१९ नोव्हेंबर, २००९
Memo to CBS and Katie Couric: Release the unedited Palin video.
In "Going Rogue," Sarah Palin criticizes CBS for editing long interviews into the most damaging soundbites and making her look stupid and irritable. There's an easy solution: Release the unedited video. There is a lot of material in the book making assertions about all sorts of trenchant comments Palin supposedly made. Palin says she was asked the same questions over and over in an effort to elicit a bad answer. She says that some of her answers were clipped after some simple beginning and before she delved into details that would have made her look smart and knowledgeable. It would be very easy to check if we had all the video. Put it up on line.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८९ टिप्पण्या:
yeah, CBS will get right on that.
Oh, man, I just shot a fava bean out my nose onto my keyboard. Gross.
I remember thinking: No politician with a clue will ever do an interview w/o their own camera again.
-XC
Yeah, that'll happen right after they locate the one armed man who typed Bush's TANG evaluations
Don't hold your breath.
i don't know about the couric interview, but the editing of the gibson interview was revolting, and in that case there was (shockingly) a complete transcript to compare it to:
http://tinyurl.com/3nolj7
I triple-dog-dare them to release the video.
( That always worked with my little brother. )
Hmmm, seems only Sarah Palin has so many editing problems with interviews.
I enjoy cocaine because it's a fun thing to do. I enjoy the company of prostitutes for the following reasons: because it's a fun thing to do. If you combine the two of them together, it's probably even more fun.
Welcome aboard Hokie.
No politician with a clue will ever do an interview w/o their own camera again
Why didn't they before this? A Navy friend of my dad's was made to look a fool on 60 Minutes in the 70's, so this is not a new problem.
The lesson CBS learned from its faked memo scandal wasn't the right one, professor. Instead of not relying on bad data, the lesson CBS (and other reporters) learned was, keep the dirtbag public away from the evidence.
CBS fully realizes their trick would have worked--had they not posted the PDFs of the memos. They're kicking themselves NOT for relying on the fraudulent memos (all for a good cause and all that) but for letting the public see them.
WV divamisp - I don't think Miss Palin is a diva, but WV seems to think so.
Not a chance in hell this will happen.
But we might see newly edited clips.
Althouse, is there a legal way for Palin to compel the network to release the video to her?
If Althouse had a store she could be selling "Release the Palin Videos" t-shirts.
Hahahahahahaha
YEs, I agree they should release the unedited video. Palin's probably making this shit up and that would expose more of her lies.
I cannot fathom why CBS would ever this.
But yes, the person interviewed should get a copy of the interview.
In this digital age there is absolutely NO technical reason why this could not be done instantly.
garage mahal said...
Hmmm, seems only Sarah Palin has so many editing problems with interviews.
I too cannot fathom what would motivate the generally liberal media to try and make their political opponent look bad. Other thoughts: Why do things always fall in the downward direction instead of upwards. Someone should look into this strange mystery, it really is confounding.
Sarah Palin says she was asked the same question over and over until she finally gave a bad answer that they could use to emabarrass her with?
Sarah Palin says she delved into details that revealed her brilliance and knowledge on all the issues, but the media purposefully clipped out all that brilliance from her so the American people couldn't know how smart she is?
Is that what she's really claiming?
Did Sean Hannity do that, too, last night? She sounded pretty dumb on there....
Palin's lying. If they released the unedited video she'd probably look even worse.
"YEs, I agree they should release the unedited video. Palin's probably making this shit up and that would expose more of her lies."
And that would be a good thing, yes?
Can you think of any reason CBS wouldn't release the unedited video at this late date? Trouncing Palin but good for a *second* time would seem to be worth it, no?
It's not that anyone really thinks that news services shouldn't edit interviews. But people need to trust that they are editing them fairly and I doubt many people believe they do.
Not only would releasing the unedited footage trounce Palin, it would prove that the news media really is professional and trust worthy.
Or prove they aren't trustworthy.
Either way, we'd know the truth and the truth is important.
One-armed man. LOL. Even Dan Rather could not make that part up. Heh.
I've long wondered why politicians don't insist on open release of all footage, say, 48 hours after airing any portion of it. It would be a terrific check on journalistic abuse, and when the interviewee is a public official, should we all have access to the full interview, unedited?
I'd love to see all her unedited interviews, particularly Fox, especially the back and forth banter with Sean Hannity. I say release ALL her interviews, unedited, to the public. Why just CBS?
I too cannot fathom what would motivate the generally liberal media to try and make their political opponent look bad..
If Katie Couric makes you look bad, you a serious deficiency of game. Out of all the Republicans that have given interviews throughout the years, she seems to be the only one that has many problems though. Weird.
"Hmmm, seems only Sarah Palin has so many editing problems with interviews."
Not at all true.
Her charges carry weight with anyone who doesn't have an emotional bias against her because everyone knows someone or has heard multiple claims from ordinary people of the hatchet jobs done on them by the media.
Taking a quote out of context is the oldest charge in the book.
The best reason to release the unedited video, however, is to see if Couric could make a face that was even more constipated than the ones she made in the portions that were broadcast.
What about ABC's Charlie Gibson interview with Palin? How did that work out?
If I were CBS, I would not just put out all my intellectual property for anyone to use. Let them turn the raw footage into a program.
News of media bias extending beyond FOX had not yet reached garage mahal.
"If I were CBS, I would not just put out all my intellectual property for anyone to use."
I don't really see the problem with doing so a year later. They'd still *own* it.
And unless it proved otherwise or made Couric look like a rabid bitch, how could it hurt them? It has the potential of increasing public confidence in the news at a time when that confidence is lagging.
Isn't there a complete transcript of the interview prior to editing? Look, I don't know if Palin can rehab he appearance with little perky Katie, but I do know that she should let it go and move on. Some things are better left in the past. Like someone said earlier, just bring your own camera gear and that will level the playing field.
Sarah Palin is the Rueben Hurricane Carter of the Republican Party.
garage mahal said...
Hmmm, seems only Sarah Palin has so many editing problems with interviews.
It was all a massive conspiracy to hide Sarah Palin's brilliance and depth of knowledge from the American people. That's what the Palin fans will obsess on in this thread. Meanwhile, in the Andrew Sullivan thread this morning, these same people were condemning crazed and obsessive conspiracy theorists.....
Well, I trust Sarah Palin. I'm sure there's alternate and unreleased footage from all her interviews that, had we seen it, we'd all have been blown away by Sarah Palin's genius.
Palin's probably making this shit up and that would expose more of her lies.
I don't think she's making it up, but I do think that after all the build up about how much editing they did, nobody would be satisfied with the original film. Most minds wouldn't change either way, as the people who hate her will continue to do so, same for those who love her. I suppose the leukwarm might be persuaded, but it's doubtful.
If Katie Couric makes you look bad, you a serious deficiency of game.
I think if you edit things to hell you can make anybody look bad. That doesn't mean she's good at interviewing.
Any public figure who is going to be interviewed by a network or cable news broadcast company should bring his/her own camera to the interview, just to make an irrefutable record of the interview.
Do those running for high office not understand this? Good grief.
That is not how you spell lukewarm, is it? I don't think I've ever written that word down!
I think if you edit things to hell you can make anybody look bad. That doesn't mean she's good at interviewing.
We don't anything about how the interview was edited, other than Palin's word. The editing done may have come together making the interview look better than it actually was.
From where we are now, having CBS release the unedited interview would be the best way to sort things out. To my mind, if they refuse to do so the implication is that they have something to hide about their editing.
OTOH, what is the purpose of these interviews supposed to be, anyway? I know lots of people who are "smart" but wouldn't necessarily make good Jeopardy contestants.
I recall reading an article long ago about how the WSJ goes about conducting interviews. In effect, they were more than willing to let their interviewees think out loud during the process and if necessary, take back what first came out of their mouths. But then, the WSJ viewed their role as being to INFORM their readers, not play gotcha with the subject.
We don't anything about how the interview was edited, other than Palin's word.
Oh sure. Like I said, I don't think she's great at interviews, I just think you can make all sorts of smart people look bad if chop their answers up. I think she was more susceptible to think because she's fairly green to the national scene. She probably wasn't used to people coming at it from the same place Katie Couric did. That's not to excuse her, but I can believe that you could have cut that interview in a way that made her look good, or at least much better, and a way that made her look terrible. I don't find it at all hard to believe that CBS cut it to make her look bad, but we will really not know unless we see the tape.
This is why there are almost no interviews done with James Dobson anymore, despite the fact that he still has the number one non-news, non- government radio show counted by listeners in the world today. Twice he released audio/video put his remarks into context, embarrassing the news organizations that played the interviews by proving their obviously slanted agendas to make Dobson look bad by saying something he didn't mean. One of those organziations was ABC News. At that time, only Dobson was sharp enough to know how to act "off camera" and off the record and Focus on the Family had enough clout and wherewithal to be able to fully record each interview, and turn the tables when edited with a pc agenda. CBS "60 Minutes" has requested interviews with Dobson over 30 times in the previous 26 years that Dobson has acceded to, but only if Focus on the Family can record the entire interview as well. 60 Minutes has never agreed to such with Dobson, therefore, there have been no long-form CBS News interviews of James Dobson.
Oh, yea, there's no leftward tilted agenda in the Main Stream Media.
Please.
I have never known an interviewer without an agenda in mind. Why not just do live TV?
The editing done may have come together making the interview look better than it actually was.
Well then, oh delusional one, they should be slobbering all over themselves for the chance to show the unedited version so they could make Palin look worse....doncha think?
They aren't though....are they?
Black Rock has been pulling this stuff for years. Nobody in his right mind goes into a 60 Minutes interview without their own video recorder going. Then there's "The Uncounted Enemy" special where Mike Malice pulled a similar number on William Westmoreland.
It will be a cold day you-know-where before Miss Sarah's interview sees the light of day, but the point Synova makes is perfectly true. If Mrs. Palin is lying, Black Rock can put her away for good.
Why not release the unedited interview?
Everyone knows that part of the visceral knee-jerk hatred of Sarah Palin is because of her association with evangelical Christianity.
"Peter Jennings used to say that that it is difficult to get the modern newsroom to accept that religion is a massive part of modern daily life. Jennings tells a funny story that when you have a hurricane, or a plane crash, or a tornado — the reporter with microphone in hand goes running up to the survivor who's standing there drenched, sweaty and bruised, and then says, "How did you get through this?" There's a pause, and the survivor says, "Well, I did this, and this and this, but most of all, it was God who saved me and got me through this." And Jennings says, "And then there's this huge pause, and the reporter says, 'No, what really got you through it?'" And Jennings argues that that pause between the answer of a typical American believer and the disbelieving reporter's "What really got you through it?" — he says that pause is why there's no one on the air doing religion.
You are actually taking Palin's claim seriously? That's precious! The normally savvy Althouse has been taken in by the moronic Sarah Pain.
Release those maps, too! Maybe Palin really can see Alaska from her house!!!
How precious. Floyd is being self-referential. (Or sarcastic. Is Floyd being sarcastic?)
If Mrs. Palin is lying, Black Rock can put her away for good.
Why not release the unedited interview?
If they could put her away for good, they'd Rather put her away in October 2012 after she's locked up the GOP POTUS nomination.
WV: asthin : as a rail
I have never known an interviewer without an agenda in mind. Why not just do live TV?
The interviewee also has an agenda. Don't forget that.
Release those maps, too! Maybe Palin really can see Alaska from her house!!!
Yawn
What is this guy, 6 years old?
Here's some news he'll will love:
Obama slips below 50% in job approval ratings in 2 major polls (Reuters)
Politicians who give interviews to major media without also recording it themselves are foolish.
What Michael Haz said @6:33 PM.
And, for the Palin haters who like to quote polls about Palin:
-
On top of Obama's fall below 50% in job approval (a very bad sign - even the liberal Brookins Institute agrees,
)By a 3-to-1 margin, voters believe that tax cuts will create more jobs than additional government stimulus spending. Most also believe that canceling the rest of the stimulus spending will create more jobs than spending the money that’s been approved. On both topics, the Political Class disagrees.
How's that marginalizing of conservatives going for ya?
The interviewee also has an agenda. Don't forget that.
While this is true, the interviewee rarely has control or input over the editorial process. Therefore, Couric's agenda trumps Palin's. CBS was free to manipulate the editing to suit its agenda. Palin was not afforded that luxury.
Also, keep in mind that the Palin interview had nothing to do with Palin's agenda, but rather with John McCain's.
JohnSteele:
I've long wondered why politicians don't insist on open release of all footage, say, 48 hours after airing any portion of it.
Better yet, agree on how long the interview will be, sit down for that long and then stop.
If I were a politician I would never agree to allow a camera crew to shoot hours and hours of stuff and then decide for themselves what parts to use.
>MadisonMan:
The interviewee also has an agenda. Don't forget that.
But the interviewee doesn't have the ability to edit the interview to make himself look better, or to make the interviewer look bad.
Well, what do you know:
Palin photographer breached contract with sale to Newsweek
Any chance of seeing any apologies (or mere mea culpas, even) from the haters in the previous threads?
"Did Sean Hannity do that, too, last night? She sounded pretty dumb on there...."
Don't all of these Palin and Hannity haters have other things to do in the evening than watch both together or are they just masochists.
Defense of the Mighty Cause trumps all law.
Boy howdee, that Palin sure is teh stooopid.
Say, did you hear that Al Gore, that Nobel laureate who's saving the earth from imminent destruction thanks to his profound knowledge of meteorology and climatology, took two whole science courses at Harvard?
And he received a D in one and a C- in the other?
I didn't even know they gave Ds at Harvard, the home of the "gentleman's B", where the average graduating GPA is something like 3.5 out of 4.
And they were just general survey courses -- nothing too advanced or technical. Science courses for history majors.
And in high school, he received a final grade of 61% in physics, and 65% in chemistry.
But that Palin, she's a real dumb ass. I'm just glad she's not vice president, she could never have handled all that responsibility.
From the Newsweek guy about why they bought the Runners' World picture for their cover:
"does the image convey what we are saying?"
What is it they were they saying?
campy said...
If they could put her away for good, they'd Rather put her away in October 2012 after she's locked up the GOP POTUS nomination.
They don't work that way, besides, she has proven she can nail Bambi anytime she wants. They can't afford to give her that kind of time.
Chase said...
Obama slips below 50% in job approval ratings in 2 major polls (Reuters)
Rasmussen's had him in the mid 40s for weeks. The cheerleaders are just catching up.
Pastafarian:
Say, did you hear that Al Gore, that Nobel laureate who's saving the earth from imminent destruction thanks to his profound knowledge of meteorology and climatology, took two whole science courses at Harvard?
And apparently they were teaching that the temperature of the Earth's core is "millions of degrees".
But Sarah Palin, there's one dumb broad.
You betcha!
From the Daily Finance article: "What on earth was Sarah Palin thinking when she posed in a pair of teeny-tiny gym shorts for a photograph that ended up on the cover of Newsweek"
Are those really what you'd call teeny-tiny gym shorts? They look like gym shorts to me. (Now, these are tiny gym shorts.) It's a silly photo for Newsweek, obviously chosen to make Sarah look silly. But I wouldn't call it a sexy photo.
And mastermind Joe Biden thinks Franklin Roosevelt announced the Great Depression on television.
I tell you, these Democrats are just way smarter than everyone else.
That's why the live in US states 51-57 rather than the dumb 1-50 like the rest of us.
Oh, and I figure CBS will release the whole tape about the same time John F'n Kerry releases all his service records.
Oh, and anyone who's suffered through "Katie Couric's Journal" on CBS radio every afternoon would assume her IQ is just above room temperature.
"I tell you, these Democrats are just way smarter than everyone else.
That's why the live in US states 51-57 rather than the dumb 1-50 like the rest of us."
They also must live in those Congressional districts that don't even exist but got stimulus $$ that saved or created jobs, anyway.
Boy, do I feel stoopid....from here on out, I'll just leave it to Zero's team - what could go wrong?
Archbishop Chaput of Denver, I think always during an interview, makes a point of turning on his own recorder and putting it where a reporter can see it, before an interview begins.
Palin should do the same, or bring her own camera.
Althouse's post is going to have about as much impact as my post "Hey, Katie Couric: let's go out for a drink sometime. What do you say?" I haven't heard back.
But, seriously: it would be helpful to remember a pre-election incident involving another video tape that BHO's opponents wanted to get their hands on.
I came up with a plan that would have been highly effective, resulting in either the LAT releasing the tape or BHO looking bad. The plan was briefly linked by Malkin, but I got zero (0) help from anyone else.
Instead, the largely worthless r/w blogosphere simply ranted and raved about the tape, and some even went as far as picketing the LAT's building, with the LAT's employees laughing at them from the windows above. Because most of the r/w blogosphere and commentariat are generally speaking more or less lightweight clowns, the LAT never saw a need to release the tape. If the tape was as bad as it sounded, it could have had a serious impact on the election. Instead, it had little or no effect because those "in charge" don't know how to do things and aren't interested in learning.
So, if you want this tape, adapt the plan at the link, either with a CBS exec or with Katie herself. And, if it's the latter, ask her to give me a call.
When you evaluate people for a job (or anything else), you judge them not only using the information that they provide, but also using what it is that they fail to provide. Any competent candidate will provide everything that advances his cause. If information is not provided, it indicates that that information will harm him. (There is a whole sub-field of economics that discusses this--check asymmetric information and signaling.) Hence, there is information in the fact that Obama sealed his academic records. Likewise, there is information in the fact that CBS has never provided the full video of the Palin interview. Even those suffering from acute cases of PDS should be able to see that.
Actually, the intrepid John Ziegler got his hands on the entire transcript, and possibly some of the video, for his film that attempted to vindicate Palin (and largely did). There's a reason CBS won't put together a clean tape.
Palin should have asked for an interview on CSPAN.
That way, it would not have been edited and we could all see if she is the incompoop the press insists she is, or if her charges are true.
A competent interviewee will control the interview. I think Clinton could do that, so could Reagan.
Palin doesn't have that kind of experience.
And just for comparison, they could release unedited video of and interview with Biden, since he was running for the same office.
Obama and McCain videos would be nice to have too.
Just watching the interview, I don't know how anyone could believe Palin's book. Asking her the same questions multiple times? Ok, on which take did she give those awful answers? And why is there no sense of real anger/annoyance/frustration in any of the "edited" answers? The only emotion I get is "bewilderment."
All this is simply another way for Palin to continue her Victimization 2009 tour.
there is information in the fact that Obama sealed his academic records.
Obama did nothing. Congress sealed his academic records back in 1974, when they passed the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. So there's not much information in Obama's failure to publish his academic records.
Any chance of seeing any apologies (or mere mea culpas, even) from the haters in the previous threads?
Happy to oblige. I hope Runners World takes Adams for everything he's got, for breaching their 12-month exclusive on the shot of Palin with her teddy bear.
More hate-spewing from very fundamentalist creeps of the Religious Right.
They are promoting a prayer based on a Psalm, which calls for him to die and for his children to be cast into poverty.
The line they promote:
"Let his days be few; and let another take his office."
And the rest:
"Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places."
This is not Christian behavior. These people should be ashamed of themselves. But they have no shame, as we see so often here.
"In September, authorities shut down a poll on Facebook asking if President Obama should be killed."
How can we respect people who engage politics like this? Openly calling for the President to die. It's anti-American.
How many Althouse commenters want the President dead and are espousing it through prayer, Facebook vote or other means?
AL... I do not know a single person, no matter how emotionally opposed to Obama who wants him dead or thinks that would be anything but a complete disaster for everyone, most particularly for those who oppose him.
Taking scripture out of context annoys me to no end but yes, it's done a whole lot. And the usual prayers for politicians tend to be that God guides their decision making. Praying against a person bothers me as a spiritual mistake, but I have no doubt that someone is praying that Obama's time in office is "short".
But consider... if anyone understands the power of a Martyr it is Christians.
Making this a wish for death instead of an inappropriate use of a single line of Psalms seems more likely to *me* to be another example of the *liberal* Obama death-cult that are enamoured with the notion of him as a martyr.
It's more than a bit obscene no matter where it comes from.
"Just watching the interview, I don't know how anyone could believe Palin's book. Asking her the same questions multiple times?"
Couric did it *in* the broadcast portion of the interview. How can you claim it didn't happen?
I noticed at the time that Couric repeated the same question when Palin didn't answer the way Couric wanted her to. And Couric didn't follow up on what Palin said either, but scowled in that pinchy faced way, looked down at her notes, and asked the next question she had prepared that was a follow up to the answer she had wanted rather than the answer Palin gave.
By all accounts and Palin's own admission, she did terrible in the interview, but Couric did just as bad.
Synova:
Well, the parts where she asked the same question in the edited video, it was where Palin answered in a way that was essentially nonsensical.
I guess what I'm asking is, if Palin really was getting treated this way, why wasn't there any indication of her frustration/anger? I have to think that if there was a Bill Clinton with Chris Wallace moment in there, CBS would have shown it to further try and show Palin in a negative light.
"Maybe Palin really can see Alaska from her house!!!"
As somebody else once said (on here, I think): "Barack Obama can see the Soviet Union from his economy."
"We chose the most interesting image available to us to illustrate the theme of the cover, which is what we always try to do," Meacham said. "We apply the same test to photographs of any public figure, male or female: does the image convey what we are saying? That is a gender-neutral standard."
Oh, yeah. That clears it all up Newsweek.
May I say also how boring I find it that they want to reuse a cover photo? Don't you want something more original for your magazine? No? Alrighty then.
James, you pretty much asked and answered your own question.
Palin wouldn't have been helped in least by getting visibly angry, and she knew it.
A bewildered search for an answer that will get the interviewer to move on to the next question seems a reasonable response to me.
"Obama did nothing. Congress sealed his academic records back in 1974, when they passed the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. So there's not much information in Obama's failure to publish his academic records."
Former Law Student, you get an A for fact-checking and an F for logic. Your third sentence does not follow from the second. Obama did something--he refused to release academic records, and decisions to provide or withhold facts provide information.
""In September, authorities shut down a poll on Facebook asking if President Obama should be killed."
Go on Facebook and search for "kill Bush". There are several groups that come up. There have been Facebook groups like for years and there still are, but somehow it's only an issue when Obama is the target.
Yes, it is disgusting, but it's just as disgusting when done to Bush.
I've linked this here before, but if you're really interested in how well Palin can perform in a fair interview, check out the one she did before she was tapped for the VP slot, with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC.
Palin is not the most articulate interviewee. She speaks in fragments rather than complete sentences quite a bit, and often won't complete a sentence. She's at least as coherent as George HW Bush (GWB is actually a better speaker than his father, IMO), but that kind of contemporaneous speech is a specific skill that is not the best indicator of intelligence. What I hear from Palin is that she knows her stuff, at least on domestic energy production, even if she somewhat mangles the message.
The unedited version of the Charlie Gibson video was fine. It wasn't the greatest interview ever, but it was nothing for Palin to be embarrassed about, the way the edited version was. I'm sure the raw Couric interview footage would show that Palin really isn't that much of a goof, and therefore we'll never see it.
AL, I know you probably didn't read the article and posted what you did in good faith, but here's the rest of that article for reference to your second question:
Still, that doesn’t push the Psalms citation into the realm of hate speech, says Chris Hansen, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
The use of Psalm 109:8 is ambiguous as to whether its users are calling for the President to serve “only one term, or less than one term,” he says.
Deborah Lauter, director of civil rights at the Anti-Defamation League agrees that the bumper sticker falls within acceptable political discourse.
For it to be considered hate speech, it “would advocate actual violence or cite scripture that was more clear in its message.”
But that doesn’t mean that it’s completely innocent.
“Are we concerned about real hostility towards [President Obama]? Absolutely,” says Ms. Lauter. “Is this a part of that movement? It may be, but in terms of this message itself, we would not criticize it.”
“The problem is you don’t know if people who are donning that message in a shirt or on a bumper sticker are fully aware of the quote or what follows. Obviously that message makes the ambiguity disappear. If they’re just referring to him being out of office, that’s one thing. If they’re referring to him being dead, that’s so offensive. It’s protected speech, but it’s clearly offensive.”
For many, the slogan is just a humorous way express disapproval for President Obama. It’s been tweeted and retweeted by Obama critics with messages like “too funny” and “an excellent prayer for America.”
Twitter user Cheri Douglas felt compelled to share the psalm with others. Reached by phone, she said she found it on website while searching for Bible passages relating to leadership – a topic on which she writes, speaks, and consults for a living.
Ms. Douglas was unaware of the verses that followed the ones she referenced and doesn’t think that those who shared the psalm wish the President harm.
“I don’t believe there’s Christians who wish him ill will,” she says.
But Douglas does say she’s unhappy with the president and used the psalm to convey that she’d like him to serve only one term.
Liberals are so un-nuanced. Everything is black or white, good or evil, for them.
wv: prerchi it brother! Can I get an amen?!
1. Every and I mean every station and network edits for time. EVERY.
2. Is there raw unused footage? sure.
3. CBS doesn't have to edit to make her sound like a moron.
mariner said...
"But Sarah Palin, there's one dumb broad.
You betcha!"
megadittos rush.
PR 101. Do not do TV interviews that can be edited.
I don't understand why Palin didn't just tell Couric (and Gibson for that matter), "let's do a live interview on your news show." Once that truck drives away with cans full of your words, they can do whatever they want with it.
I would give the same advice to Obama.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा