s a difference in trying to use the Bible alone to justify laws and quite another to point out the hypocrisy of a woman of faith demeaning community organizers when that is incredibly close to what Jesus Christ actually was in this world. He organized people and got them active in their own spiritual salvation, it may be a different organization, but I’d certainly consider it a type of community organizing.”
I love how the liberals just toatally skip over t he fact that Palin was referencing the initial atta k upon her creditintials that the obama camp put out about 5 minutes after she was announced. It’s not like she just came out and said “community organizers are dumb!”
As for “Jesus was a community organizer” can I just say gag me with a freaking spoon. Obama registered people to vote to make himself a more appealing candidate for law school. Jesus Christ saved our enternal souls. In fact, people during his life didn’t think he was doing enough “community organizing” against the Roman government.
It’s insulting to us women that McCain would choose a woman to mop up the undecided female vote; it’s disheartening to see that it appears to be working. Voting for a woman because she is female is sexism. Voting for her because “she is just like us” is scary. Us, the vile, temperamental, grudge holding, secret keeping, flag waving in a sports bar chanting USA dumb****s who’ve never met another with a different perspective, never cared to travel and learn about other cultures; what they hold dear, what they fear. Never any compassion about why people to what they do. God himself said in Jesus Christ that the measure you use to judge others is the same measure He will use to measure you (Matthew 7:2). The Lord’s Prayer says the same thing, “..forgive us our trespasses AS WE FORGIVE those who trespass against us”
Posted by: L.Livingstone at September 12, 2008 11:41 AM
First of all L., what women are you referring to?
Second, where would you be on this issue if Hillary were the presidential nomination? Probably chanting HILLARY HILLARY HILLARY
John McCain didn’t pick Sarah Palin because she is a woman. I don’t support Sara Palin because she is a woman. I support her for her personal convictions, ideas and experience that has brought her to this opportunity. To say otherwise is extremently insulting to EVERY woman who chooses to support her.
I would also like to add that I know many many women who are supporting Sarah Palin who are doctors, lawyers and business executives. These women are highly educated and well traveled.
You sound like the uneducated narrow minded dumb**** you speak of in your post.
Lauren-
I never compared him to Jesus, other people (including Republicans it seems, though as a joke)have done that. Fact is that Jesus WAS a community organizer, as have been thousands upon thousands, if not millions, throughout history. He is simply one of the more famous ones for obvious reasons.
Actually Lauren, the pharisees seemed to think He might be anti-government if I do recall, or at least anti-government if it was not related to the ministry. From thus comes the famous line Give unto Casaer’s what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s, perhaps one of the best biblical verses ever. Not only did it protect Jesus from being labeled a rebel at the time, but it also is perhaps one of the best ways to demonstrate Jesus could have cared less whether religion was infused into the government, as it bore no concern onto Himself or those who followed Him, so long as they followed their faith and the biblical law.
Sandy-
That is true, however there is also truth to the statement that there are women supporting McCain now because he chose a woman VP. I’ve seen posts by PUMAs who have said they wern’t going to vote who are now going to because McCain added a woman to his ticket, which I do think is disgraceful, at least hold to your ideas/beliefs/convictions rather than voting based on sex. ugh.
there’s a difference in trying to use the Bible alone to justify laws and quite another to point out the hypocrisy of a woman of faith demeaning community organizers when that is incredibly close to what Jesus Christ actually was in this world. He organized people and got them active in their own spiritual salvation, it may be a different organization, but I’d certainly consider it a type of community organizing.
Posted by: Dan at September 12, 2008 12:28 PM
Dan,
In no way was Sarah Palin demeaning community organizers. She was rightfully responding to his criticism of her being a small town mayor.
Why was it ok for a Christian man to demean her for being a small town mayor? He threw the first blow and she had every right to defend herself.
Ha ha!! I haven’t read all the comments so forgive me if this was already mentioned…did you notice how they were sitting knee to knee. It was like an interrogation. I would have said “wait a minute Charlie, let’s back up a few feet”. I loved how she said the name “Charlie”, like he was a little child. Quite the juxtaposition.
Posted by: Janet at September 12, 2008 11:00
And yet you don’t call her condescending for doing so? Can you say double standard, Janet? The woman (and I use that term only in its technical sense is a vindictive , lying snark.
Sandy-
Now let me answer your question with a question-
Was it right for Sarah Palin,speaking as a faithful Christian, to fight back?
Would it not been more Christian of her to simply ignore it, or if not that, recognize it had occurred and say she would not do such a thing to Obama because of the conviction she had in her faith? Wouldn’t that have energized the Christian base of the Republican party just as much and demonstrate a flex of her mental, religious, and political muscle?
The posts by Hisman and Sandy on L Livingstone are mostly personal attacks – mods?
Dan @ 12:28,
Sandy- there’s a difference in trying to use the Bible alone to justify laws and quite another to point out the hypocrisy of a woman of faith demeaning community organizers when that is incredibly close to what Jesus Christ actually was in this world. He organized people and got them active in their own spiritual salvation, it may be a different organization, but I’d certainly consider it a type of community organizing.
First: Could we start a movement to remove the word “hypocrisy” from the English language? It’s WAAY overused.
Second: God is and never was a community organizer. His word is TRUTH, not a suggestion. “Got them active in their spiritual salvation”? “It might be a different organization”????? No. God IS our spiritual salvation.
Is this “former-Catholic, Dan”? I think you’ve been away too long. Are you confusing Church Doctrine with “liberation theology”, perhaps?
,
Questioning whether or not a very small town mayor makes one qualified to be VP to a very shaky Prez, is quite different than what Palin did, which was to generalize that what community organizers do lacks responsibility, and in general it was the manner in which Palin speaks and campaigns – unnecessarily confrontational – short term: snarky. She lacks class and diplomacy. Her pride in being the type of hockey mom that is considered the worst type of sports parent shows that she is fully vested in this persona.
phylosopher-
personal attacks/snide remarks tend to riddle posts here, by just about everyone from both sides. It’s the nature of politics it turns nasty.
Though I agree there are times posts should be deleted, I think the best option would simply be to start editing posts instead of deleting them outright. Granted, I don’t know if that’s a tool the mods have available (since abuse of power could lead to bad situations, though I do trust the mods we have here whereas others might not), but I would certainly urge Jill to see if thats an option if it isnt already :)
I would vote we get some sort of system where mods can edit posts and take out the pieces that are objectable rather than this delete only system we seem to have.
I realize it could lead to sticky situations if anyone abuses power, but that could be solved by some sort of system that automatically tags that the post was edited and by whom. I don’t know if its possible or not but it’d be nice if it were looked at :)
Ah, what the heck, it said my first one wouldnt go through because I posted too much to fast ughh. Sometimes I hate the way the internet works, lol
I think we should have one or two PC mods. Even tempered ones. Like maybe Doug. Just for a hint of balance, ya know?
Janet-
I understand what you are saying, but to a point the fact remains that to outside observation Jesus would be seen today as some sort of community organizer in the way he went about things.
Dan,
Saying Jesus was kinda like a community organizer, is like saying The General Sherman Tree is kinda like a blade of grass.
Erin-
I would agree with that sentiment, though considering this is a pro-life blog Jill might have a hard time explaining to her colleagues. Then again it may draw more people who see it as more fair/balanced moderating.
Ricky-
to those outside of Christianity, or are atheist, or simply didnt join His movement at the time, that’s exactly what He would seem to be, and in a way what he was.
Hey Dan. It is actually possible for us to edit posts. I have done this a few times by removing a naughty word when that was the only unacceptable thing, but in general it can be tedious. But if Jill decides she wants to do that, then we’ll do that more.
Oh BTW Dan, I very much agree with you about wiki. Since anyone can edit it, usually good people are checking to make sure it’s factual. That does make it a bit more shady for controversial topics like abortion-breast cancer link, but I think in general it is quite reliable. It seems to me to get a bad rap, especially considering the fact that the same people who dis it will link to websites that look like this.
“Community organizing
is a process by which people are brought together to act in common self-interest.”
Seems like that was what Jesus was doing to me.
Bobby- good to know.
And yeah, Wiki does get a bad rap. A study found that it was typically as reliable as the Encyclopedia Britannica, which I thought was pretty funny considering. I use it to find sources for papers and whatnot since I can’t use wikipedia itself. Link citations are so nice :)
BTW, I’m not even saying anything about the content of that website I linked to, just the format and layout of the web design.
Dan,
The difference is in volume. Jesus started, and is sustaining, the biggest movement in history. Christianity changed the face of the world. A community organizer organizes how many people? And for how long?
We most likely will never have a pro-choice moderator here, for many reasons which I won’t go into, but if we were to ever choose one, Dan would certainly be my pick, along with Alexandra. :-)
Ricky-
there is no limit to numbers or time frame. It did in fact change the face of the world, as has every major religion in some way or another. However it doesn’t change the fact it started out as a religious movement begun through Jesus’ own organizing. Technically when He died he would cease to be a community organizer, of course that is also the point he rejoined with God and sat at His right hand, so really it is now His Church in charge of the orgnizing, which it does and it moves downward to each individual parish, etc.
Bethany-
Thank you for the compliment :)
Ha ha!! I haven’t read all the comments so forgive me if this was already mentioned…did you notice how they were sitting knee to knee. It was like an interrogation. I would have said “wait a minute Charlie, let’s back up a few feet”. I loved how she said the name “Charlie”, like he was a little child. Quite the juxtaposition.
Posted by: Janet at September 12, 2008 11:00
And yet you don’t call her condescending for doing so? Can you say double standard, Janet? The woman (and I use that term only in its technical sense is a vindictive , lying snark.
Posted by: phylosopher at September 12, 2008 12:44 PM
OK. Since, you ask, I have no problem with Sarah countering Gibson’s condescension with a bit of her own, whether or not that was her actual intention, I don’t know. After listening to all of the interview, I realized she addressed him by name many times, so that apparently is her natural speaking style.
Are you male or female, I’m sorry, I forget these things… I don’t know why you call her vindictive – Is it the “trooper-gate” investigation that (latest I heard on the news) may be thrown out due to a political conflict of interest between herself and the investigator? Does one episode a snarky, vindictive woman make?
By the way, I think you meant to say she is a “vindictive, lying” barracuda, not “snark”.
Dan, referring to Jesus as a community organizer is both insulting and just-plain wrong.
It’s insulting because He was (and is) the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. Jesus had much bigger fish to fry than organizing a community. He came to save all of mankind — past, present, and future — from our sins. Jesus was the Lamb of God Who took away the sins of the world. Registering people to vote is a laudable goal, but it doesn’t compare to what Jesus did. Even if you compare Him to the best community organizers in history, such as Gandhi and MLK, Jesus still outshines them as the Sun outshines a mere candle.
Gandhi freed India from British rule. Jesus freed the entire world from the power of Hell.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. worked to gain equal rights for African-Americans. Jesus earned the right for all people to become children of God and heirs to the Kingdom of Heaven.
But non-believers will not recognize all of the above points, so please consider another distinction. Jesus simply was not a community organizer. He never led a march, held a rally, or organized a demonstration. He showed very little concern about politics, even going so far as to tell His followers to accept the unjust (and pagan) Roman emperors. At His trial, Jesus explicitly denied that His mission was “of this world.” Claiming that Jesus was a community organizer is a bit like saying that Albert Einstein was a star quarterback in the NFL. It’s simply not true.
I made this comment on an earlier thread, but I’ll repeat myself here. Liberals should stop trying to comment on Christianity as if they know what they’re saying. Either make an investment of time and learn about the real Jesus … or give up and embrace paganism. Fake Christianity doesn’t impress anyone….
Dan,
I can kind of see what you’re saying in that both Obama. and Jesus share a general term that encompasses some of what they do.
However, Palin’s point was that it was ironic that a “community organizer” would criticize a mayor for not having enough experience with substantial responsibility. When, in fact, a community organizer, at least in Obama’s case, has less.
Palin was speaking of Obama’s specific job, not everything the term “community organizer” might encompass.
It was interesting when Charlie asked Sarah “if she hesitated before telling McCain she was ready for the V.P. nomination”. She answered no, there was no hesitation, that a leader must be able to have the resolve to be firm in their convictions (my own words).
Gibson’s replied at one point in the interview that it took HUBRIS. Did he say it because she was a woman? I don’t think he would have made such a comment if she were a man. More condescension or a compliment?
That is true, however there is also truth to the statement that there are women supporting McCain now because he chose a woman VP. I’ve seen posts by PUMAs who have said they wern’t going to vote who are now going to because McCain added a woman to his ticket, which I do think is disgraceful, at least hold to your ideas/beliefs/convictions rather than voting based on sex. ugh.
Posted by: Dan at September 12, 2008 12:41 PM
Hi Dan,
I have always stayed away from gender issues and focus on the best person for the job. IMO, Sarah Palin has the background that is needed in DC. I don’t want to doubt your assessment of some PUMA members, but I was under the impression that this group was formed more out of dissention due to the unfair treatment Hillary received in the primary and now they are making a statement by voting for the opposing ticket.
Dan wrote:
It did in fact change the face of the world, as has every major religion in some way or another. However it doesn’t change the fact it started out as a religious movement begun through Jesus’ own organizing.
Not true. Jesus didn’t organize anything. He picked His disciples and He taught them as much as they could handle. But he did not “organize” anything.
The closest that Jesus ever came to “organizing” was His famous proclamation to Peter:
“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Catholics interpret this passage to mean that Jesus chose Peter to lead His church. In that case, I suppose one could say that Jesus picked Peter to be a community organizer on His behalf … but it still doesn’t show Jesus doing any of the actual organizing. He delegated that work.
Meanwhile, Protestants have a whole different interpretation of that passage. We believe that the “rock” to which Jesus referred was Peter’s confession of faith — “You are the Christ” — not Peter himself. Therefore, Jesus was not conveying any special authority on Peter, but rather clarifying the role of faith. Whoever believes in Jesus as the Son of God will have the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, and Hell itself will not be able to stand against them.
When did Jesus organize His community? He preached, taught, led by example, performed miracles, suffered, died, and rose from the dead. Jesus did a lot of things, but He was never a community organizer.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/carol.asp
Doesn’t it bother you pro-lifers that you’re basically voting for Michael Schiavo? Actually, considering the situation Michael Schiavo was far more patient and compassionate, he spent years trying to care for his sick wife while McCain ran off with the first beauty queen he could find.
You’re kidding yourself if you think McCain wouldn’t have done the exact same thing.
Just saying…
Jess, if that article wasn’t “fair and balanced” I don’t know what is!
Look, he admits that his greatest moral failing was the failing of his first marriage. What more do you want him to say?
Also, McCain didn’t, you know, petition the state to kill his wife.
Jess,
You really need to get some better sources of information. And that’s an understatement.
The posts by Hisman and Sandy on L Livingstone are mostly personal attacks – mods?
Posted by: phylosopher at September 12, 2008 12:48 PM
phylo,
How did I atack L.L.? My point was to call her out on her insulting insinuation that people who would chose to vote for Sarah Palin are dumbshits including myself. I didn’t call her a dumbshit, just said she sounded like one by the tone of her post.
Community organizer is a fancy name for a social worker…make sure people get their food stamps, be a surrogate for housing, etc. Lots and lots of volunteer folks do that in many different ways…if just for their families….each and every day and don’t brag about it. So I suppose that’s why O had to get a little pay back in order to get his own living quarters’ spread. Sometimes those who help others to get their entitlements begin to feel they are entitled as well…since they gave up the high paying jobs that usually go with an expensive education that most folks have to pay back.
And since when does an objective interviewer get to press his own personal pre-ordained presumptions about the interviewee?? Just ask the question without all the “can you look the people in the eye and claim that you have the experience to be VP?” And when she says yes due to her similar experience to those who previously also ran for even President, he calls that “hubris”.
So when would same interviewer ask same to that other Presidential nominee…”can you honestly look folks in the eye and tell them that social work and voting present rather than having any real results from actions makes you qualified to be President….or even “Moses”?” And then follow up with how come all that “change” nonsense has flown out the window as you now have acquiesced to McCain’s views…re: withdrawal; taxes – redistribution of wealth (now you’re going to delay them); as well as your being co-opted to get down so far in the gutter re: your personal attacks that your “different politician” slogans are now just confetti blown in some long ago wind.
Palin is a SAINT…
Despite denials by the Palin campaign, new evidence proves that as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin had a direct hand in imposing fees to pay for post-sexual assault medical exams conducted by the city to gather evidence.
Palin’s role is now confirmed by Wasilla City budget documents available online.
Under Sarah Palin’s administration, Wasilla cut funds that had previously paid for the medical exams and began charging victims or their health insurers the $500 to $1200 fees. Although Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella wrote USA Today earlier this week that the GOP vice presidential nominee “does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test…To suggest otherwise is a deliberate misrepresentation of her commitment to supporting victims and bringing violent criminals to justice,” Palin, as mayor, fired police chief Irl Stambaugh and replaced him with Charlie Fannon, who with Palin’s knowledge, slashed the budget for the exams and began charging the city’s victims of sexual assault. The city budget documents demonstrate Palin read and signed off on the new budget. A year later, alarmed Alaska lawmakers passed legislation outlawing the practice.
Peach pit for the 5 millionith time, the practice was supposed to make the rapist pay for the exam. But, by all means keep saying the same thing over and over again.
Sandy-
Now let me answer your question with a question-
Was it right for Sarah Palin,speaking as a faithful Christian, to fight back?
Would it not been more Christian of her to simply ignore it, or if not that, recognize it had occurred and say she would not do such a thing to Obama because of the conviction she had in her faith? Wouldn’t that have energized the Christian base of the Republican party just as much and demonstrate a flex of her mental, religious, and political muscle?
Posted by: Dan at September 12, 2008 12:46 PM
Dan,
How do equate being a Christian with standing up for yourself? This is a political race Dan. Sarah had every right to call Nobama on his insult to her. If the US is attacked by terrorists do you think she should be a good Christian and just ignore it? Turn the other cheek because of the conviction of her faith?
But Lauren, maybe if they keep repeating it, maybe it will BECOME true!
Sandy-
Now let me answer your question with a question-
Was it right for Sarah Palin,speaking as a faithful Christian, to fight back?
Would it not been more Christian of her to simply ignore it, or if not that, recognize it had occurred and say she would not do such a thing to Obama because of the conviction she had in her faith? Wouldn’t that have energized the Christian base of the Republican party just as much and demonstrate a flex of her mental, religious, and political muscle?
Posted by: Dan at September 12, 2008 12:46 PM
Dan,
How do equate being a Christian with standing up for yourself? This is a political race Dan. Sarah had every right to call Nobama on his insult to her. If the US is attacked by terrorists do you think she should be a good Christian and just ignore it? Turn the other cheek because of the conviction of her faith?
Two weeks ago, many of us were wondering whether McCain had given any thought, much less done any backround check on Palin. The answer is clearly no, and the reason is that the McCain camp had no concern about her qualifications or record, as they simply intended to lie about it, and hope the voters could be mislead.
On the “View” this morning Mc Cain repeated the lies, including that Palin had not asked for earmarks as Governor of Alaska, in the face of irrefutable evidence she asked for over $250 million last year, and $200 million this year.
At this juncture, one must ask if McCain is a pathological liar, or if he is the victim of senile dementia. His choice of Palin suggests the latter.
In any event, his lack of judgment and his repeated lies concerning Palin disqualify him to be president.
LTL, where is your source for the earmark amounts?
Thanks, Bethany! That means a lot coming from you because I thought that maybe you didn’t like me too much. So it really brightened my day to see you say that. :)
Yes LTL,
Where is your irrefutaable evidence?
Heck, even I got confused when Gibson lobbed the “Bush Doctrine” question. I had to look that one up. Come to find Palin’s response was licit. This IS a liberal talking point and a Washington Post article by Dan Froomkin helped to explain that this “doctrine” has changed several times. So Palin’s “In what respect, Charlie?” is a legitimate and necessary follow-up that trips Gibson because Gibson doesn’t even know what he’s talking about.
A policy of preemptive strike is a legitimate one (and not a Bush Doctrine) that every nation has a right to exercise. When Bush decided to invade Iraq he changed foreign policy into one that prevents imminent threats from even taking place. And that’s where Gibson messed up.
I think we should have one or two PC mods. Even tempered ones. Like maybe Doug. Just for a hint of balance, ya know?
Erin, thank you (and you’re so sweet!)
I think it’d take a bit of the fun out for me, though – hard to say just why…. I guess I see a continuum from just an “Amen chorus” and “preaching to the choir,” etc., through brotherhood and sisterhood, affirmation, etc., to the best discourse, in my opinion, which comes from differing viewpoints while remaining cognizant of the things we share.
So, what the heck does that have to do with anything? I’m in my second airport of the day, boozing it up a bit now, and just having a great time. My wife is on the way and we’re off to the golden west to attend in wedding in California.
Overall, I like the “contesting” of things, as opposed to person A saying something and person B saying “yeah.” I’m pretty happy with the moderation here too.
…..
Dan: Then again it may draw more people who see it as more fair/balanced moderating.
Dan, IMO there’s plenty of people here now. I don’t go to any “pro-choice” blogs. What’s the point of that, for a pro-choicer?
Also, I gotta say that Carder is an awesome moderator. I have no quarrel with any of the mods here, but she has just impressed the crap outta me.
I’m probably old enough to be her dad, but I think of her as “mom.”
Alexandra, I’ve always liked you! I’m sorry if that doesn’t always come across right on this blog! :) I think you’re really sweet and one of the most fair individuals I’ve ever seen debate.
Though I agree there are times posts should be deleted, I think the best option would simply be to start editing posts instead of deleting them outright. Granted, I don’t know if that’s a tool the mods have available (since abuse of power could lead to bad situations
Dan, have to laugh – tell you what – I could edit me some posts where you’d be laughing your behind off. ; )
Wow, Bethany! Thanks. You’re pretty awesome yourself, not least because you can make kimchi. ;)
Bethany and Sandy, the earmark amounts have been published literally thousands of times in the last 10 days by the Wall Street Journal, CBS, Washington Post the Associated Press, virtually every television network and newspaper in the country. Google “Palin Alaska earmarks” and take your choice of the first thousand hits.
For comic relief, there is a video from October 2007 in which McCain states that of the GOP candidates, only he has the experience to be president, because just being a mayor (Giuliani) or a Governor (Romney) for a few years does not give you any foreign policy experience.
13 subpoenas were authorized today in “Troopergate”, including one to First Dude Todd Palin. The three committee members voting to issue the subpoenas were two Democrats and a Republican, who represnts Wasilla.
Sarah Palin will be taking “executive privilege” lessons from Bush and Cheney to try to hide 1100 e mails. The straight Talk Express becomes the I won’t Testify or Give you Documents Express!
For those not members of the Sarah Palin cult, go to womenagainstsarahpalinblogspot.com, and sample some of the more than 100,000 letters received there in the past week.
PilesOfDough:
Go back into your hole.
On the “View” this morning Mc Cain repeated the lies, including that Palin had not asked for earmarks as Governor of Alaska, in the face of irrefutable evidence she asked for over $250 million last year, and $200 million this year.
I bet the girls all called him on it with real facts, right?
LTL – “Listening to Lies”?
For comic relief, there is a video from October 2007 in which McCain states that of the GOP candidates, only he has the experience to be president, because just being a mayor (Giuliani) or a Governor (Romney) for a few years does not give you any foreign policy experience.
Posted by: LTL at September 12, 2008 4:16 PM
Palin is not running for President.
“Bush Doctrine” is not an official term. It is a political term. Anyone who says that it is an official term is lying. That you keep pointing us to Wikipedia instead of an official government website to learn about “Bush Doctrine” is proof of that.
And letting pro-abortion people be mods on a pro-life website is kind of like letting the fox guard the henhouse. Which is kind of like electing Barack Obama president.
“Too bad Sarah did not rely on Wikipedia, her usual source of foreign policy knowledge, as it has an extensive article on the Bush Doctrine.
If she had relied on Wikipedia, it would not have been updated this morning to reflect that she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is.”
Must have been written by another person grasping at any way to smear Palin, because it isn’t there now. Yep! That’s right, the whole thing is so ridiculous Wikipedia doesn’t even think it’s worthwhile. Why are we even talking about this? Come on, the Bush Doctrine is a massive umbrella for all sorts of Foreign Policies…it was an attempt at tricking Palin into saying something stupid, which she deftly avoided. Gibson was shown to be ignorant himself, as he was referring specifically to “preemption”.
H,
Thank you. I thought it was an intelligent move on Palin’s part to ask in what respect of the Bush Doctrine he was referring to.
People are so quick to want to find any tiny fault with Palin they will stop at nothing to try and disqualify her.
You’re killing me, Doug, you’re killing me.
Someone’s gotta give SoMG a hug now and then. And remind my fellow prolifers about the rules.
I personally think a prochoice mod would add a certain dynamic to the blog, maybe even increase traffic.
That’s up to the boss.
Are there any rape kits on eBay?
Love To Lie:
Live The Lies:
Let Truth Languish:
Live To Lie:
Lots To Learn:
Low To Lower:
So many acronyms, so little time.
Karl Rove himself, the supposed brains behind “Bush Doctrine” was just on TV about an hour ago, and even he said that “Bush Doctrine” could mean any one of four different things. It has no set definition. It is absolutely foolish to attack Palin for not knowing exactly what Gibson meant by “Bush Doctrine”.
Wasn’t someone complaining that Palin only tripled funding for teenage moms rather than quadrupling it?
Here you go… Our wonderful Illinois governor did for domestic violence victims that try to get out of abusive relationships. BTW, he’s a Democrat in case you didn’t know.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-domestic-violence-program-bosep13,0,654643.story?track=rss
well, since the idea of looking at an abortion through the eyes of someone getting one fell through earlier (as it was apparently inappropriate, didn’t look at it myself) this is a look at it from a point of view of a father in a life or death situation. Good, but very scary. Because of the intensity of emotion, espescially after the event, there is some very strong language, but it is a thought provoking and in my view, amazing post.
http://disgustedbeyondbelief.blogspot.com/2007/04/my-views-on-abortion.html
Washington Post Op-Ed by Charles Krauthammer: Charlie Gibson’s Gaffe
Did you guys know there is 58 states? There is, Obama says so…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
and here’s an update on his abortion beliefs:
http://disgustedbeyondbelief.blogspot.com/2007/04/abortion-with-happier-note.html
Dan, I actually posted on that site when it first came out! My post was in response to someone who said it was “irresponsible” to not immedietly have an abortion.
Cranky,
excellent article by Charles Krauthammer…I think I’ll use part of it for my QoTD tomorrow…
Cranky,
Thanks for the Krauthammer link on Gibson’s Gaffe!
Jasper,
57 States? He must have had a steak with Heinz 57 for lunch.
What a goof!
Jasper-
anything having to do with Obama and 57 states says the video is no longer available.
lauren-
what a coincedence! I just came across it. I can understand where a comment like that could come from, but with that kind of situation I dont think any call would immediately be able to be made. I mean, there’s medical staff everywhere, monitors blood, inner conflict, and most paralyzing of all- fear.
I’m pretty sure it was just a slip of the tongue, Jasper. He meant 47. One to go, no Hawaii and no Alaska, that means 47 states. So he made a mistake. Lynch him, why dontcha?
Erg, why do I keep forgetting to sign things today?
Yes, Cranky beat me to it. Gibson was actually the one who should have been grilled on the “facts” he thought he knew. Maybe his school marm glasses were pinching his nose too much. Will he apologize to Sarah?
KC,
No and it wont matter. Palin showed that she was tough enough to handle a very hard, and artificially at that, interview. The impression is all that matters. She will do very well in the VP debate. Our concern as Republicans now should only be that McCain can continue to stand his own against Obama, and hopefully beat him down in the debates.
Oliver-
I’m not so sure. Most Americans don’t even want to think about going near Russia with a stick, let alone the military.
Not to mention, our space program/role in the ISS is screwed by 2010 unless we either work with the Russians, as we had planned, while we replace the shuttle or we risk the lives of astronauts (with at least 1 or 2 more crews expected to die) by extending the shuttle program. The last option was increase funding to speed up development of Orion, but that option has already been passed upon by Congress.
Or we just give up our role all together, wasting millions, if not billions, we invested in the ISS.
Dan @ 8:46,
The Obama 57 states video is working now….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
Janet-
mine still says sorry, video no longer available.
Dan, Jill posted about Disgusted Beyond Belief’s story a while back. He actually came and commented as well. Here is the post if you’re interested:
https://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/a_husband_and_f.html
“Question: Is it sexist for Doug and LTL to joke about Sarah Palin being a “Vice President I’d Like to F***”?”
Oh please like worse stuff than that wasn’t said about Hillary (and probably more hilarious).
Ya need to lighten up! Laughter lowers the blood pressure, burns calories, and makes everyone feel better!
Just to update everyone, I finished shooting the documentary today!!! The fun part: start editing. The unsettling part: I have the camera taken away from me tomorrow, I can’t shoot any other scenes I might need later! You wont’ believe the stories I have heard through these interviews!!!
For really hilarious stuff here is a great page. I’ve posted some links tot he candidates, but you all should really look at all of them, they are so hilarious!
For really hilarious stuff here is a great page. I’ve posted some links tot he candidates, but you all should really look at all of them, they are so hilarious!
http://www.theonion.com/content/whitehousewar/candidates
**this is the post with the links, my bad**
Bethany-
Thanks for that. It was interesting to go through the comments and see some familiar names and whatnot. I think I might have been reading at that point, don’t know if I had joined in on the commentary, or if I perhaps felt that situation to weighty for me to weigh in on.
PIP,
Funny stuff!
OMG rewatching footage of student mom trying to discuss school with baby fussing all over the place. Decided it’s the cutest thing ever.
More than Gibson’s condescending approach and lack of evenhanded questioning what troubles me about this interview is the editing of Gov. Palin’s answers. They are clearly, often, clipped off.
Arlen, they were indeed edited and the last that I have heard, the producers are refusing to show her responses in their entirety. It is despicable.
Lol, mk, you can’t link us to a private e-mail box. It just don’t work!
Oooops, I’m an idiot…hang on.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1052592/LITTLEJOHN-A-pistol-packin-Looby-Loo-Lefts-worst-nightmare.html
Good, that’s better.
What a fantastic article, MK! Leave it to the Brits.
mk.
Excellent article from Britain! Didn’t miss a beat!
“Question: Is it sexist for Doug and LTL to joke about Sarah Palin being a “Vice President I’d Like to F***”?”
PIP: Oh please like worse stuff than that wasn’t said about Hillary (and probably more hilarious).
Ya need to lighten up! Laughter lowers the blood pressure, burns calories, and makes everyone feel better!
Right on, PIP – and there indeed is plenty of hilarious stuff about Hillary, Obama, etc., out there.
I think a good bit of the humor about the “VPILF” is that it was McCain wearing the shirt.
Edited parts of the interviews by ABC?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/09/13/abc-news-edited-out-key-parts-sarah-palin-interview
The column from Littlejohn is brilliant. Thanks for posting it, MK!
Actually, the Brit spotted something that the American media seems to have utterly missed:
Apart from that, the worst the scandal-hounds have come up with is that Palin, as governor, put pressure on a police chief to fire her former brother-in-law.
Given that said brother-in-law had beaten up her sister and threatened to kill her father, I’d say that far from abusing her office, she showed considerable restraint. I’m surprised she didn’t put a bullet in his head.
Why aren’t we hearing more of the true details behind Troopergate? The trooper in question did all of those things and also tasered his 11-year-old son. All things considered, he should be hanging from the ceiling of the Palin’s family smokehouse right now….
(Too far? Perhaps.)
I watched a glowing profile on Sarah Palin last night. It was on FOX News (surprise, surprise!), and it was entirely positive. The profile was less about hard-hitting news coverage and more about a soft-focused human-interest piece. It was exactly the sort of “aw, shucks, ain’t she great” puffery that the MSM have been running about the Obamas for months now.
(Yes, I can recognize puffery even when it’s my “side” doing the puffing….)
Anyway, the entire commentary on Troopergate was some Alaskan academic saying that he thought it would ultimately amount to nothing. And I agree. Political appointees serve at the whim of the Executive. Just like the non-scandal over the firing of US attorneys a while ago … or the Travelgate non-scandal under the Clintons’ watch … I just can’t spare a lot of energy to care about executives firing appointees. Yeah, whatever.
But there was no mention of the sordid details behind Troopergate. No mention of Trooper Wooten’s violence. No mention of domestic abuse, threats, and the use of a taser against a child. Now if a sympathetic FOX News profile won’t mention these details, who will? Why is the media perfectly happy to dig up the messy details of Bristol Palin’s sex life, yet they’re not willing to talk about a state trooper who is wreaking violent havoc on his own family?
Whoops, messed up my tags. That second paragraph from the Littlejohn article:
Given that said brother-in-law had beaten up her sister and threatened to kill her father, I’d say that far from abusing her office, she showed considerable restraint. I’m surprised she didn’t put a bullet in his head.
… should also be in italics. :(
in the interview Sarah Palin didn’t exactly stand up for her pro-life views. She admitted to them but phrased it as a personal view, & made mention that she doesn’t judge other’s view. She said she believed roe should be overturned, but backed away from saying she would attempt to overturn it. Is this hypocrisy? Or is it just lying to get moderate votes, and then enforce beliefs later?
Deliziosa, Mrs. Palin’s answers most certainly were not hypocritical or deceptive. I would have preferred that she not continually say, “my personal opinion”–every opinion is personal, and a person’s words are always an opinion–but I can see that she needed to emphasize that her views were not necessarily Mr. McCain’s views. Mr. McCain, after all, is the candidate for president, not Mrs. Palin at this point. Good government is not only about having the correct positions but also having the authority to implement those positions.
transcript from ABC News:
GIBSON: In the time I have left, I want to talk about some social issues.
PALIN: OK.
GIBSON: Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?
PALIN: I think it should and I think that states should be able to decide that issue… I am pro-life. I do respect other people’s opinion on this, also, and I think that a culture of life is best for America… What I want to do, when elected vice president, with John McCain, hopefully, be able to reach out and work with those who are on the other side of this issue, because I know that we can all agree on the need for and the desire for fewer abortions in America and greater support for adoption, for other alternatives that women can and should be empowered to embrace, to allow that culture of life. That’s my personal opinion on this, Charlie.
GIBSON: John McCain would allow abortion in cases of rape and incest. Do you believe in it only in the case where the life of the mother is in danger?
PALIN: That is my personal opinion.
GIBSON: Would you change and accept it in rape and incest?
PALIN: My personal opinion is that abortion allowed if the life of the mother is endangered. Please understand me on this. I do understand McCain’s position on this. I do understand others who are very passionate about this issue who have a differing.
GIBSON: Embryonic stem cell research, John McCain has been supportive of it.
PALIN: You know, when you’re running for office, your life is an open book and you do owe it to Americans to talk about your personal opinion, which may end up being different than what the policy in an administration would be. My personal opinion is we should not create human life, create an embryo and then destroy it for research, if there are other options out there… And thankfully, again, not only are there other options, but we’re getting closer and closer to finding a tremendous amount more of options, like, as I mentioned, the adult stem cell research.
GIBSON: Homosexuality, genetic or learned?