"Couric: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?.
Palin: I've read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.
Couric: What, specifically?
Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.
Couric: Can you name a few?
Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America."
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Palin aces another interview
Boy, this Governor is brilliant, and so well informed. She is totally prepared to step in on a moment's notice and lead the greatest country on earth. How could anyone possibly doubt her?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Question? 1) Why is this of national importance? 2) Why is this an 'oh my gosh' question? 3) Why does she HAVE to answer just to accomodate liberals who will bash her choices anyway? Like who cares? She couldn't win no matter WHAT she answered anyway......you can't win in an interview with an liberal journalist anyway.........
The contrast between McCain and Obama is stark. The man who stayed in the horrors of Hanoi as a matter of honor faces the man who has never met an honor that he understood. The man who would rather lose an election than have his country lose a war faces the man who would watch amused as his countrymen descend into economic terror provided that his calculated neglect won him a few national percentage points.
The contrast between the vice presidential choices of McCain and Obama is just as stark. The woman who took on her own political party and who gave birth to a son with Down syndrome, because she believed abortion was wrong, faces a man who plagiarized in law school (so he could get his degree), who copied the speeches of Neil Kinnock (so he could win votes), and who seems to have never met an honorable sacrifice worth embracing.
The lust for power is not change. That lust is as old as history. It does not carry the seeds of hope within it. However packaged, the personal ambition to win at any cost is as ancient as lying, as old fashioned as theft, as commonplace as ward heelers. Electing men who figuratively will throw anyone under the bus to win, including, literally, their grandmother and their pastor, can never bring anything good. Such people do not just believe the grand malediction, "The end justifies the means," but they believe that they, personally, are that end.
Men who will do anything to win will end up doing nothing good at all. In college, it seems, Obama heard and spoke the word "power" as normal people would speak or hear the words "soul" or "honor" or "God." Power, alone, counts to him. He will do anything to win power, and men who will do anything to win power will do anything at all.
Being interviewed by Katie Couric on the "CBS Evening News," Biden said: "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"
For those of you who aren't hard-core history buffs, Biden not only named the wrong president during the 1929 stock market crash, he also claimed a president who wasn't president during the stock market crash went on TV before Americans had TVs.
Other than that, the statement holds up pretty well. At least Biden managed to avoid mentioning any "clean" Negroes he had met.
Couric was nearly moved to tears by the brilliance of Biden's brain-damaged remark. She was especially intrigued by Biden's claim that FDR had said the new iPhone was the bomb!
Here is Couric's full response to Biden's bizarre outburst about FDR (a) being president and (b) going on TV in 1929: "Relating to the fears of the average American is one of Biden's strong suits."
The beauteous Sarah had cited McCain's prescient warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But Couric, the crackerjack journalist who didn't know FDR wasn't president in 1929, demanded more examples from Palin.
We are currently in the middle of a massive financial crisis brought on by Fannie Mae. McCain was right on Fannie Mae; Obama was wrong. That's not enough?
Not for the affable Eva Braun of evening TV! "I'm just going to ask you one more time," Couric snipped, "not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?"
This would be like responding to someone who predicted the 9/11 attacks by saying: OK, you got one thing right. Not to belabor the point, but what else?
Obama was not merely wrong on Fannie Mae: He is owned by Fannie Mae. Somehow Obama managed to become the second biggest all-time recipient of Fannie Mae political money after only three years in the Senate. The biggest beneficiary, Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, had a 30-year head start on receiving loot from Fannie Mae -- the government-backed institution behind our current crisis.
If Ohio polling looks like Chicago, ‘thank’ Brunner
Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has a reputation as the most partisan state official in Ohio. And she works hard to earn it. The Democrat’s latest stunt rejected absentee ballots for thousands of Republicans.
But it’s not her first rodeo. Almost as soon as Brunner was elected in 2006, she tried to remove several Republican county elections officials, including Ohio Republican Party Chairman Robert Bennett. They accused her of “storm trooper tactics” to silence critics.
Then Brunner spread an alarm that Ohio’s electronic voting machines were vulnerable to tampering - a favorite claim of the paranoid left. Elections officials who participated in Brunner’s study called her conclusions over-hyped “leaps in logic” and said, “The report itself could be viewed as an attack on the elections system … (that) planted seeds in the mind of the public to mistrust those who oversee elections.”
Brunner also demanded an overhaul of voting methods just before the March primaries, causing meltdowns in some precincts.
And now she’s hassling Republicans who want to vote for John McCain…
In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas. Mr. Good Will listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You.”
A Newsmax analysis of the 1.4 million individual contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered 1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25. In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.
Following this and subsequent FEC requests, campaign records show that 330 contributions from Mr. Good Will were credited back to a credit card. But the most recent report, filed on Sept. 20, showed a net cumulative balance of $8,950 — still well over the $4,600 limit.
There can be no doubt that the Obama campaign noticed these contributions, since Obama’s Sept. 20 report specified that Good Will’s cumulative contributions since the beginning of the campaign were $9,375.
In an e-mailed response to a query from Newsmax, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt pledged that the campaign would return the donations. But given the slowness with which the campaign has responded to earlier FEC queries, there’s no guarantee that the money will be returned before the Nov. 4 election.
Similarly, a donor identified as “Pro, Doodad,” from “Nando, NY,” gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most of them for $25. For most of these donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You,” just as Good Will had done. But in some of them, he didn’t even go this far, apparently picking letters at random to fill in the blanks on the credit card donation form. In these cases, he said he was employed by “VCX” and that his profession was “VCVC.”
Following FEC requests, the Obama campaign began refunding money to Doodad Pro in February 2008. In all, about $8,425 was charged back to a credit card. But that still left a net total of $11,165 as of Sept. 20, way over the individual limit of $4,600. Here again, LaBolt pledged that the contributions would be returned but gave no date.
In February, after just 93 donations, Doodad Pro had already gone over the $2,300 limit for the primary. He was over the $4,600 limit for the general election one month later. In response to FEC complaints, the Obama campaign began refunding money to Doodad Pro even before he reached these limits. But his credit card was the gift that kept on giving. His most recent un-refunded contributions were on July 7, when he made 14 separate donations, apparently by credit card, of $25 each.
Just as with Mr. Good Will, there can be no doubt that the Obama campaign noticed the contributions, since its Sept. 20 report specified that Doodad’s cumulative contributions since the beginning of the campaign were $10,965.
I sort of don't know that point of posting that clip. I mean, shouldn't we be asking Palin about thigns that are IMPORTANT and are going to AFFECT our country, like the economy or things that are IMPORTANT? Besides the fact that it was irelevant, it was also a stupid question. She could be as informed as the best of us, but she would still be dissed depending on what she reads by either political party. I guess my point is, what is your point? This has nothing to do with how well she can run our country. If someone asked you what you read wouldn't you think it was a retarded question?
If you are voting democrat YOU will LOVE this....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AU-EpU13K_o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUEQz5dltmI
frat boys stomp for Obama
children of the corn and frat thugs for Obama....kool (aid)
Post a Comment