My god, Vern, what an absolutely annoying journalist. She didn’t need an actual rep from the Republicans, she could just as well have used a store mannican — ask it a question and interrupt it before it answered. Although I don’t agree with the guy’s politics, he showed admirable patience.
I have tired of several of the women t.v. news types. Seems for many the only qualification is that they must lisp for some reason. Ms. Brown found she could not control this interview, that it is not about her, and was unable to cope. Another CNN liberal escapade. I was impressed to see the CNN anchors and pundits, however, complimenting Palen after her Wed. night speech. Perhaps a defining moment?
‘Ms. Brown found she could not control this interview, that it is not about her, and was unable to cope.‘
Yeah, that or this gentlemen was about the 12th guy she’d asked the question to in just that hour. I was watching Miss Campbell on the day in question and nobody with an (R) next to their name wanted to talk about Palin’s lack of experience. I could feel her frustration.
It wasn’t a lack of control that was the issue. It was a lack of candor.
Would both of you say the same comments if the journalist was a man rather than a women? Think about it. If a male journalist was being hard-hitting as her, he would be considered a great reporter. If a woman did the same thing she would be considered a bitch. It happened to Hillary in the presidential primaries and its happening now to Cambell Brown.
The role of the media is that of a watchdog, not lapdog. I would have been happy even if she was reporting the same way on the Obama campaign regardless of sex or gender.
Sarah, I agree. Not ONE of her questions was answered.
Been there, I’m fascinated by your perception and how two people can view something and come to entirely different conclusions. I don’t think Campbell lost control. I appreciate that she called the toad on his evasiveness. In a media relations class, this interview would be a textbook illustration about how ANY question can be manipulated into an opportunity to get your message/agenda out.
History has shown that most voters are persuaded by a leaders image, not his politics. Both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson gave out beer to potential voters and ended winning seats in the House of Burgess (year 1759). John F. Kennedy won the presidency because he was young and vibrant. Television helped him out a lot. Bill Clinton was able to play two personas: Intellectual and Average Joe. George W. Bush played the average joe against the rather bland intellectual Al Gore.
In the case of Palin, McCain did not choose her for her political experience but to only give credence to his rather flimsy conservative beliefs. Many republican voters began to question this and by choosing a “hockey mom with five kids from rural Alaska” this showed that he was not out of touch (plus she is pro-choice).
It also helps that Palin is from Alaska, the proposed state for expansion of oil drilling. By agreeing to drill for more oil in her home state it gives the allusion that exploring the natural habitat for resources is not that bad.
Plus he aimed at garnering those pissed off Hilary voters support…but not too much
All in all the image McCain is trying to show is this:
1) Strong in foreign policy
2) Strong in conservative values
3) A progressive republican sensitive to the views of women (whatever that means).
4) Palin’s age balances McCain’s age and gives him more “attractiveness”. (I mean come on, Palin is a hot mom).
but honestly, all Palin will be doing is softening his administration’s image from old and bland to new and exciting. Expect her to play less of a VP role and more of a PR role.
The right reasons for any person to vote for a leader is to question their message, politics, and sense of reality. This is true regardless of party affiliation. Question EVERYTHING a leader says. If they say that they have done extensive research on a topic it usually means that they have done extensive research to support their argument. Look at contradictory evidence. Question their message of Hope or Security. How will they do this and is this feasible given the current state of the world?
If not, then ask the leader to buy you a Guiness for your support.
‘In a media relations class, this interview would be a textbook illustration about how ANY question can be manipulated into an opportunity to get your message/agenda out. This is why I don’t watch the news.‘
… and it’s why I cover the news. It’s also why I take my responsibility in doing so to be of the utmost seriousness. Despite what they say about me, my work isn’t about my ego, it’s about my message, and that message is that you can fight City Hall and that authorities should be held accountable.
Thanks to the readers for continuing to make it worthwhile for all of us here at OJ!
Great journalism, and btw, she’s sooooo much hotter than Palin
My god, Vern, what an absolutely annoying journalist. She didn’t need an actual rep from the Republicans, she could just as well have used a store mannican — ask it a question and interrupt it before it answered. Although I don’t agree with the guy’s politics, he showed admirable patience.
I have tired of several of the women t.v. news types. Seems for many the only qualification is that they must lisp for some reason. Ms. Brown found she could not control this interview, that it is not about her, and was unable to cope. Another CNN liberal escapade. I was impressed to see the CNN anchors and pundits, however, complimenting Palen after her Wed. night speech. Perhaps a defining moment?
‘Ms. Brown found she could not control this interview, that it is not about her, and was unable to cope.‘
Yeah, that or this gentlemen was about the 12th guy she’d asked the question to in just that hour. I was watching Miss Campbell on the day in question and nobody with an (R) next to their name wanted to talk about Palin’s lack of experience. I could feel her frustration.
It wasn’t a lack of control that was the issue. It was a lack of candor.
SMS
Lack of experience in foreign policy or domestic policy is a judgment call.
And that judgment call will be made on Tuesday November 4, 2008 by those qualified to vote in the electoral college after the popular vote.
I think the A-Team of Arizona and Alaska will be elected.
2 and 3
Would both of you say the same comments if the journalist was a man rather than a women? Think about it. If a male journalist was being hard-hitting as her, he would be considered a great reporter. If a woman did the same thing she would be considered a bitch. It happened to Hillary in the presidential primaries and its happening now to Cambell Brown.
The role of the media is that of a watchdog, not lapdog. I would have been happy even if she was reporting the same way on the Obama campaign regardless of sex or gender.
Correction, I guess sometime past the November 4, 2008 popular vote.
Where’s Samantha B when you need her?
Sarah, I agree. Not ONE of her questions was answered.
Been there, I’m fascinated by your perception and how two people can view something and come to entirely different conclusions. I don’t think Campbell lost control. I appreciate that she called the toad on his evasiveness. In a media relations class, this interview would be a textbook illustration about how ANY question can be manipulated into an opportunity to get your message/agenda out.
This is why I don’t watch the news.
if the “A-team” were to be elected then it would be for the wrong reasons. God bless voter apathy…
What are the wrong reasons?
My guess is that most voters, vote for safety, security, and stability.
I think the A-Team will be pushing that theme to the voters.
What are the right reasons that you are thinking of Erick?
SAHS Teacher! That was an unexpected reaction from a good liberal!
Going out on a limb here, but maybe… tough little Campbell sounded like an ex-wife or girlfriend of yours?
Cook,
History has shown that most voters are persuaded by a leaders image, not his politics. Both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson gave out beer to potential voters and ended winning seats in the House of Burgess (year 1759). John F. Kennedy won the presidency because he was young and vibrant. Television helped him out a lot. Bill Clinton was able to play two personas: Intellectual and Average Joe. George W. Bush played the average joe against the rather bland intellectual Al Gore.
In the case of Palin, McCain did not choose her for her political experience but to only give credence to his rather flimsy conservative beliefs. Many republican voters began to question this and by choosing a “hockey mom with five kids from rural Alaska” this showed that he was not out of touch (plus she is pro-choice).
It also helps that Palin is from Alaska, the proposed state for expansion of oil drilling. By agreeing to drill for more oil in her home state it gives the allusion that exploring the natural habitat for resources is not that bad.
Plus he aimed at garnering those pissed off Hilary voters support…but not too much
All in all the image McCain is trying to show is this:
1) Strong in foreign policy
2) Strong in conservative values
3) A progressive republican sensitive to the views of women (whatever that means).
4) Palin’s age balances McCain’s age and gives him more “attractiveness”. (I mean come on, Palin is a hot mom).
but honestly, all Palin will be doing is softening his administration’s image from old and bland to new and exciting. Expect her to play less of a VP role and more of a PR role.
The right reasons for any person to vote for a leader is to question their message, politics, and sense of reality. This is true regardless of party affiliation. Question EVERYTHING a leader says. If they say that they have done extensive research on a topic it usually means that they have done extensive research to support their argument. Look at contradictory evidence. Question their message of Hope or Security. How will they do this and is this feasible given the current state of the world?
If not, then ask the leader to buy you a Guiness for your support.
Sweetelle -
‘In a media relations class, this interview would be a textbook illustration about how ANY question can be manipulated into an opportunity to get your message/agenda out. This is why I don’t watch the news.‘
… and it’s why I cover the news. It’s also why I take my responsibility in doing so to be of the utmost seriousness. Despite what they say about me, my work isn’t about my ego, it’s about my message, and that message is that you can fight City Hall and that authorities should be held accountable.
Thanks to the readers for continuing to make it worthwhile for all of us here at OJ!
SMS
Erick
I think you are right about it being all about image.
And the image that counts is the one that the over 65 year olds trust.
So, Have Cindy McCain send my case of Bud right a way.
The 18 to 35 year olds, don’t vote and
the 35 to 60 year olds split there votes, and the over 65 always vote for safety, security, and stability.
The A-Team ticket will carry the over 65 year old voters and win the day.
cook -
‘The 18 to 35 year olds, don’t vote‘
… and then came Barack Obama.
SMS
Who told Cook when the election was?
Yeah, Cook, it’s actually different for Santa Ana. Santa Ana Republican voters are supposed to go to the polls Wednesday Nov. 5. You could look it up.
Come on, you know I vote early and often. LOL
I’ve been hearing that the voter turn-out is going to be quite large this time.
What I like to do is go to Main Place, do early voting and catch the dollar movie.
This election will rank up there with 1988 poll guards fiasco, the 1998 rematch of Sanchez & Dornan, and the Tan Nguyen Latino mailer debacle of 2006.
There will be long lines, fist fights, name calling, poll watchers (local, state, out of state, national, and foreign), news people paper and TV.
Like a free all day rock concert, only I get paid to be there, ya man.