From the New West blog: Presidential Campaign
McCain Manager: Palin Will Answer Questions When Media Shows “Respect and Deference”
By Jill Kuraitis, 9-08-08
  |
|
 | |
|
In an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, John McCain’s campaign manager Rick Davis said it “would be foolhardy to put her out in that environment,” referring to VP pick Sarah Palin and the scrutiny of the media.
Wallace asked, “When will she agree to an interview?”
Davis answered, “She’ll agree to an interview when we think it’s time and when she feels comfortable doing it.”
Wallace: “Why is she scared to answer questions?”
Davis: “She’s not scared to answer questions…we run our campaign, not the news media.”
Wallace: “There are legitimate questions about is she or is she not ready to be commander in chief.”
Davis: “Until at which point in time we feel like the news media is going to treat her with some respect and deference, I think it would be foolhardy to put her out in that environment.”
def·er·ence
1. polite respect, especially putting another person’s interests first
2. submission to the judgment, opinion, or wishes of another person
(Encarta English World Dictionary)
[End of article]
They aren't serious. Are they? The woman wants to be VP yet she can't even handle an interview 2 months prior to the election? What a joke.
Comment By Inky, 9-08-08Why do conservatives fear, hate, dislike, reject, abuse
Scientists?
Journalists?
Educators?
Because these people have the gall, the temerity to speak often uncomfortable and inconvenient truths.
Fear the truth about pollution, global warming? Attack the messenger.
Fear exposure about political corruption? Attack the messenger.
Fear having your little world of miracles and the Word of God shaken by evolution? Attack the messenger.
For all you Ditto-heads who relish attacks on librul scientists, environmental whackos, Femi-nazis, the drive-by media, etc., etc., be ashamed. Bushco has been a flaming disaster and there's no reason to believe that McSame and Sarah will be any better.
She said the Pledge of Allegiance should have the words "under God" in it because it was good enough for the "Founding Fathers".
Is it sexist or in any way un-deferential to ask Palin why she thinks a bunch of 1950's McCarthyites are the "Founding Fathers"?
Is it an attack on her family if you ask her if her husband, who was in a secessionist party who advocated infiltrating other political parties is in fact a secessionist who is infiltrating our government? The guy seems to have interfered in an awful lot of Alaskan government business you know.
She's probably being coached. Face it, she's been out of the loop and doesn't have a handle on much of anything that doesn't have to do with the backassness of her personal policies. McCain folks have a lot of work to do. They have to protect their ass-sets. They aren't going to put her out there unprepared and to place blame is well, the Republican way.
Comment By Bob Wire, 9-08-08Wow. Just when you wonder how much more arrogant the Republican party can get...
Comment By Tom von Alten, 9-08-08You have read Jay Rosen's piece on his PressThink blog by now, haven't you?
http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2008/09/03/mccain_strategy.html
He forecast all this stuff <b>before</i> Sarah's big speech last Wednesday.
It's nothing if not remarkable chutzpah. The Republican base is happy to have someone stick a finger in the eye of the MSM, but it's hard to imagine anyone genuinely independent buying into the "liberal media" fiction so unquestioningly.
Never mind that abetting those who abuse the media is a self-destructive strategy. Those who applaud this move will be the same group who enthused over two terms of George W. Bush and Richard B. "Dick" Cheney as economic populism.
You guys are way behind the times. She is scheduled for an ABC interview. I'm sure Republicans know that fair and balanced FOX would never be acceptable. I'll watch, hope you do too.
Comment By Marion, 9-08-08The interview is scheduled for Thurs and Friday in Alaska. She will be there to see her son off to Iraq. It has been on the news all day, I'm surprised none of you knew about it.
Comment By Tom, 9-08-08It's so refreshing to see so many terrified lliberals. This strong woman has all of you running scared. Remember when the liberal media accused everyone who oppsed Hillary of being affraid of a strong woman?
Today's polls show Mccain Palin 10 points ahead.
Run for the hills!! The mesiah is falling!!!
Messiah is the term, with a double "s." It's not good to garble this particular term.
Comment By flounder, 9-08-08Let's see. McSame tried to run on experience and it wasn't getting anywhere, so he had to copy Obama and pretend he wasn't a Republican.
McSame had to co-opt the change message, since more of the same doesn't poll very well.
McSame had to try some hail mary VP pick and hope a bunch of weird stuff about her being a secessionist in disguise didn't pop up, like the following video:
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/palin-republican-party-infiltrator-damning-video/
The mystery VP had to start the third rate lies right off the bat about being against a "bridge to nowhere" right away and
McSame had to hope for a little bounce before the lies could be debunked and laughed at.
Supporters of the mystery VP are praying for Mr. McSame's "salvation and speedy death".
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2008/09/speaking-to-base-using-gods-love.html
I don't think "terrified" is the word for what I am feeling.
ten points in this game is a field goal in the beginning of the first quarter. better save your celebration there tom. mccain the same has a long way to go before the final gun and he is known for fumbling. poor little sarah will do just fine on tv folks. keep the eye on the prize. bush and the GOP have ransacked this country long enough. people are tired of it. when the new shine wears off this shiny dime in a few weeks the ugly reality of what mccain would mean to the wallets of the middle class will dawn on everyone at once. bush needs to go and he can take his buddy mccain with him when he hightails it for the ranch in texas.
Comment By flounder, 9-08-08Wow, looks like the from the articles coming out tomorrow that the pressure put on the press to actually do their jobs might rain on McSame's grand parade to introduce Sarah "earmarks" Palin as little miss reformer.
She's getting a tad bit of a reputation as liar. I've heard those are hard to overcome.
Andrew Romano of Newsweek says it best:
"[T]he most interesting thing about today's give-and-take is not that Palin and McCain are misleading the public. In politics, that happens all the time. It's that the Internet--and, through the Internet, the Obama campaign--is forcing major media outlets to repeatedly reject the Bridge to Nowhere deception. In the past, Time and NEWSWEEK and the Times and the Post would've run a thorough fact-check the first time the falsehood surfaced. But then they would've ignored subsequent repetitions. We've already covered that, they'd say. It's old news. Meanwhile, the McCain camp would keep airing the same ads in swing states across the country--reaching millions of credulous voters who'd never read the original fact-checks. But now sites like TPM are (in their own words) forcing "the same news orgs that debunked the original Bridge to Nowhere falsehood" to "aggressively stay on McCain and hold him accountable every time he and his campaign repeat it." That's a certain kind of progress."
Unbelievable, not even subtle, the McCain campaign wants us to put Palin's interests over the interests of the American People. Is this what a McCain administration would be like?
Comment By john, 9-09-08McCain-Palin run scared from big bad Fox News.
Comment By TC, 9-09-08Palin's simply another page out of the Bush/Rove playbook: abuse of power (a book banner who fires people when they don't conform to her rather extreme ideology); a liar (She was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it), and someone who believes laws apply to the peasants, not her (she broke Alaska's laws when she publicly lobbied against the Measure 4 Ballot Initiative in the recent election).
No wonder she's content to avoid the media, preferring the comfort of her Hocky mom facade.
Wow when you have Chris Wallace from FOX News calling you out thats pretty bad.
A fun fact:
Sarah Palin eventually came out against the "Bridge to Nowhere" but she and the State of Alaska kept the $223,000,000.
I have the feeling this is an updated version of Condon's "Manchurian Candidate." Which woman, though, is playing Angela Landsbury's part?
Comment By mary, 9-09-08The Messiah is coming?
When I read the bible, it said the anti-christ would appear first. So are you saying he is already here?
So much unbelief about McCain's and Palin's words. how about this excerpt from the Missoulain newspaper by J.Bidden when he was in Kalispell and Missoula?
Excerpt:
" Meanwhile, one in three Native women will be raped in her lifetime. More than 80 percent of the time, the rapist is non-Native."
I believe this is somewhat exaggerated, and primarily to get the Native American vote. The very same tactics that Obama did while he was here.
Only time will tell what the truth is.
Mary,
Who says the anti-Christ has to be a man?
Cindy, I can't imagine where Biden got his information, but it certainly is not true for all American Indian women. It is too high, any is too high, but it is nothing like that, and it is not usually strange white men. If anglos are involved they are usually known or related unfortuantely. Much like the rest of the female population. I am a woman's health care provider and spent most of my career on the reservation
Comment By Marion, 9-09-08Let's see it has been about a week and a half since Sarah Palin was selected, I can't imagine why she has not been on every talk show and taken both barrels from each of them by this time.
Comment By Ron, 9-09-08Five reasons Palin hasn't yet talked to the press. (For folks like Marion who apparently don't have an imagination at all):
1. Palin doesn't want to answer questions about the "Bridge to nowhere" she supported before she opposed (... and then kept the money for other pork-barrel spending in Alaska).
2. Palin has ZERO foreign policy knowledge and is in the midst of a crash course on foreign countries, leaders, and policy positions (which takes a while since she probably needs to start with the number of continents and the curvature of the earth).
3. Palin and the Republicans are scratching their heads trying to come up with an acceptable way to explain that she doesn't think evolution should be taught in schools.
4. Palin and the Republicans are scratching their heads trying to come up with an acceptable way to explain that she doesn't believe in global warming (particularly difficult to do since McCain has spoken openly and often about the need to address global warming).
5. Palin doesn't want to explain how an abstinence only education failed to keep her teenage daughter from getting pregnant out of wedlock.
Gov. Palin has requested $750 million for earmark pork-barrel spending in her two years as governor of Alaska -- the largest per-capita request in the nation.
Reformer?
Are you sure about that? Senator Baucus of Montana took a single earmark in the farm bill for $500,000,000 for the nature conservancy to buy a few acres of Plum Creek property for half of it, and The Trust for Public Land for the rest. No oversight mentioned.
Comment By flounder, 9-09-08Poor Marion, so wrong for so long. If you googled Native+American+Rape the first result would have clued you in on where Biden gets his info:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/25/AR2007042502778.html
Just in case you missed the story (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/baucus_plum_creek_conservation_groups_announce_massive_land_deal/) and were relying on Marion for information (?!), you might want to note that when she writes "a few," she means 320,000. In case the distinction matters.
Comment By clem from boise, 9-09-08Marion,
The Plum Creek land deal was for 320,000 acres. To many of us thats more than "a few acres" The $500 million came out of the $300 billion farm bill and is mostly going to be used to back bonds used for the purchse of the land.
Gov. Palin has requested $750 million for earmark pork-barrel spending in her two years as governor of Alaska -- the largest per-capita request in the nation. (As reported by the Associated Press AND The Wall Street Journal)
Reformer?
Clem, Ron, I don't know if you read here often, but Marion isn't here to be honest.
I mean look what just happened, she professed to be some sort of expert on tribal health issues, but in order to make a Democrat look bad ) she pretended to be totally oblivious to any real information or statistics (or to finding some really easily found information).
Then in order to make a Democrat look bad, she acted like she knew something about an issue, then totally made up information about it.
The media doesn't usually treat politicians with respect and deference no matter which party. Their job is to make things transparent on both sides. I can't say they've treated Hillary or Obama with "respect" and "deference". The campaign managers are afraid she's going to goof up if an interview is not carefully staged. Personally, I think we need someone who can think on their feet and they need to prove it.
Comment By Marion, 9-09-08I am aware that it is "about" 320,000, but that is not yet set. They also will continue to use the land for logging & exactly what land has not been finalized. All of that being said, I did leave off the thousand after the few.
As for the women, the article deals with two distinct things, the law enforcement authority, which is a historic issue going back to the beginning of reservations. The other is rape of women, they extrapolated their conclusions based on 3 areas, and extended it to all areas. One of the things not mentioned is whether they did the studies on the reservations themselves or in metropolitan areas nearby. There are no numbers indicating where these attacks took place or any details, not even the number of interview. Amnesty International is better known for their dramatic conclusions.
Since I provided the exams for thousands of American Indian women over the years, I truly believe that I do know a little about their health. Whether you chose to believe someone with hands on experience or Amnesty Int. is up to you.
When they make the state ment that american Indian women are raped at "nearly double" white women. That means that about 1 of 5 or 6 of all women have been raped according to them. Does that match with the folks you know?
Few, few thousand, few hundred thousand.
I guess I'll just presume that anything you say is likely to be conveniently biased to your point of view.
It's one thing to be mistaken, it's another to deliberately mislead. Whatever experience you may have or claim to have, you have zero credibility based on your behavior here, Marion.
Like I said, Marion is not a credible or honest person to have a discussion with. No wonder she is a creationist.
Amnesty explained where they did their research and how. It was near and on reservations.
From the Amnesty International Report:
"Amnesty International conducted detailed research in three locations with different policing and judicial arrangements (see Chapter 4: Issues of jurisdiction): the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North and South Dakota, the State of Oklahoma and the State of Alaska."
and
"The experiences of Indigenous women living far from tribal lands or in urban settings, therefore, are not reflected extensively in this report."
Just in case you were wondering, the Standing Rock Reservation is not exactly "metropolitan". Marion says this because she is not honest to debate with.
According to 1995 national college health risk behavior survey. Journal of American College Health, 46, 55-66. (a study for the U.S. Centers for Disease control) and based on replies of 5,000 college students at over 100 colleges, 20% of women answered “yes” to the question “In your lifetime have you been forced to submit to sexual intercourse against your will?” One in five college women has been raped at some point in her lifetime.
This is in response to Ron's list of five reasons why the GOP doesn't want Gov. Palin to undertake any media interviews at the present time. Points #1, #2 and #5 I agree with, however on #3, the truth appears to be that Gov. Palin wants to teach both evolution and creationism in science classes (something that I strongly advocate against in an article on my blog here at New West earlier this summer). Regarding #4, she disputes ANTHROPOGENIC global warming, not natural global warming (another position I disagree with based on my own understanding of the science).
Let us be clear that when we slam the McCain/Palin ticket for their errors that we slam them for the right reasons and not some made up inflammatory statements.
Wow. Look what party thinks their candidates are too good to have to speak to the lowly American people. Who is the elitist here? America deserves better.
This article was printed from www.newwest.net at the following URL: http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/mccain_manager_palin_will_answer_questions_when_media_shows_respect_and_def/C559/L559/