Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
RECENT POSTS
- Kenya Dig It? President Obama Talks Africa, Chastises Politics in Late Father's Homeland
- US-Russian Arms Negotiators "Under the Gun," Might Temporarily Bypass Senate Ratification for Treaty
- Asked What He Doesn’t Like About Himself, President Obama Cites His Golf Game
- Today's Q's For O's White House
- Afghanistan Offensive and Iraq Withdrawal: Obama's National Security Advisor Discusses Both with ABC News
- Who Makes the Big Bucks at the White House?
- Obama Quizzed at Health Care Town Hall: On Taxing Benefits, Single Payer System, and Costs
- Today's Q's for O's White House
- Spotlight on Non-Profit Work, Obama Calls on “Deep Pockets”
- Obama says Iraqi People Right to Celebrate
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Do Over! Palin Answers Katie Couric's Questions ... to Fox News' Carl Cameron (She Reads The Economist, She Says)
October 03, 2008 2:52 PM
In a post-debate interview today with Fox News' chief political correspondent Carl Cameron, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin provided some of the answers that seemed to elude her in her past interview with Katie Couric.
Cameron told her that some observers, pleased with her debate performance, asked, "Where was this Sarah Palin in the interview with Katie Couric?"
"OK, I'll tell you honestly," Palin said, "the Sarah Palin in those interviews is a little bit annoyed because it's like, man, no matter what you say, you're going to get clobbered. If you choose to answer a question, you are going to get clobbered on the answer. If you choose to try and pivot and go on to another subject that you believe that Americans want to hear about, you get clobbered for that, too."
Palin added, "In those Katie Couric interviews I did feel that there were a lot of things that she was missing in terms of an opportunity to ask what a vice presidential candidate stands for -- what the values are represented in our ticket. I wanted to talk about Barack Obama increasing taxes, which would lead to killing jobs, wanted to talk about his proposal to increase government spending by another trillion dollars. Some of his comments that he has made about the war that I think may, in my world, disqualifies someone from consideration as the next commander in chief. ... I wanted to talk about things like that. So, I guess I have to apologize about being a little annoyed, but that is also an indication of being outside that Washington elite, outside of the media elite, also, and just wanted to talk to Americans without the filter and let them know what we stand for."
"So, at the risk of annoying you," said Cameron, "when you are asked, 'What do you read, which papers and magazines?' You didn't answer it. Or, you said, 'I have all kinds of resources.'"
"Right, right, right," said Palin.
"Well, what do you read?" asked Cameron.
"I read the same things that other people across the country read, including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and The Economist and some of these publications that we've recently even been interviewed through up there in Alaska. Because of everything that we're doing with oil and gas, a lot of the investment publications, especially, are interviewing us, asking us how we are being so successful up there in contributing to our nation's step towards energy independence...
"My response to her, I guess it was kind of flippant. But, I was sort of taken aback, like, the suggestion was, 'You're way up there in a far away place in Alaska, do you know that there are publications in the rest of the world that are read by many?' And I was taken aback by that because, I don't know, the suggestion just was a little bit of perhaps we're not in tune with the rest of the world."
Cameron then asked another Couric question that Palin didn't answer: about Supreme Court decisions that she disagrees with other than Roe v Wade. "As a conservative, there are some in the Republican Party who would expect a vice presidential nominee to understand judicial conservatives and to have something that they might object to," Cameron said.
"And that's fair, right, and on that one, true, I shouldn't have been so flippant and just sort of brushed aside that," Palin said, "because it was an important question and I should have answered it, and yeah, I can cite a lot of cases that I absolutely disagree with the Supreme Court on."
She elaborated: "A recent one, Kennedy v Louisiana, where the Supreme Court will tell a state that they can't impose the death penalty even on the heinous crimes of repeat child rapists, that a state ... its rights were taken away by the Supreme Court, and we would not be able to decide for ourselves whether the death penalty in a case like that could be implemented or not. That one, I'm certainly not a supporter of that decision."
Palin mentioned the Kelo case, also with the eminent domain -- "that affects me as governor. It affected me as a mayor, also. Property rights are so precious in this nation and for the Supreme Court to have sided with government instead of the people, the property owners on that -- that was frustrating. Another one ... personally affecting me also, the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The siding with the oil companies, they decimated Alaska's coastline and much of our fisheries and much of our coastal communities' livelihoods of people who live there, and they sided with Exxon on the punishment -- the punitive damage that was to be awarded, Exxon won on that one, and in a sense, that was frustrating."
Palin, asked about her relationship with the media, said, "What I need to do is commit to not be so annoyed and impatient with mainstream media. And I will make that commitment because I do understand that that is how I speak to the American people. In a position like this, I speak to you and through you, and that way, that message is received by American people. So, I apologize for the the, I guess, flippant response that I gave through that interview on a couple of questions.
"But I would ask also, then, that the media tries a little bit harder also," Palin went on. "And that this is a two-way street, that there is fairness, just objectivity and fairness and truth. That's all Americans ask for."
"Objectivity?" Cameron asked. "Fairness?"
"As we send our young men and women overseas in a war zone to fight for democracy and freedoms, including freedom of the press, we've really got to have a mutually beneficial relationship here with those fighting the freedom of the press, and then the press, though not taking advantage and exploiting a situation, perhaps they would want to capture and abuse the privilege. We just want truth, we want fairness, we want balance."
- jpt
October 3, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (148)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Gov. Palin could have and should have answered Couric's questions if nothing more than the Anchorage newspaper or Time magazine. However, it was really a nonsensical, put-down question. Couric did a lousy job as if she were attempting to "get to" Sarah Palin. No wonder CBS is dead last.
Posted by: Karolyn | Oct 12, 2008 12:15:30 AM
McCain would have done better with Michael Palin
Posted by: John Kaye | Oct 8, 2008 2:52:42 PM
I have just wasted my time reading this entire blog. It proves the United States really has become an uneducated nation! I thought Couric stooped to an all time low in shady reporting tactics and outright disrespect. She should be fired immediately! She has brought down an entire news agency...but then CBS has always been at the bottom of the heap so maybe she is their "secret weapon" to try to make it out of the mudhole by manipulating Courics childish pranks into news. I would caution everyone to be alert to, and refuse to support, any media that uses the "seek and destroy" mentality!
Posted by: Dr.Val | Oct 8, 2008 1:09:09 AM
I have a master's degree in international relations, have traveled far and wide in the world and read all the time. I'm in no way qualified to be vice president and neither is Palin.
She simply throws out vapid comments that mean nothing in essence but evoke emotion in those less capable of comprehending what she's actually saying.
She and McCain are calling it "mainstream media" that practices "gotcha" journalism and then it is so to their supporters or people on the fence who are too lazy to investigate for themselves.
I thought Couric was asking really fair questions and in many instances, giving Palin ample opportunity to discuss who she is and how she will be able to adequately fill the seat of vp.
The fact that Palin herself said she was annoyed because all she wanted to talk about was how Obama is going to raise taxes shows a lack of respect for the free press. And her defensiveness over the newspapers question was beyond me. Couric was letting her again prove her knowledge of foreign affairs, but Palin chose to take it as a dig she's from Alaska. That was strange - I didn't get that at all.
She is being asked fair, straight-forward questions and cannot or will not answer them and we're suppose to be okay with that sort of evasion.
I am middle America - Missouri in fact - and this woman is not speaking to or for me because she is basically condescending what I do believe in - free press, right to information, intellectualism, etc.
Posted by: kms | Oct 6, 2008 11:38:54 AM
So she is now painting herself not as dumb but as flippant? Does she assume that is a good thing?
Everyone knows, Sarah, that you didn't answer the questions because you had no idea what to say. No one is buying your do-over interviews with your friends at Fox.
Posted by: *rolls-eyes* | Oct 6, 2008 11:24:02 AM
I agree. Being able to answer the same questions a second time is ridiculous. Of course she was prepped in how she "should" have answered the questions. The point is that the Supreme Court question or the newspaper questions were not hard. Any high school student in US history should be able to cite Brown v Board of edcuation or Plessy v Ferguson or Miranda or even the recent supreme court case Palin's own office put out a letter on and Palin signed - the Exxon Valdez settlement.
She cannot talk intelligently about thses things and she does not know what Hamas is, what the Bush doctrine was and she is trying to bluff her way through this.
She is unqualfied to be a VP, let alone a president. She cannot even answer questions or speak coherently. The last anwer about freedom of the press is nonsensical - but it appears she is against freedom of the press - it is just so hard to tell exactly what she is saying. Someone who is this incoherent, even in a friendly interview, is simply not qualified.
Posted by: correctnotright | Oct 6, 2008 10:49:19 AM
Why is this woman so rude to people?
Her unresponsive answers just provoke follow up. If she applied for a regular job and was as evasive, vague, and apparently confused as she has been I guarantee she would not get a call back.
I wouldn't hire her to work at a fast food restaurant and she expects the country to elect her to vice president based on snarky bad manners and a smile.
I don't think so.
Posted by: Rodger Lemonde | Oct 6, 2008 10:42:22 AM
... no comment ^^
Posted by: RockandScroll | Oct 6, 2008 9:47:22 AM
Plain sounds like she still thinks the Feudal system is still in existence. In a scary look I think she wants it back. No habeas corpus and freedom of the press is a privilege granted by the ruling class.
This women is dangerous!!!
Posted by: muffler | Oct 6, 2008 7:38:10 AM
How anyone can think this woman is qualified to occupy any position in the White House is beyond my understanding. She's incoherent, can't think beyond what she's been told to say, has a very insular view of the world outside of her own state, and has a personal set of beliefs that put her to the far right of the rest of the US.
Posted by: Bendal | Oct 6, 2008 4:08:12 AM
"As we send our young men and women overseas in a war zone to fight for democracy and freedoms, including freedom of the press, we've really got to have a mutually beneficial relationship here with those fighting the freedom of the press, and then the press, though not taking advantage and exploiting a situation, perhaps they would want to capture and abuse the privilege. We just want truth, we want fairness, we want balance."
Wow. Palinisms that equal Bushisms in stupidity and confusion. Yup, women have come a long way, baby. You betcha!! (wink wink)
Posted by: Tim Ed Anshabby | Oct 6, 2008 1:37:18 AM
Uh I think that there Palin girl is what
we need in the whitehouse. Just think how
she would do if she were ah ah talkin with old Putin there about Georgia or any of the other world leaders. She so skilled with them there words shes ah using. I bet she would wink and and say
Hey there Joe say it ant so, then she wink and all would be alright. Who needs to anwser one of them there stupid questions, like ie.. Whats your name or what state is Washinton D.C. is in. She is exactly what we need in the big house. I bet she really knows how to whoop up one good cookin with them there Moose burgers. Yes siree Bob...
Posted by: 23e45 | Oct 6, 2008 12:13:02 AM
So Sarah Palin believes that freedom of press is a "PRIVILEGE"... maybe she hasn't heard of the 1st Amendment!!!Well, let me clarify for you, Mrs. Palin, wink wink, freedom of the press is a Constitutional RIGHT, not a privelege! Gosh golly, how could we have expected you to know that, sixpack Sarah!
Posted by: Roman | Oct 5, 2008 11:56:26 PM
"Now it is the worlds turn to ask Couric some questions."
Yes, how dare known hardball interviewer Katie Couric ask basic questions like "can you name a court case?" and "what newspapers do you read?" HOW DARE SHE.
Do you even pay attention to the things you are writing? What failure of our educational system is responsible for such a shambling lapse in critical thinking?
Posted by: Bobby | Oct 5, 2008 11:45:04 PM
A point that needs to be mentioned:
When was the last time anyone got "clobbered" by Katie Couric? No one gets clobbered by Katie Couric. Asking you what newspapers you read isn't a clobbering question. It's a really basic question. Just tell them your local paper has articles from the AP and we're just peachy. That's not a hardball question.
Posted by: phil | Oct 5, 2008 10:34:31 PM
Oh, puh-leeze. In the real world, the President doesn't get a do-over.
Posted by: Marcus | Oct 5, 2008 10:21:03 PM
Could you imagine if you were interviewing someone for a job, had asked them a specific question and then watched them ramble into incoherent nonsense without ever mentioning anything relevant to the question initially asked? How could you take that person seriously?
If these interviews and debates are the interviews for this Vice Presidential slot, shouldn't we be considering that this woman is giving everyone complete asinine answers to the questions shes being asked? This is a job, these are important questions to be answered and she replies with babbling incoherence. This position would be filled by someone else, if this was a serious interview.
Posted by: A S | Oct 5, 2008 9:46:34 PM
Why can't I copy text from this web site?
Posted by: A Guy | Oct 5, 2008 9:40:30 PM
I just watched a clip from the Cameron interview. Palin was talking about the death penalty and "heinous crimes." She actually said HEE-nee-us. Chalk that one up alongside nucular.
Posted by: Rudy | Oct 5, 2008 5:13:41 PM
Ahmadinejad keeps saying about "freedom of the press". Right down to "We just want truth, we want fairness, we want balance."
Posted by: Jules | Oct 5, 2008 3:21:13 PM
Post a comment

