Dear Anyone or perhaps Fox viewers:
Is this an accurate quote?
McCain campaign manager Rick Davis told Fox News that Palin would not subject herself to any tough questions from reporters “until the point in time when she’ll be treated with respect and deference.”
I keep thinking the quote can’t be real. Newspeople are clamoring for an interview with this candidate. It’s her party’s perfect opportunity for free publicity. Is she afraid of their questions? Does she not know how to say “no comment” if an interviewer ventures into territory that she considers private? Her family’s right to privacy doesn’t preclude her from her obligation to make public who she is, what she stands for, what her plans are for her office should she win it, what her vision is for our country and its people. If she wants to dodge questions about foreign affairs, the economy, and other domestic issues, she’s going to have to learn to dodge them and dissemble when the lights and cameras are all pointed directly at her, just like every other candidate.
She’s running on the ticket for the highest offices in our government. Although people seem to have forgotten this little detail, if she wins, she will WORK FOR US. Our tax dollars will pay her salary. We will provide her a home. We will provide security for her and her family. She will travel throughout the country and the world on our behalf and often on her party’s behalf, even if we disagree with her and don’t belong to her party. That makes her accountable to us and answerable to us. Since we don’t all have access to our candidates or our leaders, we depend on the press to ask our questions and get information for us. (Those who may feel inclined to speak to me about media bias need not chime in. Reading critically is my life. I know how to get to the heart and truth of the written word, and I don’t watch wannabe-celebrity pundits or attractive newscasters–on either side–for my information. Thus my original question: Is that quote accurate?)
The simple truth is, when you put yourself in the position Sarah Palin is in, you don’t get to go all Mommie Dearest and demand respect. You don’t get to pick and choose the questions that are asked of you. You have to face even the people who don’t like you, don’t agree with you, insult you, anger you, and hurt your feelings. You have to be tough enough and smart enough to do that.
Then I read that she’s “agreed” to do an interview with ABC. AGREED? She’s not Madonna a monarch in office yet, is she? That nap I took was only fifteen minutes, wasn’t it?
Signed:
Becky Van Winkle
According the ABC News website, this is true.
Based on her acceptance speech, she will not respond to the media because she is going to Washington to serve the people, not the media and the pundits. When she said that, the camera turned to take in the amused look on the face of CBS’s Bill Scheiffer.
The whole idea of a stealth candidate, one who is not much more than a symbol, is a bit creepy, but not unsurprising. At least Bush got a canny, if dangerous, adviser with his choice.
Thanks for the info!
A lot to think about.
… she will not respond to the media because she is going to Washington to serve the people, not the media and the pundits.
The thing is, though, the domestic media and the “pundits” don’t exist in a vaccuum. I mean, they’re people, too, and putatively acting on behalf of “the people” (a claim at least as substantial as Sarah Palin’s!). Hers is an argument that doesn’t hold much water when subjected to any scrutiny whatsoever. Blech.
Yup. Unless she’s going to knock on everyone’s door, the media is her best vehicle for getting to the people she could be serving. I don’t think that this matters to her in the slightest.
The McCainies canceled an interview between John Mc and Larry
King because one of his flaks got into a tiff with Campbell
Brown. Really. That “pitbull” Campbell Brown! And Larry
King, the master of the fluff interview! They passed up
the softest of free publicity because Brown pressed the
flak to answer a simple question.
This is bad. Very, very bad.
See, again, this stuff makes me wonder what they’re so afraid of that they avoid the media, even friendly media.
Crazy.
I’ve always heard resepdct was earned not something you are automatically entitled to. She’s all over the magazines. I put up new ones atthe store Friday an dshe was on at least five including Newsweek and Time.
I think I’ve made my thoughts and opinions on this woman fairly clear.
A lot of what I’m reading that’s accusatory about her is reportedly not true or not verified. Why won’t she speak up, clear the record, and disprove those allegations? What real things does she fear coming out if she opens herself up to questions? That’s what’s disturbing to me right now.
I’m not interested in private things about her. I want her to answer questions about issues. People’s appearances and families are of little interest to me, and that’s all anyone’s talking about on both sides. What does that have to do with fixing the economy, protecting the vulnerable in our society (the old, the ill, the young, the poor), keeping us safe, bringing our troops home, and not trampling our constitutional rights? Those are the kinds of questions I’d like to hear her opinions on, and not in convention soundbites with a cheering crowd around her.
What’s so terrifying about issue-based questions?
I watched Fox News Sunday earlier today. Yeah, I remember him saying that, although I can’t remember the exact context. My attention kept wandering from the TV to my computer. Chris Wallace interviewed a person from the Obama campaign, and then one from the McCain campaign. I got frustrated with both guests because Wallace kept asking them specific questions, and they kept coming back with these non-responsive talking points.
I agree with your arguments. What I have a problem with is that it’s my impression that many in the press seem to be rooting for Obama. Then McCain chooses Palin for his VP choice, which in turn energizes his base and helps his campaign. The Obama camp and his supporters quite rightly recognize that she represents a real threat to Obama winning the election, especially since Obama decided to not go with Hillary, which I think would have did to his campaign what the choice of Palin did to McCain’s.
I don’t have any problem with Palin or anybody else having to take tough questions from the press. However, I am sympathetic to their concern about how she will be treated by a press corp that seems to overwhelmingly supports Obama, and is now just salivating to get to her so they can tear her apart. Look how they treated Obama with kid gloves, and then gave Hillary tougher treatment during the earlier debates. It wasn’t until SNL did that skit that these reporters realized, “Uh, yeah, we’re supposed to be fair and impartial, aren’t we?” Ironically, the Hillary camp felt that she got the fairest treatment from Fox News and felt that Bill O’Reilly–who the left sees as the Devil incarnate–gave her a tough but fair and respectful interview. One of the early indications of how Palin was going to be treated differently was that US magazine cover with her picture which included the word “Lies” on it, whereas Obama and Michelle’s said, “Why he loves her”. I mean, come on!
Yes, Palin should make herself available for questioning, no doubt about it. However, the way the press has been conducting itself in such a partisan manner when they’re supposed to be fair and objective has been absolutely shameful. Candidates from both parties, and candidates within the same party who are running to get the nomination, should be treated equally and fairly. The press have not been living up to the ideals of responsible journalism and they should be ashamed of themselves.
I’ll read this again and respond tomorrow. Too tired tonight! =)
Now that I’m thinking it over, a puff piece on Michelle Obama and her husband’s feelings for her aren’t really out of place or inappropriate in an article about a potential First Lady. It’s up to a president and a first lady how active she is during her husband’s administration, but in fact, all we really have much right to know is whether she’s going to be a supportive spouse who’ll be an asset to him and not be a public embarrassment to our country.
An article on Sarah Palin HAS to be more hard-hitting. She’s going to be part of making policy. She’s going to impact my life, my well-being, not be just an attractive face standing next to the man in charge. While an article on her husband might fall into the puff piece category, an article on Palin is rightfully meant to ask about more than what kind of wife and mother she is. And if the press goes easy on her, well, that’s an insult to women. She’s asking to be admitted to the leagues of Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, Indira Gandhi, and Golda Meir, among others–and that means being tough and facing whatever the press tosses her way about policy and political agenda.
This notion that Sarah Palin is being treated unfairly by the press is bullshit. The American public has a right to know where this candidate stands on the economy, on foreign policy, on health care – issues vitally important to the future stability of our nation. What the McCain camp is trying to pass off as “the real Sarah Palin” is nothing more than propaganda. (See the Republican smokescreen for yourself here and here, and get a glimpse of what the next four years would look like under President John McShame here.) The American press plays a crucial role in our democracy. They MUST be allowed to do their job.
Within the scope of my memory, from Nixon on, there has been a careful campaign by political operatives to present the media as biased any time they go after hard truths. At the same time, we have morphed into such a culture of celebrity that segments of the press have turned themselves into little more than versions of Entertainment Tonight. Ultimately, it’s become apparent that most people don’t watch hard news–they want the flash and noise.
The erosion of good journalism is part of why this country is in the mess it’s in, but we–the people–are getting what most of us are asking for–both with the press and with our decline as a nation. It CAN be reversed, but only if we start demanding more. In this case, to demand is spun as we’re picking on a plucky little “soccer mom,” and that turns my stomach. If she can’t face the press, how’s she going to face the world?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,418342,00.html
is this what you are talking about?
If the media will ask the issue questions and not focus on her private matters, then let them at her. If is is more of the gossip angle, who cares? News is not news most of the time and the media is after the “killing blow” for everyone, it seems. It appears to me that the media was taken by surprise with her selection. I think we all were. And there is much to be learned.
As for her actions as mayor, it was her job to take care of her town and its residents. Same as Governor(state/residents). Hopefully same as VP (country/residents).
But you know what really piques my interest? it is her family – they represent ME and my family. They are not ivy-league educated and are not elitists. Talk about change in Washington – that would be a change. However, I am all in favor of learning more about here – but i want facts, not slanted “news” stories. So i will do the research myself.
Thank you so much for that link!
I’m not at all interested in her family, as I don’t feel like they have anything to do with me. That’s why I’m indifferent to news stories, whatever their slant, about her homemaking. I mean, if I cared about her family, I’d be scared of her husband’s radical political views, and I’d be shaking my head about letting the RNC thrust her pregnant daughter and the daughter’s boyfriend into the limelight as a horrible message for teens. (You, too, can be unwed and pregnant at seventeen and be rewarded with attention and applause, woohoo!) Every family has people in it with views that seem a little out there, and every family has flaws–that is no different if the family’s last name is Bush, Palin, Clinton, Kennedy, Obama, Gingrich, etc.
The ONLY time I shake my head and roll my eyes over people’s–for lack of a better word–immorality is if those people are telling everyone else how to live a purer life when they should be minding their OWN business. That’s a different topic, however.
I want to know how Palin’s views are going to impact the environment (so far, I’m pretty much appalled). I want to know how she’s going to help shape policy on things that DO matter to me, and those include issues on the economy, on personal and constitutional freedoms, on healthcare.
Let me just take a Becky issue as an example, because it’s an area in which I feel I’m extraordinarily well-read and informed, to the point that I would put my knowledge up against anyone’s. John McCain was once asked if he thought condoms helped prevent the spread of HIV and he answered that he didn’t know, turned to an aide, and asked what was his position on that in previous statements. He doesn’t know what he thinks without consulting his talking points? How can you not know what you think? Can Palin do better than that?
I’m an issue voter, not a personality voter. So I don’t give a flying fig about Palin’s winning smile any more than I care about Obama’s choice of ties. I’m looking for articulate leadership from people who will put the interests of ALL U.S. people, of which I am one and have the right to demand it, before the special interests of the people who line their pockets with my tax dollars gone awry. I’ve watched several years of cronyism have devastating effects in the U.S., Iraq, and Afghanistan.
I understand that you and I don’t agree on politics, but I do listen to all sides, and if there’s any chance that these two people are going to the White House, I have a right for my kinds of questions to be heard and addressed by them. I may be a social liberal, but my lifestyle is actually among the most conservative of anyone I know. My behavior is meant to be ethical in all ways, and I put thought into each choice I make. I don’t brand entire groups as evil or wrong simply because their views are different from mine. But I, and mine, have been demonized, mocked, and ignored by Republican leaders since I first really began paying attention in 1991, and I’m sick of it.