Sound not synchronized on Palin Gibson interview?

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

Is it just my local cable tv company, or is the ABC sound not synchronized with the lip movements?

If this is national, it's really unforgivable.

[Texas_shutterbug]

Thank you.

I think that was a complement. :)

[tndarlin]

I work in a male dominated business...if I ever had anyone talk to me like Charlie did, I would ask....are you serious? This interview made me sick!

Not for her answers, but from his condescension.

[Diverdogz]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html

This speech is the beginning of what is commonly referred to as the “Bush Doctrine”.

[autumnraine]

Same here. I got a horrible gut feeling watching this and I hope it wasn’t only conservatives who like Palin who felt it too.

[kabar]

I know Georgia is not a member of NATO, but Gibson hypothetically said it was, which is why Palin answered the way she did.

[kabar]

She provided a decent answer after she realized what the Bush doctrine was. Gibson wanted a gotcha moment an got it. As I said, it may have been a blessing in disguise since the policy has been a lightening rod for Bush haters and is controversial.

[tndarlin]

People on here are going crazy about her interview. All I could see is Charlie’s condescension to Sarah and her complete answers. I could not have been more proud. Obama has NEVER answered these tough questions, nor would he ever be subjected to such scrutiny.

[LibLieSlayer]

It most assuredly was.

LLS

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" I was waiting for him to let out a big sigh of disgust. Women will notice, believe me."
Yup.. remember Gore's sigh during the debate between him and Bush ? yeah, that really helped him out alot.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

More to the point in the eyes of the MSM/DEMS/LIBS .
She is a Women who happens to BE a Conservative who is against abortion.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

” but the liberals are too dimwitted to get it. “
Maybe not the useful idiot pawns to " get it ", but, their ring leaders know full well what they are trying to do with their agenda that they are hell bent on bringing America to it's knees because our enemies are chomping at the bit to destroy us.... that is exactly what the DEMS/LIBS/MSM are trying to do.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" Charlie Gibson was a disgrace, and just following along with more distasteful behavior from the rest of the MSM and Obama and the backlash tomorrow from strong women like myself is going to echo for days, weeks even ... and hopefully to Nov "

Sorry Charlie...


There now, fixed.

[PerConPat]

She provided a decent answer after she realized what the Bush doctrine was.

Yes, I agree. I believe that her answer, before Gibson offered his understanding of the doctrine, was broad enough to afford the McCain organization enough room to weather any storm the Obama machine may try to whip up in the future.

Before:
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view.
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

After:
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.

[hunter112]

You've made my point--"fairly accepted". I'd be willing to bet that we'd describe it far more differently here on FR than they would on DU. Since Charlie represents the liberal media, I'd think his definition would be closer to theirs than to ours. It was smart to try to narrow it down before commenting on it.

After 200 years, we have a pretty clear idea of what the Monroe Doctrine is, and it enjoys wide support, at least as far as for the time it was adopted. The "Bush Doctrine" didn't even exist eight years ago, and cannot be settled on until we see its results in a decade or two, perhaps longer. We would have to have Presidential papers, etc. to fully enunciate it.

Sarah Palin did the smart thing by getting her definition out first, then letting Charlie refine it so she could answer him precisely. Just asking her about the "Bush Doctrine" is a smarmy attempt on his part to tie her to the Bush presidency. That's Obama's job, not the job of some supposed impartial 'journalist'. She showed prudence and wariness, not getting caught up in some fake charm perhaps shown to her earlier in the day.

[FLCowboy,]

I think you guys need to start thinking with your big head, instead of your little head. I realize she's your ultimate fantasy - a good looking woman who like sports, likes to hunt, etc., but do you honestly think she is ready for prime time?

And you think Obama is more qualified than Palin? Obama, the mystery man whom you know nothing about? Obama, who has extremists in his inner circle of advisers? Obama, who in three short years became the biggest benefactor in Congress with the largess of the FMs? Yeah I think Palin is more qualified. I certainly believe you don't have to be a Washington insider to be qualified. Do you think for a moment Biden would make a good president? Common sense is an admirable trait. Honesty is another. Palin has both.

[Texas_shutterbug]

You brought up Obama and Biden. I didn't.

And Palin has done nothing since I wrote that post to indicate that she is qualified other than a great big ego. We're stuck with her, but do you honestly think that if McCain died a couple of weeks after the inauguration that she'd be anything but a puppet president.

Thankfully, she shares our worldview. Imagine having to go all the way to Alaska to find such a person. :)

[FLCowboy,]

And Palin has done nothing since I wrote that post to indicate that she is qualified other than a great big ego.

We're stuck with her, but do you honestly think that if McCain died a couple of weeks after the inauguration that she'd be anything but a puppet president.

She'd be no more of a puppet than Obama. Do you really think he is qualified after spending 3 years in the US Senate, preparing to run for president versus learning his own job? While Palin was a mayor, or councilwoman, Obama was encouraging people of South Chicago to register to vote, and to sign up for more charity.

And if McCain serves full term, Palin will have had more experience that Bush, Clinton, and Bush before Clinton to run for President.

[Texas_shutterbug]

While Obama's been campaigning for the last five years...ummm, I mean almost two years, he's had advisors. Sucky advisors, but people advising him, nonetheless.

Furthermore, he graduated magna cum law with a law degree from a top law school. As radical and socialist as he is, I don't think that he's dumb. As a matter of fact, I just laugh when people here say he's dumb. Judging his intelligence on the basis of his "ummm...ummmm...ummmm" is like judging George Bush on his bumbling speech.

Face it: we're all voting on ideology - not experience. If I was faced with two CONSERVATIVES with Obama or Palin's experience and qualifications, I wouldn't like twice at Palin. Being mayor of a town of 5,000 with a city manager doesn't prepare one for much, imo. On the other hand, she's a damn good campaigner, has endless energy, and is very likable.