Originally Posted by samhass

The Couric/Palin interview was shocking. Palin looked like a Barbie doll with
a prerecorded tape running. I thought Couric was having a hard time not correcting Palin's pronunciation of Iraq and Iran. Couric's face kept an almost constant look of stunned disbelief on it. Kahuna, post turtle does indeed come to mind. As for the debates, will there be one?

Again, not meant as a defense for Gov Palin, but do we give Sen Biden a pass on his very serious gaffes because he has been around so long ?

Kahuna:
I like your reply on our problem with Freddie and Fannie . We both know some of the major players in House or Reps that should have more than some idea on what was going on. Now the same people are going to still be in power ?
It just doesn't make sense !! I am against any bailout because of bad moves by banks and yes just stupid people.
I work with an individual who had his son just buy a house about two months ago with 3% down payment. This is part of the reason we are in this position.
How can either party lie and tell us we will get a tax cut ? I just don't see how.

Originally Posted by Bucco

Again, not meant as a defense for Gov Palin, but do we give Sen Biden a pass on his very serious gaffes because he has been around so long ?

Or, for that matter, Obama? I still can't get over his proposal to bring the Georgia issue to the UN Security Council, apparently totally oblivious to the notion that Russia could veto any resolution.

Recall that Obama had previously stated that a basis for his foreign policy experience was that he had lived abroad when he was young. That, to me, is on a par with Palin's exeprience based on her view of Russia from the Alaskan shoreline. And Obama wants to be President on day one, not VP.

Originally Posted by NJblue

Or, for that matter, Obama? I still can't get over his proposal to bring the Georgia issue to the UN Security Council, apparently totally oblivious to the notion that Russia could veto any resolution.

Recall that Obama had previously stated that a basis for his foreign policy experience was that he had lived abroad when he was young. That, to me, is on a par with Palin's exeprience based on her view of Russia from the Alaskan shoreline. And Obama wants to be President on day one, not VP.

I "THINK",..not sure of my facts on this but heard that a week or so ago he promised...campaign promise...that he would put up any legislation 5 days before he signs it on the internet so that americans could read it. Didn't President Clinton start that in the 90's and arent we still doing that ???

Originally Posted by JUREK

Kahuna:
I like your reply on our problem with Freddie and Fannie . We both know some of the major players in House or Reps that should have more than some idea on what was going on. Now the same people are going to still be in power ?
It just doesn't make sense !! I am against any bailout because of bad moves by banks and yes just stupid people.
I work with an individual who had his son just buy a house about two months ago with 3% down payment. This is part of the reason we are in this position.
How can either party lie and tell us we will get a tax cut ? I just don't see how.

I could be way out of line here but this is one of the major reasons for my objection to Sen Obama. He is without a doubt a socialist and so far left and that is the group that wants the american dream available to more people. Sounds good but just like most socialist programs it does not work...part of what we are going through now is the insistence in the 90's that we make home ownership available to more people. OF COURSE there were those on Wall St who siezed on this chance and made a ton but seems to me the principle was born in the 90's and even in the 70's with President Carter.

I did miss it. Thank you for the link. I watched both parts.

Turtle on a fence post is a wonderful analogy.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I could be way out of line here but this is one of the major reasons for my objection to Sen Obama. He is without a doubt a socialist and so far left and that is the group that wants the american dream available to more people. Sounds good but just like most socialist programs it does not work...part of what we are going through now is the insistence in the 90's that we make home ownership available to more people. OF COURSE there were those on Wall St who siezed on this chance and made a ton but seems to me the principle was born in the 90's and even in the 70's with President Carter.

Bucco:

Once again you hit the nail on the head. You are correct with the socialist programs. They believe everyone should be able to own a home regardless of income. I like the fact that in TV most lenders required minimum of 25% down payment. Look at the repo rate compared to other parts of country.
If all the banks had the same regulations we would not be in this mess. I do believe it started with Carter.

the same scrutiny of the press, the media, the biased partisans and all others viewing each and every nuance with a microscope....not analyzing the subject....but only focusing on what they perceive or feel the subject did not do or say or look right.

Not many!!!!!!

Staged interviews, debates, scripted speeches, controlled appearances, et al in no way shape or form reveal the real person.

No matter who the candidate, they can say anything they want about what they want when they want....usually geared to the last poll or the last thing said by their opponent......

none of which has anything to do with what the office of the President of the United States can do/accomplish. Only when they wear the mantle of the office will they know what they can or cannot do.

Thrash all everybody does about experience....their are no candidates with the experience of the President of the USA....extrapolating what any of the candidates have done or say they will do does not translate into qualification.
Like it or not it is a year one of OJT......the only real measure will be, who ever it is and what ever is done or not done by their first State of the Union report.....everything between now and then is WORDS and PROMISES only and please don't forget the are coming from a politician (either side of the aisle....if their lips are moving they are saying what you want to hear.....nothing more).

BTK

Gov. Palin has shown great grace and composure in the Gibson & Couric interviews. Both of these alleged unbiased journalists may as well be wearing Vote For Obama banners across their chests anyway, as their position and preference are well demonstrated. Knowing that the interviewer, who controls the pace and questioning, is going to do their utmost to make you look less-than-stellar so that "their" candidate looks better takes guts to place yourself in such a negative interview environment.

There are a lot of slams on this board about the inferred bias of Fox News towards the conservative side. The sword cuts both ways here, as Gibson, Couric and several others in the network talking-head business are so far left they probably won't fly in airplanes because airplanes have right wings.

Say what you will about the interviews. It takes guts to know you are going to be set up from the beginning and do it anyway. Yes - the same would hold true for Sen. Obama or Sen. Biden to be interviewed by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh.

To my memory neither senator has placed himself in that position despite requests for interviews having been made by these conservative types. That's either "good judgment' or "gutless," depending on your viewpoint.

BTK...good post !

First, I thought Barack Obama did submit to a long interview with Bill O'Reilly on Fox News a couple of weeks ago. O'Reilly was tough, as you would expect him to be. I listened to it and thought it was pretty good.

Secondly, after watching both parts of the Couric-Palin interview I don't agree that Katie Couric tried to "set up" Governor Palin. If anything on the news reports of the interview that has been unfair, it's been the short sound bites extracted from the interview that have proliferated for over 24 hours now. Those were chosen to highlight gaffes that Palin made in her answers. Frankly, I thought Palin did a pretty good job for someone with her level of inexperience in foreign affairs. She was obviously coached with the questions and answers, but I thought she did pretty well under a whole lot of pressure.

I remain unconvinced that someone with Palin's level of experience and naiveté should be a heartbeat away from being the President. But at least she is far from being the slick, devious, almost evil person that currently sits in the VP chair. If I had only two choices for VP, Sarah Palin or Dick Cheney, I'd opt for the fresh, enthisiastic and obviously smart candidate over the person who has repeatedly demonstrated duplicitous and deceitful behavior in furthering his personal ideaology.

In a heartbeat!

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

...

I remain unconvinced that someone with Palin's level of experience and naiveté should be a heartbeat away from being the President. But at least she is far from being the slick, devious, almost evil person that currently sits in the VP chair. If I had only two choices for VP, Sarah Palin or Dick Cheney, I'd opt for the fresh, enthisiastic and obviously smart candidate over the person who has repeatedly demonstrated duplicitous and deceitful behavior in furthering his personal ideaology.

In a heartbeat!

As I remain unconvinced that someone with Obama's level of experience and naivete should BE the President. His experience with operational government (actually running things, making decisions, administering) is nonexistent, and having a rookie manager in charge of the third-largest bureaucracy (I think Russia's and China's may be a tad larger) is something I can't fathom. I wouldn't want that for any company in which I hold stock, why then would I want that for the USA Chief Executive?

Sen. Obama to me may be a decent VP candidate, and having the chance to understudy a while and learn how to be an executive/manager and how to discharge those responsiblities is a prudent step. He may be an excellent candidate for Governor of Illinois. If he can handle that, he then shows the capability for larger administrative tasks. He really does seem like an honorable man (although his policies seem a little too left to be viable), and getting a few operational callouses on his hands would season him somewhat. However, based on his total curriculum vita, he's like a competent bicyclist who has never driven the family car taking over a NASCAR racing team and competing at Daytona.

Yes, the same could be said in many ways of Gov. Palin. A lot has been said about her foreign policy knowledge (or lack thereof), but that's why there is an entire professional State Department stuffed with career diplomats and analysts, coupled with a Central Intelliegence Agency to keep tabs on it all. A good executive can manage such assets and advisors, but that is a skill one learns - it just isn't a trait locked in someone's DNA.

So, a rookie President or a rookie Vice President - is that the choice we have?

...either one would almost certainly do better than W.

Originally Posted by Bucco

Again, not meant as a defense for Gov Palin, but do we give Sen Biden a pass on his very serious gaffes because he has been around so long ?

Bucco, you keep saying your not defending Palin when you clearly are. You try to spin it to Biden, but I believe in a previous post you said it should be a McCain/Biden ticket???? Just a tad hypocritical, eh? I knew her true colors would show through -- McCain's are also.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

Gov. Palin has shown great grace and composure in the Gibson & Couric interviews. Both of these alleged unbiased journalists may as well be wearing Vote For Obama banners across their chests anyway, as their position and preference are well demonstrated. Knowing that the interviewer, who controls the pace and questioning, is going to do their utmost to make you look less-than-stellar so that "their" candidate looks better takes guts to place yourself in such a negative interview environment.

There are a lot of slams on this board about the inferred bias of Fox News towards the conservative side. The sword cuts both ways here, as Gibson, Couric and several others in the network talking-head business are so far left they probably won't fly in airplanes because airplanes have right wings.

Say what you will about the interviews. It takes guts to know you are going to be set up from the beginning and do it anyway. Yes - the same would hold true for Sen. Obama or Sen. Biden to be interviewed by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh.

To my memory neither senator has placed himself in that position despite requests for interviews having been made by these conservative types. That's either "good judgment' or "gutless," depending on your viewpoint.

SteveZ! I guess you don't know dumb when you see it!