Charlie Gibson Goes From Most Respected Anchor to Foolish Disgrace

To the author...not even a nice try. Your article reminds me of...uhmmm...well , of the interview itself..."Charlie".

And why should I care what the Canadians think anymore than what you think of the Europeans opinion of Obama.

How does the headline tie in with the article? The summary doesn't talk about Gibson at all.

Bravo well said sir.
I was an undecided?
Not anymore- the truth is evident!

mccain and Plain are on "the bridge to no where?"

Wow! This is bizarre. The article is badly written, full of half-truths, untruths, opinions, and wierd ideas.

Thans for sharing the diversity of viewpoints in this country. We should all be aware fo what the lunatic fringe has to say.

Who wrote this? It sucks regardless. Palin is a poor choice, and those who had Kaine at the top of Obama's list would always comment on the fact that he had little experience and how he wouldn't help him in that respect.

I dunno why I'm even responding to this retarded blog, it's poorly written, and inaccurate.

You've got to be kidding! Gibson proved he's not independant as an 'interviewer'. He's just a puppet for those that want to destroy Palin!

Clinton was also a Rhodes scholar.

I agree with you Mike. Sarah Palin is backwards in her views and rigid. As Governor and Mayor she either fired or abused her power to push others to fire people with views differing from her own. If elected she will undoubtedly show the same behavior in Washington. It sounds like a continuation of the Bush Cheney administration.

The republicans are pushing a platform of change and then embracing the same old Washington system of lobbyists and special interests. They have sold out and proven they will twist and stretch the truth to their own benefit. Again it sounds like Bush Cheney.

We The People deserve better.

yea, you the people get Joey B!

Mike Rupert - Bill Clinton knew how to BS.

So does Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Look where their BS got us.

That's right, RWD. Palin is going to have to answer to the American people soon; and I don't think she's going to be able to. Her past, her views, they're extreme and very immoral. I don't think Democrats have anything to worry about; her ratings will slip very soon.

Immoral? Please enlighten us.

why do you feel like Obama should not have been nominated?

Those the new catch words for transparent, ridiculous, unashamed pageantry?

Palin - out of the mainstream. Against abortion in all cases. For teaching creationism in schools. Tried to ban books from library. Says that the Iraq war is god's war. Admitted she knew not what a VP does. References her closeness to Russia when speaking of foreign policy experience.

The American public are going to actually know her views soon. And when they do, her ratings are going to plummet; and along with that, the view of Mr. John McCain's judgment.

Those the new catch words for transparent, ridiculous, unashamed pageantry?

sounds more like the new catch words for transparent, ridiculous, unashamed racism to me(as much for the not actually muslim part as just being black)

Iamright --

It appears that every successful person in life is compelled to meet a pretty wide range of people .... some that they will later be compelled to explain away to people with no understanding of the word "power".

While republicans relentlessly demand that Obama renounce notorious Chicago figure heads, they are oblivious to the same requests by democrats for McCain to renounce high profile corporate execs who were convicted felons, failed business entrepreneurs (who were expelled from foreign countries), abysmal fiscal policy advocates, and for all intensive purposes all-around charlatan. His Google hits are so rife with the S&L scandal and the role of Sen. and Mrs. McCain, that you would not even think Keating did anything else in life than swindle. Which he did well enough to secure conviction and imprisonment, and numerous biographies.

My point -- Keating is not your normal run of the mill mistake in economic policy. His scam covered all the right bases: Mother Theresa was his character witness, Alan Greenspan his last minute hire to testify to his judgement. And the worst part ... there were only five suckers.

Mike,

The American public are going to actually know her views soon. And when they do, her ratings are going to plummet; and along with that, the view of Mr. John McCain's judgment.

I hope you are right and their ratings do drop. Remember that the American people voted Bush to a second term.

re: #3.4 Lies of omission! Should read "except in the case of detriment to the health of the mother". It's pitiful when you can build a case only if you lie!

re: #3.6 Lies of omission! Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly in the Keating Five matter, but were criticized for having exercised "poor judgment". Both ran for re-election and were successful.

I find this an interesting article: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/09/opinion/main4426965.shtml

Iamright - spare the keating 5 stuff. I grew up in Arizona and was involved in politics there - the guy was in bed with Charles Keating (as was McCain's father-in-law).... His judgement was very very poor and he most certainly did things as a favor for keating. Note that he didn't learn much from the S&L crisis as we are repeating it now.

iamright

Hussein Obama's

There's a lot of radical or Islamic influence around him

You know you sound like a racist fear monger, don't you?

Ire:

Being here to spread hate and fear is iamright's only purpose. I wouldn't be surprised to learn he/she is on the GOP payroll. Perhaps he/she works for those people that put out that despicable dvd in this weeks Sunday papers.

I suggest that no one respond to his messages of hate, which are all over newsvine.

CLM,

Thank you - that's very good advice.

IamRight --

Then why do you ignore the questions off McCain's rich wife who was also named as a part of the scam. Of course, she was not indicted or tried because she was richer than Keating. But, she has also had as little to say on the matter, as you have to say of her role in the matter.

Keep trying, my eye witness friend.

As for Obama's Chicago ... is this the first time you've heard of scoundrels in Chicago politics? And being involved in Chicago politics is actually all you need to prove that they were in bed together? Let's just say ... nobody has been indicted yet.

PS. Just Google Keating Five ... her name will come up in the top ten hits.

Mike Rupert said:

"For teaching creationism in schools. Tried to ban books from library. Says that the Iraq war is god's war. Admitted she knew not what a VP does."

Creationism claim:
False. See Wasilla website where it answers FAQ's.

Book ban:
False. See above.

Admission:
She made a joke when asked several months ago on the Glen Beck show, when asked whether she would consider joining the McCain ticket. It was a joke. You know, humor?

So by not knowing much about Senator Obama, MCcain is your answer?
Macth these words up to their repective candiates!
education vs. abstinence
evolution vs. creationism
diplomacy vs. arbitrary war
intelligence vs. narcissism
liberty and science vs. self righteousness
sustainability vs. monopoly
democracy vs. plutocracy
Your in denial- you dont know about mCcains 26 years in the senate- nothing, zero, nada. The man was non existent unless it had something to do with war!

lol classic.

Iamright - you are beyond tedious with your posts. I lived in Chicago for a long time - grew up in Iowa and you honestly just make this stuff up as you go along.

Try talking about an issue for once without tossing in a personal attack that has no basis in fact. And that includes the Write and Ayers issues. Those are all baseless.

Why are the Wright and Ayres issues baseless, but the Keating issue important? What about Rezko? That doesn't count either? All of these issues for all of these candidates are part and parcel of their careers and has some account for how they think and who they associate with. I agree personal attacks are of no value and simply cloud the issues, but let's be clear about not only the issues, but character as well.

The wright issue has some points - if you look at it objectively. The Ayers issue is baseless. He served on a community board with the guy YEARS after Ayers anti war involvment. People change and that is one thing that is bogus with the Ayers issue. You are tying Obama in 2000 something to Ayers of 1970 something.
And Keating is also an issue - again - when looked at objectively.

I also agree on the character issue. Does cheating on your wife count or do you want to redefine the terms of a character debate?

Dukennukem,

Also, if we want to keep bringing of the Wright issue and associations that would mean that we would have to bring in the fact that Palin's husband was associated with the AIP (http://www.akip.org/index.html), who wanted to secede from the U.S. We would also have discuss Palin's church associations as well.

It has been reported in the news that Palin now attends the Wasilla Bible Church and that she was there on August 17, just days before entering the national spotlight wherein David Brickner, the founder of Jews for Jesus, was a speaker. He told congregants that terrorist attacks on Israel were God's "judgment" of Jews who haven't embraced Christianity. Brickner said, "Judgment is very real and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television. When a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment -- you can't miss it.

SM - Cheating on your wife counts. My point was simply that all these things matter. All of these candidates have issues. To portray one as loftier than the other is disingenuous. If you read my post you would realize that.

Lin Nil - You seem to be more interested in tearing down the GOP and trying to draw feable comparisons than you are in having an intellectually honest discussion where we each learn something from one another.

This site is supposed to be about that, though from what I have seen so far it seems more about the angry left and right and who can score more points with ridiculous comments that don't speak to any of the issues, i.e. lipstick on barnyard animals and what not.

Well, when you keep repeating things about Senator Obama associations and pastor, I have to let you know that everything about Palin will come up as well. Fair is fair isn't it?

Dukenukem,

I just reread your post about character. I see what you are saying. Sorry. I spoke to quickly I assumed you were one of the posters who continually talk about Senator Obama's past associations, church, and pastor but never acknowledges Palin's and her husband's' questionable associations as well.

Hopefully, you are not one of those. I just believe in playing fair.

Thank you. I was only drawing an analogy, I wasn't dredging it up. You're right fair is fair, if they are going to talk about Obama's associations then Palin's, McCain's and Biden's have to come in too. This is where the media has to get its share of blame for sensationalizing all the "bad" stuff.
The problem is it doesn't solve anything or bring us any closer to a decision about who can best run the country in this really tough period and it doesn;t end with the Presidential race, the senate and the congress need to be looked at closely as their approval rating stinks too for many reasons.

I hope the debates will help.

The first debate will decide the election. Personally, I'd love to see blood from both. There is a lot that has been "stewing" and it will give us all a little relief.

I guess republican's are so corporate minded they don't realize Canada is a different country? Russia ... well it plays right into their need for an arch enemy. Looks to me like no respect for Canada or Russia.

lol yeah; god forbid he ask someone tough questions of someone who wishes to be 2nd in command of the most powerful nation in the world at the most precarious time in this country's history. The gall of Charles Gibson.

Charlie, who first of all shouldn't be asking anybody anything, asked open ended questions about the Bush Doctrine and when she replied "what aspect?" Charlie couldn't even elaborate properly. Then provided his own interpretation and he was wrong. He was wrong then and when he asked these same questions in a different forum over a year ago. Do we want to be intellectually honest or just follow the ideology?

Open ended? You mean like "Do You Agree With the Bush Doctrine?"

There isn't much open ended about that. You either agree - with comments or you disagree with comments.

I don't care how he asked it a year ago - what does that have to do with the price of eggs? If he got it wrong a year ago (so says you) that doesn't matter as he isn't going to be a heart beat away from the presidency. What is important is that his interpretation of the Bush Doctrine in his interview with Palin was correct.

Open ended in that there are many Bush doctrines, so which one? Education, defense, health care, so on. That is why she asked "which aspect?". I am not saying that she performed particularly well, nor does it matter considering that it was Charlie Gibson.

He did in fact ask the same question during the primaries and also stated it incorrectly then, incorrectly meaning Charlie was after the one on defense and his interpretation was wrong then and it is still wrong now. I think if you are going to be that smug and condescending when interviewing someone you should at least know what you are talking about. It has to do with the "price of eggs" because he was the person interviewing her. Get it?

I am beginning to see how the angry left got its name. People on this site just assume you must be defending something so they attack. Real intelligent.

High-five, Lawbill. Yeah, McCain is a "Maverick" - voting with George W. Bush 90% of the time - just like Bush was a "uniter" and "compassionate conservative" What an absolute joke.

Dubya now has 7 plus years of white house experience, he's still not qualified for the power he swiped.

He remains THE american idiot, at least until he turns that crown over to Caribou Barbie.

Experience without brains was a disaster these last two terms, Sarah would be a fine way to "continue the course."

Now THAT'S FUNNY!

Lawbill - Why do you and others keep avoiding the fact that she is a governor and she does in fact have more executive experience than all the candidates? Why does Obama keep comparing and talking about Palin and Bush? Why not McCain? The fact is that Obama has zero executive experience and so does McCain and Biden. None. Obama has less overall government experience than all the candidates in the race. He may speak very well from a teleprompter, but using your argument what will he do when he has to face the leader of a hostile nation, as he intends to do? Obama won;t even agree to face McCain in a town hall setting. What does that tell you?

Dukenukem,

She has been a Govenor for less than 2 years. The McCain camp kept harping on Senator Obama experience so what did they expect was going to happen when he picked Palin?

You also said: "Obama won't even agree to face McCain in a town hall setting. What does that tell you?"

What it tells me is that Senator McCain is trying to run/control things and trying to tell Senator Obama how he should conduct his campaign. It onlys shows Senator McCain's absurd arrogance.

Who does he think he is? I guess he thinks he's Obama's father? LOLOL.

With all the lies Senator McCain has been telling, he isn't even worthy to be speaking to the voting American citizens at all in my opinion.

Lin Nil - Please read the reply and the original post which you obviously neglected to do. The fact is Obama has no executive experience. Again, none of the candidates besides Palin do. McCain didn't "dictate" he in fact agreed to debate Obama in the forums planned. Your father comment makes no sense!

In addition, Obama has difficulty appearing genuine without a prepared speech and when not speaking from a teleprompter. Formal debate settings facilitate Obama's talents for embellishment and side stepping the questions, i.e. Saddleback. These forums provide voters with not much more than what they already know as time limits allow them to side step. Though I understand that each candidate will be allowed to ask the other follow up questions and I believe this ought to make for nice theater. Perhaps not much more.

I guess you just didn't get my father comment. When I saw Senator McCain on The View, he came across as it he was trying to control and tell Obama how to conduct his campaign. If Senator Obama does not wish to do a town hall meeting with him then it's his perogative. Just as it was the McCain/Palin's perogative to allow her to only interview with Charlie Gibson.

I think Senator Obama is busy campaigning on the real issues while Senator McCain chooses to put up negative ad campaigns and skirt the real issues.

If that's true then why does he keep saying he will lower taxes for 95% of Americans? Obama has shed no more light on his intentions in most areas of his plans than McCain has. If you go to Obama's website and look at his tax plan it spells disaster at an economic period where we can't afford it, not to mention what he wants to do with the employee choice act. It is an attempt at shear wealth redistribution and socialism. Last time I checked that wasn't working real well in Socialist countries. I am not saying our systems are perfect nor would I say GW has done such a bang up job, I don't drink the Kool Aide, but come on!

McCain's plan doesn't talk about how he will account for some of the tax cuts though drilling alone along with royalties for the states will make up 2-3 trillion $ by most estimates, making up for it, closing the budget gaps and relieving our dependence on oil all at the same time. Buying time for alternatives whose technologies are not far along enough yet. Anyway, to say that any of these candidates are campaigning on the issues if folly!

Dukenukem,

Also, the media reported during the campaign in the summer that Town halls are also McCain's favorite style of campaigning and would also have allowed him to get free media attention alongside Senator Obama.

If I recall correctly, the media also indicated that when a McCain adviser brought up the idea, Senator Obama said it was a great idea. Senator Obama eventually said that it wasn't realistic to have 10 town halls with all the other campaigning he needed to do after getting the Democratic Party's nomination months later than Senator McCain's GOP nomination.

From what I gather, neither campaigns have been able to come to an agreement regarding this matter.

McCain/Palin - the bridge to nowhere!

How appropriate!
Your in denial and you most likely voted for Bush- the worst pres. in history!
And you think a 72 year codgety "insider" with no history of benevolent legislation will do better?
Your on the same bridge too sir!

Gibson, rather than showing some pleasure in being the first to interview Palin, looked down his nose constantly at her...

Huh!??!?! What's he suppose to do have sex with her? He is there to ask questions, because that's what reporters do. You're one cog away from going coo-coo. Look it's so sad that anyone even has to respond to you. He's suppose to ask questions, and if she knows what she's doing she should be able to answer them. It's not rocket science. He could have asked a whole bunch of questions about precise laws that have been passed. Instead he asked one, an easy one at that, and now it's the "liberal media's" fault cause she can't answer a simple question... good grief at this point voting for McCain/Palin is voting for stupidity.

McCain/Palin - the bridge to nowhere!

Don't forget the Road to Nowhere. Under Palin's leadership a road was constructed to where the bridge was going to be. Now it just runs into the water.

Now it just runs into the water.

Yeah, but in winter it'll run into the ice. If it gets thick enough, won't need a bridge.

I just came from the SNL sketch last night. The entire story is there. But the bloggers really steal the show. You really can tell who's pro-Palin and who's not.

So, what's the difference between Sarah Palin and the Republican Party? A SENSE OF HUMOR!

Sarah Palin, like her or not, has made news for her biting attacks and innocent naive smile. Then, she laughs. Republicans have no idea how important humor is in belittling the opponent. It's all fierce combat, toe-to-toe, and when you're done... the final spit. Get over yourselves.

You will find nothing here on the vine, but NOBAMA WALLOWERS.
Go McCain/Palin 2008 you really have the Dems. on the run.
It is really something when "The One" has not even got the resume' that
the V.P. pick on the Republican ticket has.
Maybe they should check out Michelle's Community Activists job in Chicago.
I for one and sending it to everyone I know.
They can say they are American's if they want to, but they sure don't want
anyone loving America, spewing all of the Hate they do.

crooked6p,

Sarah Palin, like her or not, has made news for her biting attacks and innocent naive smile.

I believe she made her name for outrageous, repeated lies and excessive resume polishing. Unless she also has another name...

I'm willing to look at life from both sides now. From up, or down. But still somehow ....

this girl gets more goats than a hungry pit bull. Can't imagine why she didn't get Miss Congeniality???

Oh woow! Sean Hannity from Faux news! This will certainly be fair and balanced. He will not serve softball questions but whiffle ball questions. She will even get them in advance!. Gimme a break. Aren't you conservatives really interested how she will perform on an unstaged event just for your own edification? Or doesn't it matter?

well said.. btw, if anyone wants a accurate slant on just how bogus this ¨Canada Free Press is just try this link to their authors.

Obama has been talking about the issues. The press and the public just like the mud slinging and name calling better. Sad but true. If that weren't the case the country wouldn't be more consumed with Britney and Paris and Lindsay than with Iraq and Darfur and the miserable economy.

Wednesday the Obama campaign was out talking about the economy and Freddie/Fannie/Lehman etc. and the McCain campaign held urgent conference calls with reporters to complain that Obama called Palin a pig.

Sadly - those kinds of BS distractions tend to work on the American public so it might work out in McCain's favor on election day. We get what we deserve I guess. Gonna fight for Obama until the end though - prefer to not repeat Bush for one minute longer let alone 4 years.

...or buy that damn "bridge to nowhere" and walk McPalin across.

[SATIRE] Flag anyone? All in favor say aye!

Nah. It's too much fun watching people who don't get satire respond to the posts.

westwind - sadly we are dumb enough to fall for it. we let them talk about lipstick on a pig instead of issues. We are to blame for the coverage because we rush to watch it. We are responsible for the mistake the government and bush have made because we elected them. We can't remove ourselves from the blame - as we fall for this stuff all the time.

It's not that simple...

We (I) rush to watch out of hope. Sometimes that hope is rewarded, such as this past week when they began to call them lies (instead of misrepresentations, stretching the truth, etc.). Most times we are disappointed, but ALWAYS we hope.

I am comforted in the fact that I meet people every day that I have so much in common with. There is NO reason to believe we will not prevail.

Hopefully the debates will show who the candidates really are based on their views and policies. Mr. McCain....... the attacks are getting really old and it's making me loose all respect for you.

From my vantage point John McCain sold out to the religious right and powerful groups in the Republican party in order to get their backing. McCain's real choice for VP was Lieberman.

The idea of Sarah Palin becoming President and Commander and chief of the USA scares the crap out of me. She is WAY to the right.

Hillary Clinton would make a fine President and I hope to vote for her again someday.

Barack Obama seems like a very intelligent sincere man with integrity. He is more about the issues than McCain or Palin who would rather use disinformation and attack than go head to head on the issues. I feel Obama is just the person to inspire the American people and get this country on the right track again. He has won my vote.

Here is more information for you for your Honorable Candidate files

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/

Why do you suppose these Military folks are against Mccain????

http://sensico.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/mccain-lies-about-his-voting-record-for-veterans/

Oh he does not support Vets...

Obama/Biden 08

Simmons518 excellent links!!!

I always had a suspicion that McCain wasn't treated the same as our other prisoners! If they wanted to release him just because his daddy was an admiral, it stands to reason he didn't get the the same treatment as the other poor guys!

He had been so anti-vet in all his votes in Congress, I cant believe any vet will vote for him! I WONT!

Jake --

Are you suggesting that Sarah Palin actually had any kind of relations with Bill Clinton??

Shameless tactics would be spending 7 years going after a President for the sole reason that you have the political votes in Congress. Shameless tactics would be spending millions of dollars on trials and hearings even after the courts have laughed you out of the courtroom. Shameless tactics would be to suggest that a person's morality is a measure of his political policy.

If the last were true, by the way, the entire republican majority who weighted their own morality more heavily than a wide range of policy issues ... Watergate, Iran, Irangate, Iran, Iraq, Libya ... and I haven't even gotten to the Clinton years!!

don't forget the S&L Scandal - Neil Bush made out like a bandit on that one.

simmons518 - Really interesting. On the one hand the site talks about how McCain was singled out for "softer treatment" (yet he can't lift his arms above ribs) and on the other claims he was the subject of 5 and half years of soviet brain washing so he must be the real manchurian candidate. How do you reconcile that? Are you aware of who owns the site in question?

FredC - If you really want to look at a politican's voting record just go to votesmart dot org. This site has no party affiliation and you can sort a politican's votes by issue and even when they were serving. Don't be taken in by propaganda.

Well said, rube r.

You confuse republicans with conservatives in the same way you probably confuse democrats with liberals. So I assume that if I have faith in some religion I am also a neocon? There are fundamental flaws within your argument and some of your observations are replete with error. Though some are right on the money.