Sarah Palin's ABC Interview
We all know (at least those of us in touch with reality) that interviews get edited... I don't know why, personally, but I know that they are. Personally, I would like to see the entire interview to make judgments for myself! I'm sure a lot of people are in the same boat as me... Enter Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. She was interviewed, for the first time, by the abhorrent, biased, callous, detestable, extraneous (how many nasty words can I come up with that go down the alphabet?) Charlie Gibson. I was pretty upset when I noticed just how hard an interview he put to Sarah Palin right off the bat, when this guy didn't press Obama on anything remotely the same. We all know the media is biased this year, but this is outrageous. There's even been mainstream media opinion that the interview was too harsh and clearly biased after having done Obama's interview so lightly.
Apparently, there were three parts to the interview conducted by Charlie Gibson. One was aired on Thursday, September 11, on World News... Second was aired on Thursday's Nightline, and the third and final was aired on Friday's World News. At least, according to this article, which also scolds Gibson for his clear intention to trap the "inexperienced" Sarah Palin in some lie or hard corner. (Never happened, though... She, several times, even used his name with a certain tone that reeked with: "Come on, Charlie... Don't be so naive." She ate him alive... Sarah Barracuda is living up to her name after all.) As I've said before, I don't ever watch TV, but I saw three articles that reviewed the interview and exposed Gibson's crazy questions and attempts to press her into saying things she doesn't mean to say... We've got an article for each part. Part 1: "Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War'", Part 2: "Gibson Pushes Palin to Concede Global Warming 'Man-Made'", Part 3: "Gibson: Economy 'Sick,' Makes Palin Affirm Conservative Social Views". No other way around it... He went in, guns a-blazin', with the purpose of making her look like she had absolutely no idea what she was talking about.
With all that background, I wanted to see the interview for myself, so I managed to find "Part 1" of the 3 part interview on YouTube lastnight. It's split into two videos... So... Essentially Chapter 1, Verses 1 and 2! The other 2 interviews are also on YouTube, but I'll just link you to them, since they're not really what I want to talk about. In fact, I got distracted covering the history... The point was to show you how much they cut out of this interview. There were things that could be left out, sure, but there were things that SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN. But, first, the videos. Be prepared to want to hurt Gibson if you watch them, though:
If you're as astute an observer as I am, you quickly noticed the clear cuts where they trimmed things out... You can hear sometimes where she's hasn't finished her sentence, but they cut her off, plain and simple. They didn't even do it cleanly. Some even say that the intention of the clear and rough cuts was to give an aura of unprofessionalism... I don't know if I'd go that far, but I do think that they just don't care as much about Sarah Palin's treatment as they did Barack Obama's. But it turns out that what they cut out were things she very much intended to be heard. The stuff he cut out was rarely his own questions, but almost always an answer that just destroys his attempts to show her as inexperienced. Sure, some things cut out were cut out because they were just the two trying to get on the same page, and some were entire questions and answers blotted out, but it's safe to say that NOTHING should have been cut out. It was all important and it all showed how professional, calm, collected and EXPERIENCED Sarah Palin is.
Here's a transcript that the Mark Levin Show provided us all of the REAL interview. (Here's the NewsBusters article that alerted me to Levin's transcript.) The uncut interview... Some of your are movie-goers. Consider this a peak at the way the movie was supposed to be seen, before the director went in and changed it. (Think of it like the fabled "Han Solo Shot First" fiasco in Star Wars.) After watching the video and comparing it to the script, you can't help but wonder exactly how crushing Sarah Palin would have been had they left all that intact. Gibson had no choice but to cut out some of these amazing answers... He interviewed her to test the waters and see if she could be tempted into two-faced opinions, but she couldn't, and then he tried to hide it as best as he could without being too obvious. That failed... It failed when people watched it and saw the rough cuts like that... Clearly cut off in the middle of a sentence. You can tell her words weren't naturally stopped like at a period! She was still holding her words like people do when in the middle of sentences. That's absolutely pathetic, Charlie. If you were afraid to look like a moron in front of the entire nation, you would have been better off keeping the entire interview intact. That would at least give the illusion that you were concerned with objective reporting. Clearly this is not the case. As the first comment on NewsBusters says: "Bias is exhibited not only by what is reported, but also by what is not."
That concludes what I wanted to mention, but, as promised, here are the links to the other two interview segments, which are split up into multiple parts due to YouTube's time constraints:
Segment Two: Part One
Segment Three: Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four
Do yourself a favor and watch them, but I would advise against reading the YouTube comments beneath them... Nasty little inconsiderate, clueless and disrespectful morons the lot of them. If you want a laugh at how blind they are, feel free, but I know some of you don't appreciate being exposed to the darkness of the liberal left, so I'm giving you fair warning. Also, as we now have proof of foul play with this interview, I would take things with a grain of salt. Not with what Palin says, but with how Gibson cut the interview to shreds and adds his own questionable tidbits to the introduction. Still, I think she clearly aced the interview and the Democrats and the mainstream media are both still terrified of her... But they dredged up the already debunked "Troopergate scandal", the already explained "Bridge to Nowhere" fiasco, and the fact that she charges the state government for traveling and lodging costs for her family... Let's completely forget that it's far, far cheaper the way she's doing it, after having sold the governor's jet and all that. "Technically allowed but frowned upon" my tail... How much would the state have to pay if she lived in the governor's mansion? That would all be paid for by the state and would be acceptable, but... It's a mansion. It's going to be more expensive than just living at her own home. Of course, we could ask what Alaska thinks about her doing that... Oh wait, did I hear the introduction say themselves that she has an approval rating of over 80% and that she's the most approved of governor in the entire country? Well, I guess that answers that.