Did Gibson have a double standard for Palin?

[-Cp]

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]



Hot Air Blog Archive Did Gibson have a double standard for Palin? Update: ABC’s edits

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't see a double standard. All the questions seemed legit to me.

 

[Ninja]

Liberals never learn. Every "gotcha!" they've tried has backfired.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

I don't see a double standard. All the questions seemed legit to me.

At least none of the questions was above her pay-grade.

Hey! When are you guys gonna find somebody eligible for that pay-grade?

 

[Gem]

I have no issue what so ever with the questions Gibson asked Palin, nor the way he asked them. If he wants to ask her 18 times in one interview if she thinks she has enough experience because he does not agree with her answer, he can...if people feel it makes him look like a petulant, angry school teacher (as some have claimed), so be it.

I would just like these same questions to be asked of Obama...since their experience-levels are commensurate...we should be equally concerned about both.

Palin could have had a perfectly nice interview if Gibson had asked her, "How does your family feel about you breaking this glass ceiling?" "How did it feel to give that speech at the convention?" etc...instead, he asked her tough questions...no one should whine about that...but everyone should be asking why Obama isn't hit just as hard in his interviews. (Instead...Obama was hit hard during a debate...and the left went nuts and asked for peoples heads!)

 

[Denny Crane]

Hey! When are you guys gonna find somebody eligible for that pay-grade?

Probably when you guys quit nominating someone who doesn't realize Iraq isn't on the border of Afganistan.

 

[jillian]

Liberals never learn. Every "gotcha!" they've tried has backfired.

as opposed to the really effective disgusting campaign karl rove and the swiftboater have run?

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Probably when you guys quit nominating someone who doesn't realize Iraq isn't on the border of Afganistan.

So you take your cues from the GOP?

Ni-i-i-ice.

Rove told Obama there were 57 states.

 

[Denny Crane]

So you take your cues from the GOP?

Ni-i-i-ice.

Rove told Obama there were 57 states.

I take my cues from listening to stupidity coming out of politicians mouths.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Well, I am one who thinks they are questions that needed to be asked

of both candidates.

Actually, I think the softballs that Obama got were probably more offensive. If Gibson is taking on the roll of a job interviewer, which the vibe I got from the Palin interview, then Obama got the "affirmative action" interview, in all its most pejorative meanings, while Palin got the real interview of someone who is getting a job that requires qualifications other than being the member of a must hire minority, who will be shunted off and ignored after he gets on the payroll.

 

[Silence]

I have no issue what so ever with the questions Gibson asked Palin, nor the way he asked them. If he wants to ask her 18 times in one interview if she thinks she has enough experience because he does not agree with her answer, he can...if people feel it makes him look like a petulant, angry school teacher (as some have claimed), so be it.

I would just like these same questions to be asked of Obama...since their experience-levels are commensurate...we should be equally concerned about both.

Palin could have had a perfectly nice interview if Gibson had asked her, "How does your family feel about you breaking this glass ceiling?" "How did it feel to give that speech at the convention?" etc...instead, he asked her tough questions...no one should whine about that...but everyone should be asking why Obama isn't hit just as hard in his interviews. (Instead...Obama was hit hard during a debate...and the left went nuts and asked for peoples heads!)

People have been questioning Obama's experience for the last 19 months... Clinton and all the other democrats he ran against questioned his experience... the media questioned his experience...even McCain has questioned his experience....the PUBLIC decided he was experienced ENOUGH...

see that's the inherent difference between Obama and Palin... the PEOPLE got to decide Obama was experienced enough for them... Palin was chosen by McCain (after running a campaign based on experience no less) therefore the question of her experience is legit because the PEOPLE didn't know anything about her prior to her being placed second in line for the Presidency.

As for Palin breaking the glass ceiling? she didn't... Hillary Clinton did that... Palin is like a second string quarter back that comes in at the end of the game after the first stringer has gotten them a comfortable lead and they win the game without much effort on the second stringers part... Hillary did all the work... Palin and the GOP seem to want to get the credit.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

People have been questioning Obama's experience for the last 19 months... Clinton and all the other democrats he ran against questioned his experience... the media questioned his experience...even McCain has questioned his experience....the PUBLIC decided he was experienced ENOUGH...

Correction the liberal base voting in the primaries decided and even then it was a bitter contest to the end where a more experienced (albeit just as liberal) candidate won.

see that's the inherent difference between Obama and Palin... the PEOPLE got to decide Obama was experienced enough for them... Palin was chosen by McCain (after running a campaign based on experience no less) therefore the question of her experience is legit because the PEOPLE didn't know anything about her prior to her being placed second in line for the Presidency.

You do remember that McCain is the one running for president? It's not like Palin steps in on 21 Jan, 2009.

Meanwhile your guy can't even run a google search to keep from ironically embarrassing himself on with an ad about McCain lack of internet useage.

Face facts: He touts his campaigning experience as a resume credit towards hi executive experience...and he's sinking in the polls!

As for Palin breaking the glass ceiling? she didn't... Hillary Clinton did that... Palin is like a second string quarter back that comes in at the end of the game after the first stringer has gotten them a comfortable lead and they win the game without much effort on the second stringers part... Hillary did all the work... Palin and the GOP seem to want to get the credit.

I thought Ferraro broke the ceiling. Didn't they teach about her in feminist studies?

Hillary made it to the senate as a consolation prize for trophy-husband fondling other women.

 

[PeterS]

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]



Hot Air Blog Archive Did Gibson have a double standard for Palin? Update: ABC’s edits

Palin hadn't just wrapped up the primary and Obama had been interviewed 1,000 times-we knew his basic positions. We knew nothing about Palin. Even though I think Gibson is a idiot the questions seem in line for the time frame asked.

 

[SwingVoter]

No question who Gibson's voting for. Contrast that with his pal George Steph., know he's a Dem because he worked for Clinton, but not that obvious if you listen to him ask questions.

 

[Silence]

Correction the liberal base voting in the primaries decided and even then it was a bitter contest to the end where a more experienced (albeit just as liberal) candidate won.

did you read what you just wrote? you're an idiot... Obama won the primaries not Clinton... and yes the DEMOCRATS elected him as THEIR nominee... hence the PEOPLE decided they wanted him representing them... jeez you're slow

You do remember that McCain is the one running for president? It's not like Palin steps in on 21 Jan, 2009.

I do remember, does anyone else? why do people keep comparing Palin's experience with Obama's? oh that's right because John McCain made EXPERIENCE a campaign issue prior to picking Palin.... so logic would say that if McCain feels Obama isn't experienced enough neither is Palin and the POINT of the VP is to be READY to step in as President from day ONE!

Meanwhile your guy can't even run a google search to keep from ironically embarrassing himself on with an ad about McCain lack of internet useage.

what does that even mean? McCain admited he's illiterate with computers back during the primaries when asked if he uses a PC or a Mac... he said he has his wife do all that stuff cuz he knows nothing about computers... are you all claiming now he doesn't use it because of his "injuries"? he uses a cell phone just fine and newsflash to you also they make computers that have software that is voice activiated... people with NO arms know how to use a fucking computer you dipshit!

Face facts: He touts his campaigning experience as a resume credit towards hi executive experience...and he's sinking in the polls!

umm no, he touts his years working with people in the communities, years as a civil rights attorney/constitutional law professor and a IL state legislature...in addition to his years in the Senate where he serves on the Senate Foreign Relations committee.... nice try though...

now go back to your room and curl up into a fetal position and suck your thumb

I thought Ferraro broke the ceiling. Didn't they teach about her in feminist studies?

Hillary made it to the senate as a consolation prize for trophy-husband fondling other women.

Ferraro dented it but she was like Palin... picked by the nominee.. Hillary ran on her own... and almost made it...if only she hadn't turned negagive and ran a shitty campaign..

 

[frazzledgear]

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]



Hot Air Blog Archive Did Gibson have a double standard for Palin? Update: ABC’s edits

Even though the two interviews were clearly different -one intended to lob some softballs for one candidate, and the other hoping to embarrass and discredit the VP candidate from the other ticket -people aren't stupid. Even though Democrats and the liberal media believe they are and will believe whatever they tell them to believe.

People can see which person was dealt the tougher questions -AND the motivation for the stark difference in questions. The majority of people in this country already believed that the media was intent on helping Obama win anyway, even before the Palin pick -and this only confirms that belief. For good reason. They are.

But if they do the same thing in the VP debate, people will be outraged about it which can only result in ANOTHER backlash -and not one that will benefit Obama. Maybe Obama's camp and the media haven't figured this out yet -but McCain LOVES this blatantly disparate treatment of Palin compared to Obama who wants an even higher office. At least McCain knows that people really aren't as stupid as the left believes. Too bad that is a founding premise of liberalism though -because I don't expect the liberal media to change a thing here. And McCain is certainly hoping they don't either.

 

[Ninja]

Even though the two interviews were clearly different -one intended to lob some softballs for one candidate, and the other hoping to embarrass and discredit the VP candidate from the other ticket -people aren't stupid. Even though Democrats and the liberal media believe they are and will believe whatever they tell them to believe.

People can see which person was dealt the tougher questions -AND the motivation for the stark difference in questions. The majority of people in this country already believed that the media was intent on helping Obama win anyway, even before the Palin pick -and this only confirms that belief. For good reason. They are.

But if they do the same thing in the VP debate, people will be outraged about it which can only result in ANOTHER backlash -and not one that will benefit Obama. Maybe Obama's camp and the media haven't figured this out yet -but McCain LOVES this blatantly disparate treatment of Palin compared to Obama who wants an even higher office. At least McCain knows that people really aren't as stupid as the left believes. Too bad that is a founding premise of liberalism though -because I don't expect the liberal media to change a thing here. And McCain is certainly hoping they don't either.

Repped. Gibson's hit piece (which I believe Obama was involved in, BTW) has backfired.

The Obama/Biden is melting down, and we have the pleasure of watching it happen right before our very eyes

 

[frazzledgear]

the best part of the gibson/interview is gibson's two different outlooks on the bush doctrine. so which one is it?

The Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war… as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us.” --Charlie Gibson, last night.

“The president in his speech last night, very forceful…He also outlined what is being called the Bush Doctrine, a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.” --Charlie Gibson, 2001.

or maybe wiki?

"...the doctrine was articulated more fully in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, when President Bush declared that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor terrorist groups as terrorist states themselves. This policy was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001"

I've got news for you. Every President in history has had the power and authority to a pre-emptive attack in order to prevent an enemy from attacking us first. And always will. Our Constitution is not a suicide pact no matter how many liberals squeal that is really is. Our Constitution doesn't demand that we must first have tens of thousands of dead before acting to protect the people of this country. If you think otherwise, you live in the wrong country -but I don't actually know of one that believes they must first have a bunch of dead people before taking their enemy's threats seriously. So I don't know which country you need to be in -but if you NEED to see tens of thousands of dead Americans first, it sure isn't THIS country.

As for the part about any country that finances or harbors terrorists being the same as the terrorists themselves -exactly which part of that do YOU find objectionable? Since international terrorists cannot survive at all without that kind of support from a government -what would you change about that? Bush got hit up broadside with reality -that we couldn't take on every single country that financed and harbored international terrorists all at the same time. But that sure as hell doesn't mean they aren't terrorist suppporting states and no better than the terrorists they are making sure can continue with their terrorist activities, does it?

 

[Ninja]

Bingo. When the fuck did we become Japan?

 

[chapstic]

I've got news for you. Every President in history has had the power and authority to a pre-emptive attack in order to prevent an enemy from attacking us first. And always will. Our Constitution is not a suicide pact no matter how many liberals squeal that is really is. Our Constitution doesn't demand that we must first have tens of thousands of dead before acting to protect the people of this country. If you think otherwise, you live in the wrong country -but I don't actually know of one that believes they must first have a bunch of dead people before taking their enemy's threats seriously. So I don't know which country you need to be in -but if you NEED to see tens of thousands of dead Americans first, it sure isn't THIS country.

As for the part about any country that finances or harbors terrorists being the same as the terrorists themselves -exactly which part of that do YOU find objectionable? Since international terrorists cannot survive at all without that kind of support from a government -what would you change about that? Bush got hit up broadside with reality -that we couldn't take on every single country that financed and harbored international terrorists. But that sure as hell doesn't mean they aren't terrorist suppporting states and no better than the terrorists they are making sure can continue with their terrorist activities, does it?

the part i find offensive is the yo-bama supporters claiming palin didn't know what the bush doctrine is when gibson didn't know himself. oh and i'm sure most those yo-bama supporters don't know and don't care to know.