Palin Has Meet and Greet With Foreign Leader

Gov. Sarah Palin met with her first foreign leader today. Only one press member was allowed to attend -- and only for 29 seconds. Tomorrow she will meet with rock star Bono.

Joe Biden? [More...]

Judging from the eight-page document -- which Biden's office said was only a "partial list" -- Biden has quite a headstart on Palin.

As of September 23, his office says, he has met with the leaders of nearly 60 countries, territories and international organizations (such as the United Nations and NATO.) The list of names runs to about 150 people -- including nine Israeli prime ministers (ten if you including prime minister designate Tzipi Livni), four Soviet leaders and two Russian presidents, a few kings and a queen (of England), Pope John Paul II and the Dalai Lama, and even a few tough guys like Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi and Serbian president Sloban Milosevic.

Here's how McCain-Palin adviser Stephen Biegun spins it.

< Supreme Court Stays Execution of Troy Davis | FBI Conducting Criminal Investigations of Mortgage, Banking Firms >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Won't do Dems good (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:11:06 PM EST
    since Clinton's even longer list didn't do her any good.  She wasn't the pick, so it didn't matter.  It's about Obama's list and how long it is.

    Biden isnt helping with his goofy gaffes (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:25:19 PM EST
    The right is having a field day with this stuff. What the heck is wrong with Biden?

    Biden says we have no coal plants in the US. Senator Bobby Byrd may beg to differ.  The railroads might too.

    FDR was President in 1929 when the stock market crashed?  And he went on television to talk about it?  What the heck was Biden thinking?  This is wrong on so many levels. Is Biden getting a bit forgetful? If McCain had said these things, wouldn't we say that he was senile?  

    Biden calls Obama ad terrible.

    And then Obama criticizes Biden for having the same opinion on AIG as McCain.  

    What the heck is going on?  Are they just gaffes or is something bigger happening?  I know, I know, I am being paranoid, but it's making me wonder.  


    Yikes, even the link (5.00 / 6) (#49)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:36:45 PM EST
    doesn't note that Joe was off on TV by a decade.  And even when TV did debut in 1939, it was only to a small market -- and then its growth was stopped by the war.  So FDR could not have addressed the country on TV until nationwide broadcasting in . . . 1950.

    This will be enjoyed on my listserv of media historians, to whom I am forwarding it forthwith  -- in time for them all to rewrite the history books.  And the midterm exams.

    There are gaffes, and then . . . yeh, yer right, what is going on with Biden?!  


    We all knew he was going to do this stuff (4.50 / 4) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:28:13 PM EST
    though.  He always has.  It was only a matter of how many how much.

    True, so I have to wonder, yet again (4.71 / 7) (#43)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:32:06 PM EST
    Why is Biden on our ticket instead of Hillary?  

    I'd guess that Mrs H Clinton (none / 0) (#59)
    by of1000Kings on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:58:14 PM EST
    turned Obama down...

    easier to re-run in '12 against Palin that way...

    just saying...

    why not Bill Richardson, that's what I'm wondering...


    Bill said last night on Letterman (none / 0) (#91)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:25:24 AM EST

    Not sure why there's still any mystery about this.


    That contradicts what Hillary said (none / 0) (#95)
    by stefystef on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:22:59 AM EST
    when asked if she would be VP, she said she would "consider" it and was open to the idea of being Obama's running mate.

    Now, I never believed it when she said it, but it was a way of keeping her supporters on board for a while.  

    Bill and Hill were not interested in second place.  She's smart to keep promoting the Party and stay important in the news.


    That doesn't mean she wanted it (none / 0) (#106)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 10:51:15 AM EST
    Bill Clinton is appearing numerous places this week. Listen to his response to the question.

    Hillary did NOT want to be vice president, but if she had been asked she would have felt it her duty to accept as a fiercly loyal democrat.

    Bill is also doing all he can as a fiercly loyal democrat, but it is obvious he is not so sold on the party candidate, and that has nothing to do with Hillary not being the chosen one.


    Bill Clinton (none / 0) (#108)
    by CST on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 11:06:22 AM EST
    On the daily show last night explained his support very clearly.  And he did so in a way that shows he clearly supports Obama - as a candidate.  He explained that it's not about how the voter identifies with the candidate that's important, but what the candidate will do for the voter.  And it was pretty clear that he thinks Obama will be a much better president than McCain, although I suspect he likes McCain better personally.  He also had a good line in there about how he is confident Obama will win - one of the reasons being his superior organizing and ground game.  His personal touch being "as I found out in the primaries".

    I agree completely with you about your VP statement.


    he said she didn't particularly want to (none / 0) (#109)
    by Iris on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 11:49:38 AM EST
    because it was a very personal decision who a Presidential candidate picks, who they work well with.  But he said that she would have if asked.

    I think I'm remembering (none / 0) (#110)
    by Iris on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 11:50:15 AM EST
    the interview from "The View," actually, not Letterman.

    OK, but how long is Obama's list? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Radiowalla on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:58:47 PM EST
    I'd wager that it is longer than Palin's.

    Obama is running against McCain (none / 0) (#42)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:31:50 PM EST
    -- just ask the voters.

    Of course (none / 0) (#53)
    by Radiowalla on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:50:11 PM EST
    but why, then, compare him to Palin?

    I didn't. If you look at the construction (none / 0) (#71)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 11:05:13 PM EST
    of the comment, I'm stating that this is not a comparate -- i.e., not an argument that is going to make much difference to voters for a couple of reasons that have been made more than clear in this campaign.  One, voters had a candidate more experienced along these lines, and it didn't matter (to the Dems).  Two, and more important, voters vote for the top of the ticket.

    VP Debate (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by WS on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:30:08 PM EST
    I'm wondering how Palin will fare in the debate once the moderator asks for details about "reform."  Its going to be the same as Bush's plans.  

    Biden has to be careful and not seem like he's too aggressive or too smooth.  Challenge her on specifics and stress the Democratic alternative/not Bush/Palin/McCain policies that led to the current disaster.  

    I'm looking forward to the debate (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by YesVirginiaThereIsASanta on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:35:37 PM EST
    No matter what it does, it will certainly show the differences and similarities between the two VP candidates under pressure.

    Biden participated in plenty of debates during the primary, but this will be Sarah's big test of ability to think on her feet and articulate her thoughts on important topics. She could just as easily fall flat on her face as hold her own. Biden's years of experience will be intimidating.


    From that interview with Couric, (none / 0) (#118)
    by andrys on Sat Sep 27, 2008 at 05:58:58 PM EST
    I'd have to say "more easily"...

    I thought that was Obama's idea (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:35:49 PM EST
    Isn't he all about change and reform in Washington?  How will he bring that about?  Palin might argue that she did some of that in Alaska.  Has Obama or biden done any of that while they've been in Washington?  Or in the Il Senate?  I hope so because I would imagine that they will both be asked about it.  

    I'm sure (none / 0) (#98)
    by WS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:20:28 AM EST
    Obama and Biden will do fine on the change front.  They are proposing Democratic ideas after all after 8 years of Republican misrule.

    I don't think Palin should be proud of her Alaska record.  She did and does support Big Oil and the Bridge to Nowhere.  Sounds like a Republican I know...  


    It's interesting (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Steve M on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:51:59 PM EST
    to watch the press push back against all the press-baiting antics by McCain and Palin.  All through the Bush Administration we begged them to grow a spine and resist the bullying.  Who knows what they would do if McCain actually got elected, but for now they're fighting hard to express their resentment.

    Today was supposed to be a smoothly stage-managed event to show Palin alongside world leaders, and instead what they got was tons of coverage of the McCain campaign trying to shut out the media.  The old aphorism about people who buy ink by the barrel seems applicable.

    The notion that Palin is entitled to evade the media because some diarist at Daily Kos was mean to her is quite whacked, but regardless of whether you believe it or not, the media sure doesn't.  And they seem to be expressing themselves for once.

    Typically (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by TheRizzo on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:04:55 PM EST
    Most events let the media in for the first few minutes to get their photos and video for their stories and then its a behind closed doors discussion.  To try and make this seem like its completely crazy and unusual to talk privately is a huge stretch.

    The criticism that can be laid though is they tried to block the press totally from even getting their typical shots at the start.  But to blast her for having a private meeting with a world leader, well ok.


    Well (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Steve M on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:23:38 PM EST
    I think the coverage of today's event has to be viewed in the context of the overall veil of secrecy that has been thrown up around Gov. Palin.

    No answering of any questions? (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:26:12 PM EST
    Zippo......as another commenter pointed out even Bush doesn't attempt such things and he hates the press passionately.

    He's the president (none / 0) (#64)
    by TheRizzo on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:22:52 PM EST
    And he answers questions like how he thought it went to which he replies, it was a good meeting blah blah blah.  

    I'd love to see real good, hard interviews of Palin as well, but I also want to see them for Obama, McCain and Biden too.   The only reasonable interview of Obama was the O'Reily one and even that one jumped off issues to fast instead of holding down answers.   The only good interview of McCain was on the View... Pathetic journalism standards we face today.  Sad.


    I am (none / 0) (#93)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:24:08 AM EST
    sure you have a link for that.

    True. (none / 0) (#51)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:41:18 PM EST
    And cutting short the media time in these meetings can be at the request (or stronger than that) of the world leaders.  Y'know, the First Amendment is only in our Constitution.:-)

    Aha. As the link says. . . . (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 11:14:37 PM EST
    One handler, who did not appear to be with the campaign but rather with Karzais' entourage, repeatedly said "No writers," and he tried to keep this pooler from entering the room when he saw my notebook.

    However, Chris Edwards, Palin's deputy chief of staff, allowed me to pass.

    It seems that at least some of the difficulty was due to the other country represented in the room.  And other sources state that after the initial resistance, the media were allowed to do their photo-op thing for the time they needed.  Maybe they only needed half a minute for their in-depth investigative pushing of flash buttons?


    lol!~interesting . . . . (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:50:01 AM EST
    the media gazed at their navels (none / 0) (#20)
    by coigue on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:00:55 PM EST
    after Katrina and after being asleep at the wheel in the buildup to the Iraq war.

    Finally, they decided to grow a pair.


    I think it has to do (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Steve M on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:04:19 PM EST
    with the Bush Administration having the power and willingness to actually deny meaningful access to the media.  All McCain can do, for now, is deny them access to a campaign.

    Something Is Happening Here (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by john horse on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:11:42 PM EST
    Now Sarah's met with world leaders
    And they all liked her looks
    With great statesmen she has
    Discussed lepers and crooks
    I'm sure she's been through all of
    F. Scott Fitsgerald's books
    She's very well read
    Its well known.

    But something is happening here
    And you don't know what it is.
    Do you, Mrs. Jones?

    It's not the toughness of the interview (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:20:40 PM EST
    that I object to. It's the completely dishonest selective editing of both her previous quotes and the entire interview afterwards. I don't believe that occurred on the Chris Wallace interview. Do you?

    If palin is a Russian expert simply by (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by pluege on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:20:54 PM EST
    living in Alaska next to Russia, why did she have to actually meet Foreign Leaders today? Porkbarrel palin could have just hung out somewhere in New Jersey or Connecticut and become an expert on Foreign Leader meeting without ever meeting anyone.

    As Inky said, people who've not read (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:58:05 AM EST
    the full transcript of the UNEDITED interview will tend to go on as you do here.

      She didn't say she was experienced in foreign policy matters or was a Russian expert because she could see Russian from where she was, though some will enjoy or love thinking so because Gibson encouraged this:

    GIBSON: What insight does [Russia being seeable] give you into what they're doing in Georgia?

    PALIN: Well, I'm giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation [sic] with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War . . ."

    And I must say, Biden is showing a few reasons why she is not being encouraged to respond to the press just yet, seeing he has had 35 years of experience, with a heavy emphasis on foreign affairs, and yet he's been producing  gaffe after gaffe.  The most curious one (besides getting the FDR years wrong while using FDR's non-existent actions as an example of what politicians today should do in an emergency) was Biden's saying that an ad was "terrible" and that if he'd known about it it wouldn't have happened - WHEN Obama "approved" the ad of course!  Then when asked to explain his saying this, he added he'd never SEEN the ad.  

      Slight passby-comments are made in the press about these but if Palin had said these things, they would have been unending headlines.  I wonder about all of these politicos...


    Heh (none / 0) (#99)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 08:20:58 AM EST
    and the prior question:

    GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

    PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

    You're acting like this line of questioning came out of nowhere.  As a close student of the facts, I'm surprised you're not aware that it was a non-stop talking point from the right wing that Palin was knowledgeable about foreign policy since her state was the closest to Russia.

    For example, here's John McCain arguing that Palin understands foreign policy because "Alaska is right next to Russia."

    Here's Cindy McCain, surely not by pure coincidence, offering the exact same talking point.  "Alaska is the closest part of our continent to Russia. It's not as if she doesn't understand what's at stake here."

    So with the McCain campaign persistently putting out the message that Alaska's proximity to Russia gives Palin some kind of special insight, it's entirely fair for the media to pin down exactly what that insight consists of.  There's plenty you can complain about in the Gibson interview, but this isn't one of them.


    What's 'at stake' (none / 0) (#116)
    by andrys on Sat Sep 27, 2008 at 05:44:17 PM EST
    and the reminder of the effects of even a cold war for those who are reminded of the reality of another country (rather than just reading about it in books as I have) is all I see mentioned though, and the part excised from the interview speaks to her daily visual (when there's no fog) of how 'small' the world and how important we do our best to avoid even cold wars.  Despite that focus, HuffPost headlined their report of the interview with how Palin "would invade Russia" in big black, bold fonts.

      I didn't see a direct quote of McCain saying she understands foreign policy.   Even Cindy McC's statement is about her understanding what's at stake.


    Foreign Policy... (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by DancingOpossum on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 10:27:02 AM EST
    Foreign policy is a lot more than seeing the Taj Mahal or having photo-ops with former russian republics leaders.

    Is it more than holding an outdoor rally and free concert in Berlin?

    Um.. Yes. Much More! (none / 0) (#112)
    by EddieInCA on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 11:58:13 AM EST
    It is very obvious biden would have a (3.71 / 7) (#3)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:15:48 PM EST
    headstart on Palin...he's also ahead of her on gaffes.

    You actually have to speak (4.40 / 5) (#12)
    by IndiDemGirl on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:39:48 PM EST
    without a script to make gaffes.  Palin hasn't done that yet.

    Hard to tell...since she WON'T SPEAK TO THE PRESS! (4.00 / 3) (#14)
    by EddieInCA on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:44:20 PM EST
    Biden had more interviews today, and spoke to more press than Palin has since she was chosen.

    Today Campbell Brown ripped (4.00 / 2) (#68)
    by byteb on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:49:48 PM EST
    the McCain campaign for its sexist treatment of Palin. She said the Mccain Campaign was treating Palin like 'a delicate flower' by shielding her from the press. Brown accused the McCain camp of chauvinism by treating Palin differently than the other male candidates pointing out that Palin was tough and could handle questions from the 'pesky press' just like Obama, Mccain or Biden has. She ended by saying the McCain campaign should "Free Sara Palin".
    Huffington Post has Brown's video up now.

    Did you buy that? (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 11:15:34 PM EST
    I found it to be insincere. I don't recall her ripping anyone for the sexist treatment of Hillary. I suspected she had other motives.

    Hillary did not hide from the press (1.00 / 1) (#75)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:03:25 AM EST
    don't pretend that Hillary ever acted like Palin is acting.

    WTF? I didn't say that. (5.00 / 4) (#85)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:48:05 AM EST
    But since when is Brown so freakin' worried about sexism? She never spoke up about it when it was happening to Hillary. Sexism is more than this perceived slight/faux-outrage by Brown about Palin.

    As far as I know (none / 0) (#100)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 09:52:45 AM EST
    Brown was always concerned about it. I dunno because I wasn't watching much TV during the primaries.

    I did see Matthews and Olbermann exhibit sexism, but they aren't on CNN. I also saw Anderson Cooper decry sexism against Hillary.

    Just because I did not actually see Brown decry sexism against Hil, doesn't mean she did not, AND in this case, she has a HUGE point. The McCain campaign is acting as if Palin cannot handle herself. She's a governor, for peet's sake. I agree with her rant 100%. The way Palin is allowing herself to be handled is an embarassment for all women.


    I thought she might (none / 0) (#74)
    by byteb on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 11:33:20 PM EST
    be attempting to use reverse psychology on the McCain camp in order to get Palin out of the tightly scripted bubble McCain has placed her in. Of course,  McCain is shielding Palin not because she's a woman but because she's not ready to handle the press or foreign leaders (if today's press black out was any indication)...but since the Mccain campaign has cast every remark or criticism of Palin as a sexist, chauvinistic attack, Campbell is turning the tables on John...kinda what's good for goose is good for the gander...

    CNN needs to fire Campbell Brown (none / 0) (#104)
    by stefystef on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 10:30:15 AM EST
    She is no good to them or the field of journalism.
    It's insulting watching her try to act intelligent.

    The Media is whine like a bunch of little girls... The Republican base is going to fire up in October when this Wall Street crap is off the main page, replace when some terrorist attack.


    I think Campbell Brown is great (none / 0) (#105)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 10:38:37 AM EST
    Her show is the best in the time slot.

    Darn right. (none / 0) (#114)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:31:21 PM EST
    She is one of my new heroines.

    Brown has always been extremely competent (none / 0) (#117)
    by andrys on Sat Sep 27, 2008 at 05:57:11 PM EST
    I don't know why some dislike her so much.  

      She knows her stuff and her communication skills are better than most who are doing that kind of work.  Very natural.


    Campbell took a lot of criticism (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 11:04:21 AM EST
    straight to her face on prime time over her own sexist coverage of Hillary and Sarah Palin. Her network had to defend her to make her feel better. She acted stunned that such a criticism would be dumped on her.

    This appears to be payback, and an effort to say she was only reporting what was happening.


    actually she stood by her reporting (1.00 / 2) (#113)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:30:50 PM EST
    and to their credit CNN stood behind her.

    You just could not be more wrong in your spinning.


    Love Campbell (3.50 / 2) (#70)
    by coigue on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:52:16 PM EST
    Does Biden have the self confidence though (3.75 / 4) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:28:37 PM EST
    to allow press to witness his meeting with a foreign leader?  I'm sure it has already happened to him on numerous occassions.  It is disturbing that Palin lacks that.

    No kidding, and the press (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by YesVirginiaThereIsASanta on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:31:51 PM EST
    has been so incredibly fair with her, too.

    Who has the press been fair with? (4.00 / 5) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:36:13 PM EST
    I'd love to know. Bill Clinton handles biased press and biased reporters very well usually.  I'm not talking about a popularity contest here and I don't think that choosing the VP I support should have anything to do with such things.  I'm talking about competency and capability and qualifications.  When you are so afraid of what you may or may not say that you ban the press I don't think you can handle being President of the United States.

    Well, even Bill Clinton (5.00 / 6) (#21)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:03:14 PM EST
    never quite got the treatment that Palin did by Charles Gibson, with past statements being selectively quoted to create a totally false impressionism of the candidate's thoughts (vis-a-vis whether our war in Iraq was fulfilling God's plan), and with further selective editing after the interview to make Palin sound much more foolish than she in fact is.

    Try this out as a thought experiment. Imagine that it had been Sarah Palin, rather than Joe Biden, who said the FDR went on television in 1929 to calm the public's jitters about the stock market crash. Do you honestly believe every news networks would not now be excoriating her for her incredibly poor grasp of history?


    Good one (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:20:06 PM EST
    I mean I totally remeber how her running mate didn't get a free pass on his gaffe-a-matic apporach to Foriegn Policy over the last 4 months: Sunni, Shia same difference! Czech Republic- what's that, Death to Spain!

    Ouch, the things you remember (none / 0) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:22:54 PM EST
    Um... A Simple Question for you... (3.66 / 3) (#26)
    by EddieInCA on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:12:09 PM EST
    If the MSM didn't spread the word about Biden's gaffe today..

    How did YOU hear about it?


    To be honest, I read about it ... (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:17:51 PM EST
    on a PUMA blog. I'll admit that I cancelled cable months ago (the day after KO's "RFK assassination reference" special comment, to be exact). But I didn't hear about it on NY1 or any other non-cable channel.

    Yeah... It shows... (3.00 / 2) (#35)
    by EddieInCA on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:23:44 PM EST
    It was on MSNBC, Fox, CNN, LA Times, NY Times, Politco, Washington Post, etc.

    What about ABG, NBC, or CBS? (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:41:41 PM EST
    That's still where most Americans get their news, and it was on one of those networks that the Gibson interview appeared.

    I'm somewhat confident that Palin can handle a tough debate (she handled lots of them in Alaska against much more seasoned opponents). Obviously she has a lot of cramming to do, but at least the debate format will prevent her responses from being edited out. It also will play to her benefit that the MSM has been portraying her as a religious freak of sub-par intelligence. She's now almost bound to beat the expectations game.


    I am having a tough tiime (none / 0) (#84)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:32:16 AM EST
    taking your media analysis seriously, since you get your info second hand from a blog. (and one that might have ODS, at that)

    Biden's Gaffes (none / 0) (#47)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:36:25 PM EST
    Honestly, I hadn't heard that much about them until I heard my husband screaming at CNN to shut the f%^*k up.

    AS IF (none / 0) (#67)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:46:33 PM EST
    Biden will EVER do that!  lol

    If she said the FDR thing (none / 0) (#27)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:13:13 PM EST
    that would be wildfire but she didn't say it, Biden did and Joe Biden says so much stuff like that the press has almost come to expect it of him.  If she's been dealt with unfairly in the press though why doesn't she call them out on it?  When the going gets tough you can't just hide.

    I'm sure she will call them out ... (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:25:34 PM EST
    Timing is everything in politics and I suspect she's aiming to time her counterattack for the best effect.

    But I may be wrong. We shall see.


    Maybe she'll (2.00 / 1) (#66)
    by byteb on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:32:49 PM EST
    take issue with their 'verbage'.  ;)

    She's not a whiner (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:56:14 PM EST
    I don't see her as someone who would whine about bad treatment from the press.  

    Calling people out isn't whining (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:03:21 PM EST
    and when actual wrong doing has taken place it is the responsibility of those in charge or in leadership roles to call those who have committed wrong doing out.

    Well (none / 0) (#102)
    by CST on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 09:59:28 AM EST
    I think it is similar to the way McCain gets a free pass when he mixes up Shia and Sunni but you know Obama would get killed for the same thing.

    You're doubting Palin's confidence?! (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:35:08 PM EST
    She may be over controlled (as was Obama in the beginning), but lacking confidence?! lol!~ I don't think so  ;)

    I disagree (4.20 / 5) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:37:29 PM EST
    If she is over controlled by others right now this is the time to assert her leadership and tell them to back off and that they are preventing her from preforming the duties she needs to preform.

    [alone with a foreign leader and press in the room], then there must be footage of those meetings somewhere on YouTube.

    Not sure, haven't looked for them (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:40:01 PM EST
    yet.  Perhaps Cspan has stuff too.

    I don't know about that (none / 0) (#16)
    by coigue on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:47:13 PM EST
    29 seconds with Karzai (3.42 / 7) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:12:43 PM EST
    and a ticked off ushered out press, this is where and how Sarah Palin must not be my next VP.  Seriously, how is this VP going to handle a situation where the President is not in play...taken out by health matters or whatever?  This is frightening, this level of inexperienced combined with what would seem to be a lack of confidence in herself in handling such matters while being observed.

    Um, no. Palin met with Karzai for 30 minutes ... (5.00 / 5) (#15)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:47:04 PM EST
    and afterwards, Karzai had this to say about the meeting:

    The meeting was "very good. I found her quite a capable woman. She asked the right questions on Afghanistan," Karzai said in an appearance later before the Asia Society in New York.


    Yes, she's keeping an arms-length distance from the press right now. Given the way she's been treated in the press for the past few weeks, I find it hard to hold that against her.


    "keeping an arms-length distance.." (4.50 / 6) (#24)
    by EddieInCA on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:10:02 PM EST
    Are you freaking kidding?

    She'd AVOIDING the press AT ALL COSTS.  

    Avoiding them during even a meet and greet with a photo-op.  Even Bush, who hates press conferences, took questions during these kinds of photo-ops.

    Anyone defending Palin's lack of press availability is being highly disingenuous. In the HISTORY of this country, we've never had a candidate for higher office AVOID taking questions from the press.

    And SPARE ME the comment that "She's been treated badly by the press."  The McCain campaign is treating her as someone who's not ready, despite their language.

    It shows how terrible a president John McCain would be. George Will nailed it today.


    When did Obama (5.00 / 5) (#40)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:27:47 PM EST
    last meet with the press?  He's not exactly big on taking press questions.  (I've never understood this since he's smart and seems quick on his feet.)

    He had a PC today (4.33 / 3) (#45)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:33:25 PM EST
    I'm nearly 100% sure he had a press conference today.

    He didn't say anything stupid enough (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:36:44 PM EST
    to warrant press coverage I guess ;)  Perhaps that is why Biden was picked, he promises some sort of press coverage no matter what.

    A press conference that the press (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:57:46 PM EST
    Didn't write about?  Seems strange.  Perhaps it will be in tomorrow's papers.  

    Just because you didn't see it brasstacks... (1.50 / 2) (#69)
    by coigue on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:50:07 PM EST
    What is your problem? (3.25 / 4) (#76)
    by BrassTacks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:07:03 AM EST
    I didn't see the press conference and heard nothing about it on the news.  Therefore, I said maybe the papers will cover it tomorrow.  What on earth is your problem with those statements?  

    And why on earth do you follow me around this forum, making inane responses to my posts, and often doling out a silly troll rating?  

    Get a life.  I'm already using mine.  

    Have a nice day.


    Just a guess (3.00 / 2) (#79)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:25:13 AM EST
    I think his problem is that you're a troll and as such your limited to 4 comments a day.

    Nope (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by BrassTacks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:55:58 AM EST
    Jeralyn told me 10 per day as a newbie and I adhere to that.  But thanks for the welcome.  

    What the heck has happened to my democrats?  


    what? (none / 0) (#81)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:26:44 AM EST
    says who?

    oops. the margins confused me (none / 0) (#82)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:28:08 AM EST
    heh. sorry I thought you were talking about me.

    um. (none / 0) (#77)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:17:54 AM EST
    excuse me?

    I'll make every effort to do that (none / 0) (#78)
    by BrassTacks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:23:36 AM EST
    your comment that I responded to (1.50 / 2) (#80)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:26:02 AM EST
    was snarky and sarcastic.

    Too bad you can't take what you dish out.

    As to our other interactions, I don't really remember any of them, but given your snootiness in this example, you probably deserved it.


    If she can't (3.50 / 2) (#39)
    by Natal on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:27:43 PM EST
    handle questions from the press in the campaign, how's she gonna handle the grilling of the WH press core, if she is somehow thrust into the presidency?
    It's worrisome.

    I imagine... (none / 0) (#101)
    by sj on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 09:53:28 AM EST
    ... that she'll be more proficient at that task than Bush is.  She's "sequestered" now because it's during the campaign.  Do you really think they'll give a hoot afterward?

    Um... (3.50 / 2) (#56)
    by Radiowalla on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:55:24 PM EST
    what in the world could he say?  That she was a blithering idiot?
    The man is in no position to make a candid assessment.  He may have to deal with her so he surely isn't going to dump on her now.

    very good point... (none / 0) (#83)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 12:30:17 AM EST
    cause if Palin were to win the election, Karzai would be thus screwed.

    The way Palin has been treated by the press?? (3.50 / 2) (#63)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:20:24 PM EST
    ROFLMAO.  Are you kidding??  

    The press needs to just ignore her all together.  Complete blackout.  No photos; no quotes; no clips.  Since she wants nothing to do with them, they should comply.  


    wow thirty minutes (3.40 / 5) (#17)
    by coigue on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:48:43 PM EST

    Does she not realize that the press are the eyes and ears of the public?


    the press was only allowed in (none / 0) (#54)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:53:42 PM EST
    for 29 seconds. It helps to read the source links provided.

    I understood that ... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:55:19 PM EST
    I was responding to a commenter who seemed to think that she met with Karzai for only 29 seconds.

    You misunderstood my post (none / 0) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:00:03 PM EST
    I realized that she spent time with Karzai alone, but only 29 secs with Karzai and press.  What was the point in even bringing the press if this was going to be an all work private meeting?  She did allow taping of the meeting though, it seems most likely they were people involved in making her campaign ads.

    Well. clearly there was a SNAFU ... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Inky on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:14:56 PM EST
    And I'm sorry that I misunderstood your original comment. Clearly, Palin is ducking the press until she gets her FP knowledge up to speed. But I do suspect, based on what had been an open relationship with the press in Alaska, that Palin will start handling press conferences soon. But, once again, we shall see.

    If she runs from the press... (none / 0) (#89)
    by Thanin on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:46:00 AM EST
    everytime theyre mean to her, theres no way she can handle being in the Whitehouse.

    She's just getting up to speed ... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Inky on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:02:16 PM EST
    Jeez--Obama and McCain have been campaigning now for about 18 months and Biden has been a Washington pol for 34 years. I'm sure we'll see whether Palin is a quick learner soon enough.

    Palin's Meets and Greets (3.00 / 3) (#50)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 09:39:02 PM EST
    I you believe she actually spent 30 minutes with any of these leaders, I have a bridge in Alaska to sell you. This is like the 60K who came to see her in Florida.

    The REAL October surprise? (2.00 / 1) (#88)
    by BrassTacks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:19:29 AM EST
    Does anyone here think that there is any truth to the October 5th rumor about Biden?

    Nope (none / 0) (#90)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:22:16 AM EST
    If you watched any of Bill Clinton's interviews this week you would have heard him say that Hillary did NOT want to be VP, but would have felt an obligation to serve had she been asked. She likes her job in the Senate, and Bill loves his work with his foundations. In fact, he says he had absolutely no desire to return to the WH.

    When the rumor is started by Sean Hannity?? (none / 0) (#92)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:36:39 AM EST
    And you actually give this an an ounce of credence?

    I have no idea who started it (none / 0) (#111)
    by BrassTacks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 11:52:35 AM EST
    I don't watch Hannity and Colmes.  Was it said on their show first?  

    Brains.... (none / 0) (#94)
    by Oceandweller on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:21:08 AM EST
    When Palin cited as experience when dealing with Russia the fact, one can see Russia from her home-state, it meant it all.
    I see a plumber, am I a trademan ?
    my son gets his cavity filed, has he become a dentist ?
    NO , NO WAY
    sorry for the Pumas and other L jOHNSONS fans
    but the woman credentials are very poor and her CV is below sea level
    Foreign policy is a lot more than seeing the Taj Mahal or having photo-ops with former russian republics leaders. And Kissinger experience is not transfered by hand shakes, even if he was a so-so Secretary.
    Poor foreign policy means poor grasp of international economics currents these days, poor McCain seems his capital of maverickisms is dwindling like Alaskan ice-cap...

    You see a statement made by someone (none / 0) (#97)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:04:01 AM EST
    but are you a reader or explorer in-depth ?

    Full transcript of a very-edited interview:

    Holding onto the Russia-in-view thing as a catch-all is lazy especially when the full remarks were edited out.

      And the full transcript has been linked often now.