From novatownhall blog

September 13th, 2008 by joe

[UPDATE: Here’s the transcript of the first Charlie Gibson interview showing what was deleted from later broadcasts. And here is the Newsbusters annotated version.]

[UPDATE II: And if you REALLY want to get a sense of what a wad Charlie Gibson is, check out his interview with John Edwards – at the time far less experienced than Sarah Palin – right after Edwards was selected as John Kerry’s running mate. Henceforth, Charlie Gibson should have no more credibility than Al Franken. Case closed.]

It’s the fact checking, stupid.

As Shiplap just spelled out, this blur of words from the mainstream media and their Democrat overlords is proving no match for …. regular folks with Google access.

You’d think the geniuses would know they are going to get fact-checked but I guess all you can say is: Hubris. Also, derangement.

Compare and contrast these two Charlie Gibson interviews – not totally apples to apples but relevant nonetheless:

Charlie Gibson Interviews Barack Obama

Charlie Gibson Interviews Sarah Palin

Yeah, this sort of treatment could possibly backfire:

The double-standard Gibson applied to Palin, compared with the uncritical media platforms repeatedly offered to Obama, who has had zero executive experience running anything, was especially striking. ABC and Gibson focused on Palin as if she were running right now for the presidency rather than the vice presidency. He and other media pundits, by contrast, have never asked the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, if he has ever had to make a decision on anything.

Gibson’s aggressive approach appeared to take Palin by surprise: He was clearly attempting to put her on point by presenting her as having extreme religious views. This again, however, appears to be a double-standard, as Palin grew up in the Assemblies of God, one of the largest Christian denominations in America with 16 million members, and is now a member of the Wasilla Bible Church. Even now, Obama has yet to receive any comparable grilling on his 20-year attendance in the congregation of the notoriously racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Yes, it does appear to be a double-standard, but let’s never forget about the derangement component.

For example, the media breathlessly reported Palin would support war with Russia. In reality, she only said it after being pressed by Gibson on whether her support for admitting Ukraine and Georgia into NATO would also entail maintaining the obligation of mutual support. Her precise response was:

“Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.”

This is, incidentally, the correct response.

It is also, incidentally, the only possible response Barack Obama could give unless he is a blithering idiot because, you see, his stance on Ukraine and Georgia is exactly the same as Sarah Palin’s:

I welcome the desire and actions of these countries to seek closer ties with NATO and hope that NATO responds favorably to their request, consistent with its criteria for membership. Whether Ukraine and Georgia ultimately join NATO will be a decision for the members of the alliance and the citizens of those countries, after a period of open and democratic debate. But they should receive our help and encouragement as they continue to develop ties to Atlantic and European institutions.

As a side note, the next time you are at a restaurant and learn your server is a former “professional journalist,” remember the San Francisco Chronicle example in case you are tempted to overtip.

A final example which still needs further unraveling is the infamous “task that is from God.”

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

Well, not exactly:

A video shows Palin asking a group to pray that the nation’s leaders were sending troops to Iraq “on a task that is from God.”

Gibson, however, mischaracterized her as simply asserting that the nation’s leaders were sending troops to Iraq on a task from God.

“Are we fighting a holy war?” he asked.

After Palin disputed his characterization, she paraphrased Abraham Lincoln, saying she meant, “Let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.”

Gibson went on to take a second part of her comments out of context. Palin had asked the group to pray “that there is a plan, and that plan is God’s plan.”

But Gibson dropped her reference to praying — and instead quoted Palin as saying the war was God’s plan. He asked if she believed the country was sending her son on a task from God.

Why would Gibson be, for lack of a better term, such an ignorant a-hole? Well, it could be that peculiar phenomenon we have noted earlier. To wit: Derangement, this time courtesy of the AP from the time of the Republican Convention:

“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”

Here’s what the AP turns it into:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told ministry students at her former church that the United States sent troops to fight in the Iraq war on a “task that is from God.”…

“Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,” she said. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God’s plan.”

So apparently a week later Charlie Gibson picked up the faulty quote from AP, and not only demonstrated his lazy, shoddy journalism but also his sheer arrogance. “Exact words,” indeed.

Unsurprisingly, ABC edited out Gibson’s mistake in the later broadcast.

But it is at this moment still in the transcript posted on their Web site, heh. Idiots. Charlie Gibson, you need to start brushing up on your garnishes. Here’s your first test:

Manhattan?
Cuba Libra?
Tom Collins?
Screwdriver?

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 13th, 2008 at 2:35 am and is filed under Campaign 2008, media. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Advertisements