Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
I really don't get this whole "it's gotcha journalism". Since when is asking someone to talk more about something they said GOTCHA! I mean, it's like when Palin was flustered at the whole "I can see Russia from my house" and ended up saying... "you know... reporters". Is she saying that we basically shouldn't take anything she says seriously because if we do and follow up on what she says it's a "gotcha!".
82, any thought on this?
I mean, I can understand the Bush Doctrine maybe being a bit of gotcha journalism, let's test the rookie thing, but "what did you mean when you said (insert whatever dumb thing she said here)?" What are people supposed to ask her about if not what she says about things?
__________________
Rubarb is what makes my feet look cheese!
I really don't get this whole "it's gotcha journalism". Since when is asking someone to talk more about something they said GOTCHA! I mean, it's like when Palin was flustered at the whole "I can see Russia from my house" and ended up saying... "you know... reporters". Is she saying that we basically shouldn't take anything she says seriously because if we do and follow up on what she says it's a "gotcha!".
82, any thought on this?
There will be nothing to "get" as a "got'cha," if she stopped hanging her and her running mate out there to dry, with HER OWN WORDS. But then again, is she capable?
I really don't get this whole "it's gotcha journalism". Since when is asking someone to talk more about something they said GOTCHA! I mean, it's like when Palin was flustered at the whole "I can see Russia from my house" and ended up saying... "you know... reporters". Is she saying that we basically shouldn't take anything she says seriously because if we do and follow up on what she says it's a "gotcha!".
82, any thought on this?
I mean, I can understand the Bush Doctrine maybe being a bit of gotcha journalism, let's test the rookie thing, but "what did you mean when you said (insert whatever dumb thing she said here)?" What are people supposed to ask her about if not what she says about things?
Look - I think that what is extremely frustrating is that we elect, or seek to elect Presidents largely based upon how well they do in interviews. Whether you believe it or not (I honestly don't care), there is little to no credible media sources and reporting going on this country today. So, first - I do believe that there is a measure of "gotcha" tactics going on. And just like it would be if Hannity were interviewing Obama or Biden, it is hyper-Gotcha when Couric interviews Palin...
Secondly, it seems clear to me that Palin is not at all prepared to deal with the monumental challenge of being "on" 24x7... with living in a global glass bubble... and the stress of knowing that you MUST say the perfect thing in every recordable soundbite, or else... gotcha!
Does this mean that she is not capable of being a VP? Not sure... I lean toward waiting to see the debate on Thursday (though, I am skeptical as should this debate follow recent debating trends, we may very well not learn anything worthwhile here...).
Lastly, it also seems pretty clear that McCain is indeed antsy sitting there, watching and listening to Palin respond to Couric. Not sure what to make of that - but it's hard to see anything positive about it... Is it that he knows she is ill-prepared? Is he indeed a control-freak and the mere thought of someone on his "team" speaking on issues with him in the room completely unsettles him? That, more than anything stuck out to me as something to be concerned about...
Look - I think that what is extremely frustrating is that we elect, or seek to elect Presidents largely based upon how well they do in interviews. Whether you believe it or not (I honestly don't care), there is little to no credible media sources and reporting going on this country today. So, first - I do believe that there is a measure of "gotcha" tactics going on. And just like it would be if Hannity were interviewing Obama or Biden, it is hyper-Gotcha when Couric interviews Palin...
Secondly, it seems clear to me that Palin is not at all prepared to deal with the monumental challenge of being "on" 24x7... with living in a global glass bubble... and the stress of knowing that you MUST say the perfect thing in every recordable soundbite, or else... gotcha!
you really think it's "gotcha" to ask "what did you mean when you said this statement?" I mean, some of these things they ask are in her stump speech and things she's said multiple times. What's gotcha about asking about things that are said ad nasuem?I'm not asking your opinion on her qualifications.
__________________
Rubarb is what makes my feet look cheese!
you really think it's "gotcha" to ask "what did you mean when you said this statement?" I mean, some of these things they ask are in her stump speech and things she's said multiple times. What's gotcha about asking about things that are said ad nasuem?I'm not asking your opinion on her qualifications.
As a matter of fact, I do believe Couric is attempting to make this a "gotcha" moment...
As I understand the "issue", Palin responded to a person in a crowd who asked her about Pakistan. Palin responded that she believes we should attack terrorists in Pakistan.
Couric correctly states that this position is close to Obama's position. She however, attempts to position Palin's response as being directly opposed to McCain's position. The reality is that McCain says he does not endorse attacks in Pakistan that are not approved or endorsed by Pakistan.
What is missing here is the question about whether or not Palin agrees that we should only attack when/if we receive the endorsement of Pakistan. Of course, because Couric is taking this issue out of context and making it a "gotcha" moment, you don't know if Palin had this in mind when she answered the person in the crowd...
As a matter of fact, I do believe Couric is attempting to make this a "gotcha" moment...
As I understand the "issue", Palin responded to a person in a crowd who asked her about Pakistan. Palin responded that she believes we should attack terrorists in Pakistan.
Couric correctly states that this position is close to Obama's position. She however, attempts to position Palin's response as being directly opposed to McCain's position. The reality is that McCain says he does not endorse attacks in Pakistan that are not approved or endorsed by Pakistan.
What is missing here is the question about whether or not Palin agrees that we should only attack when/if we receive the endorsement of Pakistan. Of course, because Couric is taking this issue out of context and making it a "gotcha" moment, you don't know if Palin had this in mind when she answered the person in the crowd...
oh my god.
__________________
Rubarb is what makes my feet look cheese!
Sorry -- there's a difference between setting someone up for a gotcha moment and having a basket of them delivered to your door. Asking a candidate to clarify what he or she meant is done all the time, to all candidates, and if you can't restate or clarify or spin it when asked that bland question, you ain't ready for prime time.
We're talking about a woman who consciously portrays herself as a tough, no-nonsense, moose-killing hockey Mom. She says she's tough enough to take on powerful special interests and politicos -- OK, she damn well ought to be able to put Couric away easily, in that case. Instead she makes Dubya sound articulate and polished, and we're supposed to feel sorry for her?
We're supposed to cut her all this extra slack for exactly what reason? Can't be just because she's a woman, can it? Maybe it's because she's such a complete novice on virtually every subject that she's being asked about and embarrassingly out of her depth?
Then she damn well isn't ready to be a heartbeat away from running the country.
__________________
oderint dum metuant (Latin for 'let them hate, so long as they fear').
Well, in truth I'm actually not a total hawk, but I'm not a dove either -- I'm more like an angry pigeon flying over the political arena after a really big meal. -Abba Gav
Sorry -- there's a difference between setting someone up for a gotcha moment and having a basket of them delivered to your door. Asking a candidate to clarify what he or she meant is done all the time, to all candidates, and if you can't restate or clarify or spin it when asked that bland question, you ain't ready for prime time.
We're talking about a woman who consciously portrays herself as a tough, no-nonsense, moose-killing hockey Mom. She says she's tough enough to take on powerful special interests and politicos -- OK, she damn well ought to be able to put Couric away easily, in that case. Instead she makes Dubya sound articulate and polished, and we're supposed to feel sorry for her?
We're supposed to cut her all this extra slack for exactly what reason? Can't be just because she's a woman, can it? Maybe it's because she's such a complete novice on virtually every subject that she's being asked about and embarrassingly out of her depth?
Then she damn well isn't ready to be a heartbeat away from running the country.
Let me be clear - I do not expect anyone to "feel sorry" for her... I don't...
And yes, in my best case scenario, she would have easily handed Couric her ass as Katy placed it on a platter for her. Did she not because McCain was in the room and she felt inhibited? I dunno. Maybe she is as inadequate as everyone here believes her to be... Thursday night could be telling... maybe... we'll see....
Also, I believe she did restate her comment. It was McCain who interjected with the "Gotcha" commentary...
It occurred to me as I was out killing a moose in the yard... well, actually, I was digging out bermuda grass, but same thing...
that most of Palin's defenders are strongly opposed, under other circumstances (and many would say under any circumstances) to affirmative action programs. To quotas.
And yet what else is this? There is no way under the sun Palin would have been selected for VP if she was a white male with exactly the same personal history and professional credentials. Not in a zillion years. She was only picked because she was a woman, without any regard to being best-qualified or not.
There are a few jobs where hiring underqualified, learn-as-you-go affirmative action babies is really insane -- President, neurosurgeon, test pilot...
(And you GOPers, you know full well that if Obama had picked someone with identical background to Palin, you would be in hog heaven ripping him and his Veep to shreds and feel --and be -- absolutely justified in doing so.)
__________________
oderint dum metuant (Latin for 'let them hate, so long as they fear').
Well, in truth I'm actually not a total hawk, but I'm not a dove either -- I'm more like an angry pigeon flying over the political arena after a really big meal. -Abba Gav
Linear Mode
