Sarah Palin Interview

[The Germanator]

I don't think there is bias. I feel like both sides get a lot of guff from the media. If anything, the main stream media is just horrible these days.

This article sums up a lot about how I feel about it. Of course, the author is probably just a "liberal", right? The facts he mentions about the media won't matter I guess.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa.../28/mcclellan/

EDIT: And I got the Palin quote wrong, I was going from memory. Remind me why "task from God" is any better than "mission from God?" I kind of get what you're saying, but not being a very religious person, it's a bit weird for me. A bit too "holy war" for me I guess.

And Charlie being harsh? He asked her a simple question about the Bush Doctrine. High schoolers are taught what the Bush Doctrine is in their text book these days and she has no clue what it is. I don't think he was harsh, I think he was absolutely befuddled that this woman might be our VP.

Remember Gibson at the Democratic debates?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041700013.html

He was horrible. This time he actually asked questions about a candidate's policies which people haven't been doing enough of lately.

McCain on the View today was fairly humorous as well...

[Bond]

Originally Posted by The Germanator

And Charlie being harsh? He asked her a simple question about the Bush Doctrine. High schoolers are taught what the Bush Doctrine is in their text book these days and she has no clue what it is. I don't think he was harsh, I think he was absolutely befuddled that this woman might be our VP.

This is humorous.

I, personally, could not give a cut-and-dry answer if asked to define the "Bush Doctrine." Perhaps this is because: 1) the "Bush Doctrine" has changed throughout Bush's presidency and 2) Bush's presidency is not yet over.

I can, however, give you a nuanced and intricate answer as to what the "Bush Doctrine" is... sound like anyone else we may know?


And the polarization begins.

[Teuthida]

[Professor S]

I find Matt Damon's comments to be a direct reflection of the sheer hippocracy of many Obama supporters. How do you criticize her experience, as she is running for Vice President, and not Barack Obama who is running for PRESIDENT who has barely more experience on a national stage and less than her as an elected official?

Its this kind of willful blindness that drives me nuts, and honestly, drives a lot of independent minded voter's nuts. All they're doing is bringing more attention to Barack Obama's inexperience, as he is the one running for national office.

And Germ, you make decent mpoints that center on one event in American history, but you must remember that ther majority of politicians, both right AND left were for the Iraq War as it began, so I really don't you can call that as an example of media bias. That and Scott McClellan was and is an idiot who was given the position as more of a favor to his daddy, a practice I've always disliked that Pres. Bush took part in. Still, how do you explain the run-up to this election and the severe, and I mean SEVERE disparity in the coverage in both time given AND the tone in which the news is given?

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Professor S

I find Matt Damon's comments to be a direct reflection of the sheer hippocracy of many Obama supporters. How do you criticize her experience, as she is running for Vice President, and not Barack Obama who is running for PRESIDENT who has barely more experience on a national stage and less than her as an elected official?

Its this kind of willful blindness that drives me nuts, and honestly, drives a lot of independent minded voter's nuts. All they're doing is bringing more attention to Barack Obama's inexperience, as he is the one running for national office.

I don't know about all that the hippocracy isn't in his opinions on it, its in the fact that Mccain chose her dispite using inexperience as a weapon against Obama. He picked someone less experienced on the national stage, and who a lot less people even know about. I think anyone who was bashing Obama for lack of experience, but who is now strongly supporting Palin are the biggest hypocrites there are personally.

(Yes, I'm twisting it back.)

The truth of the matter is the majority of the people are going to vote off of who's in the party they support regardless of how unfit they are for the job. They'll find every reason to defend their canadate and bash the others even if they share in the same downfalls. Most "democrats" and "republicans" are guilty of this.

I think that palin's a cool person with a cool story, but I really think Mccain picked her for all the wrong reasons. It just makes a bigger joke of what this whole election is. If Obama and Mccain are the only two people left fit to be president, then this country is pretty sad right now.

[Dyne]

Hahaha, they were bashing that Damon interview on the Adam Carolla show, I think it was. Let me point out one thing that completely invalidates his opinion:

"McCain has a 1/3 chance OR MORE of surviving his first term and then oh look IT'S PRESIDENT PALIN."

The actual number was that McCain's chance of survival was 1/3 for two terms, not one term. I think someone got a little upset and rushed to judgements a little early.

[Dylflon]

I have a really good idea for a drinking game.


Every time a right-wing, ultra-biased television personality or reporter whines about the "liberal media", everyone takes a drink.

And since there are so many ultra-conservative TV personalities, who are ultra-biased, and straight out maliciously attack the left wing, we'd all get really drunk.

I think we could call it

The Pot Calls the Kettle Black: Drinking Game Edition

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheGame

I don't know about all that the hippocracy isn't in his opinions on it, its in the fact that Mccain chose her dispite using inexperience as a weapon against Obama. He picked someone less experienced on the national stage, and who a lot less people even know about. I think anyone who was bashing Obama for lack of experience, but who is now strongly supporting Palin are the biggest hypocrites there are personally.

(Yes, I'm twisting it back.)

The truth of the matter is the majority of the people are going to vote off of who's in the party they support regardless of how unfit they are for the job. They'll find every reason to defend their canadate and bash the others even if they share in the same downfalls. Most "democrats" and "republicans" are guilty of this.

I think that palin's a cool person with a cool story, but I really think Mccain picked her for all the wrong reasons. It just makes a bigger joke of what this whole election is. If Obama and Mccain are the only two people left fit to be president, then this country is pretty sad right now.

I agree with most of what you you say here. I'm not a fan of the Palin pick either, but the way that the media has lost its mind over her pick, when Obama barely has more experience than her, is just an example of how rediculous the media is. I agree, the Republicans went after Obama's ionexperience, but the media never did or never did with much care or vigor, and just the opposite is true for the Palin nomination. Also, how they have dug up and attacked her family is beyond the norm, especially considering the most they've done as a public face for the campaign was stand next to her on stage.

Dyflon, Germ and Jason, you can hoot and howl all you like about claims of media bias, but a spade is a spade. No amount of jokes or mocking can erase the OBVIOUS bias that the media has shown since the Palin pick. That doesn't mean that I am defending her pick, it just means I'm pointing out the obvious. At some point you'll have to look at a situation and recognize it for what it is.

The problem with how the left is reacting to this, is that its working for McCain. The more the Palin pick receives such hollywood and media backlash, the more they alientate the country from the cause, and point out Obama's own inexperience and the fact that he is the PRESIDENTIAL candiate with little experience, and not the VP candidate and thats a big difference.

In the end, if they continue with such wolfpack tactics, this is going to be 2004 all over again: The Republicans will win and the Democata will be left scratching their heads, wondering how the hell they lost.

[TheGame]

I agree to an extent, but there's one key difference between Obama and Palin. Obama, as inexperienced as he may be, actually was VOTED in to be where he is now. He went up against more experienced people and what not, and he BEAT them. He actually "earned" his sponsor from the democratic party by appealing to the people.

Palin on the other hand, well.. The problems I have with her are similar to yours so it goes without saying. But the difference is, her being VP is a direct reflection of Mccain's decision making ability. It doesn't fall on the voters shoulders whatsoever outside of the fact that they picked Mccain and believed in his judgement. And he made a bad decision to me personally.

The media can sound 'bias' all they want, but the fact remains there is no face you can put out as the 'person who made a bad judgement and picked Obama' because his party voted him in. Most republicans I know were not too happy with Palin being the choice, though some have warmed up, most of them still don't think it was a good idea.

[The Germanator]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Dyflon, Germ and Jason, you can hoot and howl all you like about claims of media bias, but a spade is a spade. No amount of jokes or mocking can erase the OBVIOUS bias that the media has shown since the Palin pick. That doesn't mean that I am defending her pick, it just means I'm pointing out the obvious. At some point you'll have to look at a situation and recognize it for what it is.

The problem with how the left is reacting to this, is that its working for McCain. The more the Palin pick receives such hollywood and media backlash, the more they alientate the country from the cause, and point out Obama's own inexperience and the fact that he is the PRESIDENTIAL candiate with little experience, and not the VP candidate and thats a big difference.

In the end, if they continue with such wolfpack tactics, this is going to be 2004 all over again: The Republicans will win and the Democata will be left scratching their heads, wondering how the hell they lost.

Okay...You call it obvious bias and I say that it's not obvious bias. Where have we gotten with this? You know who first called out the "liberal media?" It was segregationists. They were upset that Blacks were getting an equal say opposing Jim Crow laws. But, no, I guess they shouldn't have reported that because it was biased against the segregationists. I understand this doesn't really have to do with current times, but there's been nothing to show me coverage has been biased. It seems like the Right knows they have the media in their back pocket and are afraid when the left makes any kind of intrusion on it.

I love your term, "wolfpack tactics." I guess that means FLAT OUT LYING from the McCain campaign. They were even called out by FACTCHECK.ORG for mis-quoting one of their articles. They said Palin went to Iraq, she didn't. Their attack ads have been downright shameful. They said Obama taught sex-ed to kindergarteners, but it was really just a bill to teach them how to avoid approaching threatening strangers. And guess what? The media hasn't given McCain nearly as much shit as he deserves for it. You can say it's as effective as it is, but you can't deny that it makes McCain lose a hell of a lot of integrity. You can stand by these so-called "wolf-pack" ideals if you want, but I don't know how you live with yourself by supporting them, just like I don't know how McCain does. Case in point from the McCain campaign

'We’re running a campaign to win. And we’re not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say about it.’

They don't care about people or the issues. Sad.

Palin is a fad. The post-convention bump has already showed itself. Gallup has it at 47% to 45% McCain, a statistical tie. Smart people will tire of the negative campaign run by the countless D.C lobbyists and Karl Rove. Just because the media calls them out on his lies doesn't mean they are biased. Have you ever thought that maybe Palin just has a hell of a lot more dirt on her than Obama?? It's been 19 months, maybe Obama has a lot less skeletons in his closet than you want him to. McCain cheated on his bed-ridden wife, I haven't heard much about this. I wonder why...

EDIT: And I posted the SNL thing because I thought it was, you know, funny. There's no reason to get bent out of shape about it.