Posted on 07/14/2004 4:51:34 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Do they do it to keep us off balance? Just when you're about to write off The Today Show as hopeless DNC surrogates, they pull something like this morning. In separate interviews, Katie Couric made manifest her skepticism about John Edwards, while (the solid professional, IMHO) Jamie Gangel treated Laura Bush in a reasonable and straightforward manner.
Katie began her interview with Edwards and wife Elizabeth with a shot between the eyes: "Despite a nationwide bump in the polls when you were named to the ticket, a new poll in NC shows Kerry/Edwards down by 15%."
Edwards: "I'm not a poll expert but I've seen other polls showing 'basically a dead heat' [translation: " not down by quite as much"] in NC. I think once they get to know John Kerry, the people of NC will embrace this ticket."
Shot back an arch-eyebrowed Katie: "Really? A liberal Democrat from Massaschuesetts?"
Edwards waxed on about Kerry's volunteering for the military and service in Vietnam.
Couric: "Do you have a Florida strategy?" Edward and Elizabeth dwelled on the fact that his wife was born there and that they have 20 relatives that live there."
This again was met with skepticism by Katie: "Well, that's 20 votes, but doesn't George Bush have the ultimate family tie with the Governor?"
Both Edwards and wife mused darkly about how, yes, the "administraiton" of the state of Florida played an important role as to how the election came out in 2000, and piously hoped that this time "the people" will get to decide.
Katie then quoted Dick Cheney about how Kerry and Edwards voted for the Iraq resolution but now have developed "a convenient case of campaign amnesia."
Edwards: "It was right to vote for the resolution. But that authority has been abused by the President in lives, money, our reputation around the world."
Yet again, Couric put Edwards on the spot: "But you knew the coalition wasn't that strong and that there wasn't a fully-developed exit strategy, and you still voted for the resolution. How can you look back now and say this wasn't happening and that wasn't happening?"
Edwards was forced to retreat: "That's a fair question and I take full responsibility for my vote. But I didn't have control over the coaliton, over the lack of a plan to win peace. Saddam was a serious threat and needed to be dealt with. But ultimately it was the President's responsiblity."
When it came to Kerry and Edwards voting against the $87 billion in Iraq war funding, again Katie put Edwards on the defensive: "There's been a change of tactic on the campaign trail. [Note how the reference to 'campaign trail' implies that this was a purely political maneuver]. Kerry used to say that he supported the $87 billion but objected to the way it was funded [he wanted to raise taxes]. Now he says he's "proud" of voting against it. Which is it? Do you have a problem being one of four senators who voted for the war and against funding?" [Recall that he voted against funding at the point Howard Dean was riding high and it was expedient for Edwards and Kerry to portray themselves as anti-war].
"My view was I had to stand up and say no, this is not working."
Couric: "What would be John Kerry's exit strategy in Iraq?"
Edwards: "John Kerry would make certain that Iraqis were much more quickly and efficently trained to take responsibility for their own security."
With sarcasm normally resolved for Republicans, Katie shot back: "With all due respect [which as we know means: "with no respect at all"] why would Kerry be able to do a better job?" Edwards' answer escapes me.
Couric: "What do you think of Dick Cheney?"
Edwards:"He's always been cordial and polite [guess he hasn't told Edwards to go ---- himself. Yet]. He called me on the day I was nominated. But he is out of touch with ordinary Americans, wiht the struggles people deal with in their daily lives. We have dramatically different views of the world."
Edwards then actually repeated, for the 1,000,007th time, "my father worked in a mill, and I was the first person in my family who went to college."
He continued: "I feel an enormous responsiblity to provide those opportunities to other Americans."
Once again, he was met with Katie's incredulity. "And you don't think Dick Cheney wants to give opportunities to Americans?"
Edwards: "I don't see any signs of it. I get up every morning thinking about giving the same chance to other Americans. I grew up in the bright light of America and I want to give other Americans that same chance" [gag me with a smiley face.]
Then it was on to Jamie Gangel's interview with Laura Bush.
Gangel: "In light of the Senate report highly critical of intelligence on Iraq does your husband have any regrets?"
Laura: "Who can regret Saddam is no longer in power? Is it tough? Absolutely? Have we sacrificed? Absolutely. But we can do tough things in this country."
Gangel: "She [Laura] has become the President's secret weapon, and is ready to play political hardball."
Gangel: "Kerry recently said that "no young Americans will need to go to war unnecessarily if I'm president," implying they have under President Bush.
Laura: "Are they sorry Saddam is no longer in power? They saw the same intelligence. They're stuck because they can't give any credit to Pres. Bush."
On Ron Reagan, Jr. speaking to DNC convention, Gangel asked: "Is it embarrasssing?" "No." "Is he being used?" "I'm not going to say that" [meaning that I'm too polite to say that it is obviously true].
Gangel lobbed a softball on the VP candidates: "What do you think of John Edwards? Do you think he matches up to Dick Cheney." Laura: "Of course not, absolutely not." "Any basis for speculation that he might be replaced by someone like Colin Powell? "No. No."
The interview concluded with some soft questions about daughters Jenna and Barbara's new-found interest and involvement in the campaign.
Neither Gangel's questions nor tone were hostile. A shocking contrast with the blatant skepticism Couric expressed to Edwards.
I thought Saddam wasn't a threat, John-boy?
The libs are going to make sure Kerry loses in November. W will win re-election with about 310 EV's. For the next four years, Hillary will prep for her '08 run, causing an increased frequency of vomiting among conservatives. Sometime in early 2007, the "New Reagan" will show his face, and end up slaughtering Hitlery in the 2008 election, dooming the Democraps to minority status for many more decades to come.
I about died laughing when I read that comment!
What the hell kind of picture is this?
First time I've seen it.
Don't think she'll do it this year. She wouldn't unless Kerry (and therefore the Dem ticket) was ahead by a good margin, and if anything, he's falling behind. Hillary wants to WIN and I doubt she could this year, New York and Connecticut excepted.
"About to write off?" They've been written off in my book for years.
Is the sky falling?
Yesterday on our local ABC affiliate Marvin Zindler went on a tear about how journalists spout the 1st Amendment when it suits their own purposes and how the same journalists feel the need to try people in the press and taint jury pools.
I realize they are not the same subjects but what has happened on TV? Is there something in the water in these studios? It scares me.
Two Words: Bill Owens
Couric and Edwards had this planned all along?
BILL OWENS!!!
Step one - collect medals from friends Step two - throw medals over fence (be sure to keep your own - you'll need them later) Step three - you're now an instant "patriot"! go directly to government office!
no wonder Kerry bats his lashes at Edwards,, he ain't gettin nuttin fron Tarrrreeeezzzaaaa,,,,,,LMAO
that is because hillry is much more manly than either of these 2 sissy sub boys.
PRICELESS!!! Interpretation: "Oh no, the polls dropping in MY home state once I was added to the ticket couldn't be MY fault! It's not that the residents of NC know what a slime I am, it's that they don't know what a slime Kerry is.. wait, that didn't come out right..."
Agreed. She's just trying to draw a larger audience. I will not be taken in.
There are new cosmetic procedures that have very little down time.
-PJ
Why does Teresa always look like she's pulling away from Lurch?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.