One minute on YouTube – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgMWhrCzbdk
Gibson asked her about the Bush Doctrine. Look at her face. She had no clue what he was talking about. He fed her enough so she could vamp, and she did, but she still didn’t know.
I think she got it. What I see a lot of subtle errors in communication between the two.
You know where the confusion comes from? She’s being interviewed by a guy who patronizing her. Which is never fun. And she’s got enough steel to return the favor with the contempt it deserves.
Win or loose in November, the Press is in for an interesting time with this lady.
Cross posted to Space For Commerce.
I was actually surprised that Gibson asked her hard hitting questions. I didn’t find him condescending in anyway. Palin tried to bluff, lie and skirt addressing the issues through most of the interview. Gibson tried his best to hold her feet to the fire. It became quite obvious she is an accomplished liar and opportunist.
There is no way in hell this woman is fit to run for office at the national level. By choosing her to be his running mate, is just another example of McSame’s incompetence to be president.
Why don’t you tell us what the “Bush Doctrine” is?
Pick one, and your interviewer can probably say *bzzzt!*, “you’re wrong, sorry”.
For starters, look at the Wikipedia (yeah, yeah; might as well start somewhere) entry for “Bush Doctrine”, which starts out:
For all practical purposes, in an interview it means whatever the interviewer says it means.
Sort of like Humpty Dumpty.
is just another example of McSame’s incompetence to be president.
A lame insult as a substitute for saying anything meaningful usually indicates a vacuity in the brain housing group.
Newsbusters has a link to a transcript of the unedited interview. It’s very interesting when compared to the edited version. They’ve highlighted some of it. You might want to check it out.
http://tinyurl.com/3nolj7