Sarah Palin's don't-blame-me TV tour -- Part 2
Sarah Palin, who refused to do all but a handful of TV interviews during the election, continued her all-day blitzkrieg of the medium yesterday with the biggest stops at CNN.
And while neither Wolf Blitzer nor Larry King performed anywhere near the level ABC's Charles Gibson and CBS's Katie Couric did during the campaign, both CNN hosts were a big improvement over the kiss-up interviews by NBC's Matt Lauer and Greta Van Susteren of Fox News this week.
I expected a solid interview from Blitzer, who has a strong and well-deserved reputation as a straightforward journalist. But I never thought I would write the following sentence: Larry King is a tougher, more tenacious and informed interviewer than Matt Lauer. After all, King does not pretend to be a journalist, while Lauer is employed by NBC News.
If nothing else, King's conversation with Palin proves you don't have to engage in mortal hand-to-hand combat to do a useful interviewer that gives the listener a better sense of the person being interviewed. But when you are dealing with a look-at-me, win-at-any-cost narcissist like Palin who seems willing to lie left and right to repair an image that even she knows has been damaged, you have to ask a follow-up question or two and put a liitle steel in the conversation when she starts hardcore spinning.
You can go to CNN and read the full transcripts. But let me just highlight a couple of things Blitzer and King did well.
Rather than letting Palin characterize herself as a dutiful handmaiden simply following the will of the Almighty in each and every political decision she makes without challenge as Van Susteren did, Blitzer asked her this question about comments she made in a forum of the religious right:
BLITZER: "Gov. Palin, before the election you were speaking with James Dobson of Focus on the Family and you said that you were confident that God would do the right thing for America on Nov. 4th. Did God do the right thing for America?”
PALIN: "I don't know if that was my specific quote. But I do believe that there is purpose in everything. And for me personally I put my life in God's hands and ask him to -- don't let me miss some open door that he has for me, and I'll travel through that. I think the same thing for our nation as we seek God's guidance, his wisdom, his favor and protection over our nation, that at the end of the day, that the right thing is done.
And I do believe that prayers were answered, others who prayed across this nation in the election that this nation would be protected, that we would be safe, that we would be prosperous and favored. I believe that prayer is answered."
First of all, that is her specific quote -- so she is willing even to lie about what she says about God. Second, I wonder what all the people who are without jobs today think about her claim that prayers asking that "we would prosperous and favored" were answered.
Blitzer did his best work in showing the fundamental contradiction between all her sound bite rhetoric about "personal responsibility" and her support of the Wall Street bailout during the election. And he really exposed her inability to think on her feet when he asked as a followup if we should also bail out the auto and other industries.
Each jumbled phrase of her answer -- she doesn't speak in actual sentences most of the time -- seemed to contradict the one that came before.
As for King, give him credit, time after time, he told her in a nice way that she had not answered his question and politely asked her to answer it.
And each time she lied about "wishing" she could have done "more interviews" during the election, Blitzer and King reminded her that CNN was non-stop in its requests for such interviews -- and that she was non-stop in denying them. She even went so far as to blame McCain and his handlers for not letting her speak -- another contradiction that belies what she calls her "love" of her former running mate.
Memo to Matt: See, it's not that hard -- all it takes is a little preparation and a commitment to informing the viewer not kissing up to the person you are interviewing. One job of journalism is to expose public liars -- not give them a bigger and bigger forum in which to spread them.
(Above: Anchorage Daily News photo of Sarah Palin by Bill Roth)
Comments
Who are all these hostile folks who commented on your last post about that wacky palin? I was so glad you nailed the fawning interviews of Matt Lauer and Van Sustern. I couldn't agree with you more. I started to watch the Larry King interview last night but just couldn't bear to hear Sarah Palin talk once again without saying anything. Now I wish that I had; at least Larry King had some sense. By the way, I don't usually post on these blogs but I thought you should know that there are people out here that completely agree with you in spite of some of those nasty responses I see you getting. Hang in there!
Posted by: Donna | November 13, 2008 10:12 AM
you are secretly in love with sarah palin. you are obsessed with this. does your wife know?
Posted by: brandon | November 13, 2008 10:46 AM
Thanks for this piece.. It seems to me that the "mainstream media" is afraid of Sarah and don't want to be on her "hate" list. Because we all know that's a scary place to be.
Sarah is still bashing Couric who actually had the courage to ask some questions about her beliefs, credintials, policies,etc. Now, Sarah is on her goodwill tour and the "media" just gives her air time to promote herself.
How about some tough questions, how about some follow up questions when Sarah isn't telling the truth. How about holding her accountable instead of letting her control the interview--making it a PR event?
Posted by: Kari | November 13, 2008 10:47 AM
Nice that you didn't bring up how every single media outlet never once asked hard questions of the Democratic community leader running for president. There wasn't a single real question posed to him about any controversial. And you are going to commend Katie Couric for asking tough questions to someone whom you are clearlly against. Where is the criticism of the cup cakes Baraq Obama recieved? Where is the criticism of the obvious media bias toward the Dems and Baraq Obama. Of course you won't metion that because you are part of the problem. I don't think I would bite off the hand that feeds me either.
At least Matt Lauer had enough professionalism to deliver the same type of interview to both sides, even if it was not as probing as you would have liked.
Posted by: Jeff | November 13, 2008 11:27 AM
"First of all, that is her specific quote -- so she is willing even to lie about what she says about God. Second, I wonder what all the people who are without jobs today think about her claim that prayers asking that "we would prosperous and favored" were answered."
The answer is that all those people are going to be just fine. All those people that don't have jobs are now going to get handouts from the Democratic Congress and Baraq Obama. Why should they work when Baraq Obama is going to take care of them regardless. Hope you can sleep well knowing that your income will be going to keep people in poverty and incentivising joblessness.
Posted by: Jeff | November 13, 2008 11:33 AM
You lose all credibility when you accuse SP of lying and you use a specific quote, while you give Obama a free pass on his "I will meet with the Iranian leader WITHOUT pre-conditions". statement. Obama weasled, twisted and contradicted himself into a different position every time it came up. Where were you when Obama said he won't turn his back on his friend, Reverand Wright and then did. You seem to value Sarah Palin's comments about her God more than the President-elects waivering on committments over REAL POLICY ISSUES for the US. Unreal Z. This scrutiny for Sarah Palin which is left behind the door for Obama is wrong and you should be ashamed.
Posted by: eddiebees | November 13, 2008 11:37 AM
Why keep even bothering to interview her and give her the opportunity to lie and spin? The latest was the press was in-fact fair in questioning her, this after a non-stop whine-fest about the liberal 'gotcha' media not being fair to her.
The press is bending so far over backwards to make sure everyone seems them being 'nice' to Palin that they aren't calling the b.s being thrown in their face time and time again.
Posted by: David | November 13, 2008 11:45 AM
How does asking Palin to answer a question about God and this election help our economy, protect us from terrorists, etc.? There are more important things to worry about. Blitzer should feel embarassed that he has to stoop that low to help his ratings. The only thing worse than that is blogging about it...
Posted by: Chris | November 13, 2008 12:03 PM
No no...please let this nut job keep talking, lying, contradicting and ultimately burying herself on a daily basis. She is everything that I had surmised she is, after seeing the few solid interviews that she blundered into before they realized she was out of her depth. Then her stumping ala Goebbels, circa 1933-1938, during the ensuing weeks, further confirmed it for me. Ultimately she is naive, dumb, uncultured and ultimately harmless but nothing could be better than this run...it's like watching Tina Fey perform every night.
Posted by: Ken Hartman | November 13, 2008 12:33 PM
I'm glad David has finished his weeklong orgasm, enjoyed a cigarette and gotten back to the impartial, unbiased journalism for which we've come to know and trust the Sun. If I hadn't read this blog with my own eyes over the last few weeks I would not have believed it. Who asked Barack a difficult question about Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers or how a half-term Senator is qualified to be Commander in Chief? Go on, I'm waiting ...
Posted by: jmr | November 13, 2008 12:50 PM
Is there a contest going on between Z and Reimer to see who is most afraid of Palin?
Posted by: MD4palin | November 13, 2008 1:02 PM
"David Zurawik's Scorecard:
No. of Ratings: 10
Range 1-5
Average Easiness: 3.8
Average Helpfulness: 4.8
Average Clarity: 5.0
Hotness Total: 0
Overall Quality: 4.9 "
Here is his problem. Goucher College students gave Z a big fat "0" in hotness. Palin gets a 10.
Posted by: md4palin | November 13, 2008 1:06 PM
"... when you are dealing with a look-at-me, win-at-any-cost narcissist like Palin ... "
Whuh? You know nothing about Palin personally or her record in Alaska. You seem to be projecting an East Coast creation of your own imagination on to a woman widely admired by the residents she governs.
Posted by: Mediaskeptic | November 13, 2008 1:06 PM
Z
You have more patience than me (even if you get a paycheck to ease the pain) in that you have sat thru all of these Sarah Palin odes to non-self improvement. Since you've done this, I must ask you-did anyone ask her how she feels in her oh-so-christian heart about the Secret Service noting a strong spike in death threats vs the President-Elect after her "pallin around with terrorists" nonsense began?
Till someone asks that and follows up on her first nonsensical answer and Palin owns her large part in stirring hatred in such an un-Christian manner, I don't want to hear a word she says and hopes the country gets over their obsession with her.
Posted by: Tony Joe From Baltimore | November 13, 2008 1:11 PM
David, I googled Larry King / Palin & your article came up...OMG you are terrible!! Believe me I will not Clck on the Z article anymore!
Posted by: dental | November 13, 2008 1:24 PM
Palin also lied to Lauer about Couric's "up their in Alaska" question.
http://www.poynter.org/q/?id=A154013
Posted by: dbd | November 13, 2008 1:58 PM
Palin's exact quote, according to a "rough transcript" that I found on the web, is that she is "going to know at the end of the day, putting this in God's hands, that the right thing for America will be done, the end of the day on November 4th." You naturally assume that she is predicting a McCain win. I would suggest to you that what she really wanted to get across, is that she believes that God is in control of all things, that God's will is always done, and therefore, whatever God wants for America is, in His eyes, the "right thing". Wolf obviously framed the question as a gotcha; he wanted to get Palin to have to say that an Obama presidency, since it is God's will, must be the "right thing" for America. In my opinion, she should have tried to explain that those who have faith in God believe that *everything* that happens MUST be the "right thing" simply because it is God's will. But if she HAD said that, you probably would still have called her a liar, because in your opinion the original quote just HAD to be saying that God wanted McCain to win.
I believe there is more than a grain of truth in what the conservative commentators are saying - that in the eyes of feminists (and possibly liberals in general), Palin must be destroyed because her pro-life beliefs set a bad example for feminism i.e. you can't be both pro-women AND pro-life. Isn't that really it, Z? Haven't the feminist organizations proved that fact by their relentless attacks on Palin? Isn't it obvious that NOW is not so much an organization for women as it is an organization for pro-choice women? Isn't it obvious that NOW wants all pro-lifers, regardless of gender, to be considered enemies of the "women's movement"? And on a larger scale, isn't it obvious that liberals, because their greatest source of motivation is hatred of those who disagree with them, instead of trying to debate philosophy or issues, would rather resort to attacks and smears (such as those contained in this blog), and do so much more frequently than conservatives do?
Posted by: Jim | November 13, 2008 2:45 PM
The coming Humiliation of Religion (Christians) Do not misunderstand After the humiliation the real reason for being caught in this net will appear
Interpretations of religion are self rightness because they did not get each block from the Spirit. To do so would be radical.. see www.dnatree.us
Quote:
"Whoever loses his life for my sake and the truth's sake will save it"
Leave = Leave the Struggle
Bitter= As in the bitter vinager given on the cross Viewtopic "There is only YOU, my life, all other obsessions turn bitter.
Humiliation= looking unto Jesus…who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame… Hebrews 12.2 Viewtopic
The humiliation of understanding the least on this planet is to be changed and be seen as a criminal, an outcast, rejected by society placed in the group of theives. Then You find that the world that judged You does not know the "intentions of the heart" of the least of them. This is the path to knowing the heart of God.
Hurricanes, Fires, Christians following a lie and even the LA train crash predicted. www.dnatree.us/new.htm
Posted by: P. S. Spence | November 13, 2008 2:57 PM
Will someone let Sarah Palin know the election is over. I just saw her on CSPAN still talking about Joe the Plumber. She was giving her stump speech to the Govs.
Posted by: whynot | November 13, 2008 4:29 PM
More evidence that newspaper journalism is a dead art in America. The media probably secretly hoped for a McCain/Palin win so they would have something to rant about for 4 years. Instead we'll all have to endure an Obama lovefest.
Posted by: Drew | November 13, 2008 5:04 PM
Sarah Palin has not been really introduced to America. The woman ranting at podiums around the country was a programmed message wearing high end clothes with price tags still attached.
Those who are rabid supporters may dwindle as the handlers and the speech writers are absent, and the real Sarah Palin steps up to the microphone.
For the star gazed, ego driven new interview junky incapable of sentence structure? Follow up questions will be her downfall. No political opponent will bring Sarah obscurity faster.
Good job Wolf and Larry. At some point this woman's hand gestures, filler phrases, lacking in g's at the end, juxtoposition of words, and run of the mouth will become redundant and old even to the most half baked in our society.
Sarah Palin is on her way to irrelevancy. She will fade away as did hoola hoops, "Baby on Board" window signs, and Pet Rocks.
Posted by: Jeanie Schneider | November 13, 2008 9:11 PM
"...that is her specific quote -- so she is willing even to lie about what she says about God."
David - are you even capable of writing an honest sentence about what Sarah Palin says without vitriol? You diminish and disgrace yourself and the institutions you work for with such vicious nonsense. Your hatred and that of many of your sycophants for Palin and the things she represents seems very deep-seated.
For Sarah to say: "I'm not sure if that was my specific quote" was not a lie. What planet are you on, man? It was an obvious attempt to not specifically confirm Blitzer's words back to her without a transcript in front of her. In this world of "gotcha" journalism where every word is parsed and examined from a hundred different angles for every possible unfavorable interpretation, no one speaking publicly can trust a journalist to 'get it right.' You are an excellent example of that.
Palin was not trying to avoid Blitzer's question. She was speaking about the sovereignty of God.
Posted by: JimM | November 15, 2008 6:24 AM
Hey MD4Palin, you're right Z and Coutice and Reimer and King and the rest of the world should be afraid of Palin! Ever hear of the expression, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing"? Well palin has very little about anything except popping out babies, thinking that God is on her side and if your own her side then God surely is on yours as well. Ha! You're the kind of brain dead person who woould vot for Hitler if he said he held Republican values, you know like waging way, incading countries for gain, allowing your daughter to get knocked-up and saying its okay, and shooting animals from a heliocopter for sport. If you haven't figgured it out, dumbass those aren't values and virtues, just the opposite.
I'm sure while Lee Atwater was watching the election in Hell with the devil he was pleased to see that, yes evil does live on and the good is interred in our bones.
JB
Posted by: jb hanson | November 15, 2008 8:30 AM