Who are "you guys?"

 

Anyone who complained about Palin as the choice and that you didn't know anything about her views on issues.

At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates.

 

McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.

 

The wrangling was chiefly between the McCain-Palin camp and the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which is sponsoring the forums.

 

Commission members wanted a relaxed format that included time for unpredictable questioning and challenges between the two vice-presidential candidates. On Wednesday, the commission unanimously rejected a proposal sought by advisers to Ms. Palin and Senator John McCain of Arizona, the Republican presidential nominee, to have the moderator ask questions and the candidates answer, with no time for unfettered exchanges. Advisers to Mr. Biden say they were comfortable with either format.

 

NYTimes

 

Now, I'm sure the Obama campaign agreed to that structure as they have a "foot-in-mouth" artist debating and Obama and McCain will have much more open debates.

 

IMO, this is a HUGE mistake by the McCain/Palin camp! This was THE opportunity to make Biden look like a boorish, sexist buffoon, but they've virtually eliminated any opportunity to goad or prod him into saying things he didn't think about first.

The point is not what questions she has been asked to this point but that I would expect that they are getting her caught up on names and things so that they limit the chances of 'gotcha' questions.

 

I have agreed with you that she needs to begin interviews in the next couple of weeks and through October.

 

I thought the Dems, though, wanted the exposure off Palin and on the issues?:confused:

 

And remember the question of kid gloves to Obama and railing about the press giving him an easy pass was raised by the Clintons. Last I checked, they are not Republicans or members of a right wing conspiracy.

 

I find it humorous that when Bill and Hillary were raising this issue, it was a real concern.

 

Now it is the Republicans trying to divert from the issues and blame the media. THE SAME MEDIA that the Clintons complained about.

 

So, were/are the Clintons and the Republicans wrong? Has Obama been treated very gently by the media over the past 19 months?

 

I have asked twice and don't believe I have heard an answer on whether in any interview BESIDES O'Reilly's was Obama held to answer about his relationship with Resko and Ayers? Not just asked but challenged on it.

 

 

Obama was asked about Ayers in a primary debate. He has been asked about Rezko in interviews with news organizations. He has answered questions about both subjects in situations other than the O'Reilly interview. I'm not sure I know what you mean by "Not just asked but challenged on it."

 

Has Sarah Palin allowed herself to be asked why she has backed down from her previously stated openness to see the Troopergate investigation resolved? Nope.

IMO, this is a HUGE mistake by the McCain/Palin camp! This was THE opportunity to make Biden look like a boorish, sexist buffoon, but they've virtually eliminated any opportunity to goad or prod him into saying things he didn't think about first.

 

I would have preferred an open debate and let's see who is the better candidate.

 

I would like to see all of the candidates be more in front of voters TOGETHER answering questions in a town hall format instead of reading prepared speeches and taking prepared shots.

 

Most of what they say at the campaign stops I don't listen to because it has been run through the political washing machine.

Obama was asked about Ayers in a primary debate. He has been asked about Rezko in interviews with news organizations. He has answered questions about both subjects in situations other than the O'Reilly interview. I'm not sure I know what you mean by "Not just asked but challenged on it."

 

Has Sarah Palin allowed herself to be asked why she has backed down from her previously stated openness to see the Troopergate investigation resolved? Nope.

 

H why are you hammering me on this. I have agreed with you and said to this point the interviews should be introductory to let people get to know her.

 

If that is as far as they go, than I am fully on your side.

 

I would hope that they are moving to a time through October that she has to answer tough questions and challenged on answers.

 

By "challenged" I mean the interviewer does not let them answer the "talking points" but wants them to move throw that BS and own to a true answer to the question.

Yeah that position. How long did Ford serve as VP before he became President?

 

She has shown the ability to lead. That is obvious.

 

 

Lead a town of 7,000, and a state of 670K.

 

For all intents and purposes, she was a one (wo)man show in Alaska, in both jobs.

 

I can't wait to she if she plays well with others.

Anyone who complained about Palin as the choice and that you didn't know anything about her views on issues.

 

So what have we learned in an interview that is of significance? They won't let her talk freely. Heck, they didn't even want the press there yesterday when she finally got a chance to meet some real world leaders.

 

All we seem to know is a general far right mentality (not comforting to all of us), a potential issue with how she determines who gets hired and fired, a seemingly good mom, one who talks out both sides of her mouth (hold me accountable but don't make me go before anyone other than my own appointed folks), a good delivery on the exact same speech over and over (if you skip the obvious untruths), a reformer (but takes per diems when she is at her own home).

 

 

I can think of many people who I would be much more comfortable with as the #2 on the GOP ticket. She's way down the list.

H why are you hammering me on this. I have agreed with you and said to this point the interviews should be introductory to let people get to know her.

 

If that is as far as they go, than I am fully on your side.

 

I would hope that they are moving to a time through October that she has to answer tough questions and challenged on answers.

 

By "challenged" I mean the interviewer does not let them answer the "talking points" but wants them to move throw that BS and own to a true answer to the question.

 

 

I don't mean to hammer you. I just think it's a bit ridiculous that we are almost 4 weeks into this pick and she hasn't been turned loose from McCain's apron strings.

I don't mean to hammer you. I just think it's a bit ridiculous that we are almost 4 weeks into this pick and she hasn't been turned loose from McCain's apron strings.

 

I don't get this "lets just let her introduce herself" dung when we're one month away from electing the POTUS.

I don't mean to hammer you. I just think it's a bit ridiculous that we are almost 4 weeks into this pick and she hasn't been turned loose from McCain's apron strings.

I don't get this "lets just let her introduce herself" dung when we're one month away from electing the POTUS.

I would agree that it is time to let her fly or fall.

So what have we learned in an interview that is of significance? They won't let her talk freely. Heck, they didn't even want the press there yesterday when she finally got a chance to meet some real world leaders.

 

All we seem to know is a general far right mentality (not comforting to all of us), a potential issue with how she determines who gets hired and fired, a seemingly good mom, one who talks out both sides of her mouth (hold me accountable but don't make me go before anyone other than my own appointed folks), a good delivery on the exact same speech over and over (if you skip the obvious untruths), a reformer (but takes per diems when she is at her own home).

 

 

I can think of many people who I would be much more comfortable with as the #2 on the GOP ticket. She's way down the list.

 

 

We have learned the same thing that we have learned from most of Obama's interviews.

 

They ask a question and he gets to say his/her talking points and then they move on.

 

In her case, it was the same as his first interviews a year ago when HE STARTED this process.

 

As far as untruths. Unfortunately both sides are always filled with untruths, half truths and let's just shade this a little truths.

WITHOUT LOOKING IT UP, name the leader and country that Darfur is in?

Personally, I have no clue who it is or the country.

 

Not knowing the information that becomes "gotcha" questions in interviews and debates has no bearing on a person's ability to lead.

 

True. Though she should probably know the names of the leaders of our allies and other major powers. I don't think any fair mined person would expect her to have known that the President of Colombia is Alvaro Uribe. But she should certainly be able to talk at length about free trade, foreign aid to South America vis-a-vis the drug trade, regional integration (Mercosur) and its bearing on the United States without hesitation.

 

I feel she is simply being brought up to speed on names and issues that governors do not have to address.

 

And that's the heart of the matter isn't it? McCain chose someone who wasn't prepared because the campaign was desperate for her novelty. If this weren't a last ditch, last minute selection she would have been ready from day one to tackle these questions.

 

I guess, Habib, that is no different than Obama agreeing to the town hall meetings with McCain and then deciding not to do them when he felt that he might not do well in them.

 

1. It is different. Obama is still answering questions and articulating his positions.
   
2. It is certainly a knock against Obama and his message of change. It is regrettable voters are forced to suffer through these canned debates when the possibility of change was on the table. I absolutely criticize Obama for that.
   

Here's Pallin getting interviewed by Katie Couric

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main447617.shtml

True. Though she should probably know the names of the leaders of our allies and other major powers. I don't think any fair mined person would expect her to have known that the President of Colombia is Alvaro Uribe. But she should certainly be able to talk at length about free trade, foreign aid to South America vis-a-vis the drug trade, regional integration (Mercosur) and its bearing on the United States without hesitation.

 

 

 

And that's the heart of the matter isn't it? McCain chose someone who wasn't prepared because the campaign was desperate for her novelty. If this weren't a last ditch, last minute selection she would have been ready from day one to tackle these questions.

 

 

 

1. It is different. Obama is still answering questions and articulating his positions.
   
2. It is certainly a knock against Obama and his message of change. It is regrettable voters are forced to suffer through these canned debates when the possibility of change was on the table. I absolutely criticize Obama for that.
   

 

Is not knowing names of all the countries leaders really indicative on not being prepared?

 

I would prefer a leader that has shown they can lead rather than one that knows the names of the leaders.

 

That they can learn.

 

Leadership really can't be learned.

Is not knowing names of all the countries leaders really indicative on not being prepared?

 

I would prefer a leader that has shown they can lead rather than one that knows the names of the leaders.

 

That they can learn.

 

Leadership really can't be learned.

 

It's not about knowing names.

 

I don't think any fair mined person would expect her to have known that the President of Colombia is Alvaro Uribe. But she should certainly be able to talk at length about free trade, foreign aid to South America vis-a-vis the drug trade, regional integration (Mercosur) and its bearing on the United States without hesitation.