Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War' --9/12/2008

1. Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War'
Charles Gibson's interview with Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, the first since her selection, not surprisingly focused mostly on pressing her to prove she's qualified for the job and quizzing her about foreign policy issues. He suggested her willingness to unhesitatingly accept John McCain's offer demonstrated "hubris" and he delved into what he described as her "provocative comments" on the Iraq war being part of "God's plan." When he seemingly caught her unaware of the definition of the "Bush Doctrine," he outlined its tenets without embarrassing her, yet he also veered close to condescension in asking if she had "ever travel[ed] outside the country" and: "Have you ever met a foreign head of state?" Gibson began the World News excerpt with what he termed "the central question," namely: "Can you look the country in the eye and say 'I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just Vice President, but perhaps President?'" Gibson paraphrased her as saying "our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." He demanded: "Are we fighting a holy war?" Unconvinced by her answer about how she only meant, as Lincoln urged, "let us pray that we are on God's side," Gibson pounced: "But you went on and said, 'There is a plan and it is God's plan.'" He soon followed up again: "Are you sending your son on a task that is from God?"

2. Part 2: Gibson Pushes Palin to Concede Global Warming 'Man-Made'
ABC's Charles Gibson pressed Sarah Palin repeatedly, in a fresh interview excerpt aired on Thursday's Nightline, to cry uncle and concede global warming is "man-made" -- but even when she did he wasn't satisfied and pushed for more of a mea culpa. Gibson presumed not believing global warming is "man-made" is some kind of shameful oddity as he wondered: "Do you still believe that global warming is not man-made?" Palin offered that "I believe that man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming," but that wasn't enough for Gibson, who held up John McCain as the oracle and lectured: "But it's a critical point as to whether or not this is man-made. He says it is. You have said in the past it's not." To which Palin promised "John McCain and I are gonna be working on what we do about it." Still not satisfied, Gibson argued: "Yes, but isn't it critical as to whether or not it's man-made, because what you do about it depends on whether its man-made?" Palin repeated herself ("That is why I'm attributing some of man's activities to potentially causing some of the changes in the climate"), which finally led Gibson, "color me a cynic," to gloat "it sounds to me like you're adapting your position to Senator McCain's."

3. ABC's John Berman Suggests Palin Politicizing Son's Iraq Service
On Thursday's Good Morning America, reporter John Berman raised the issue of whether Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was politicizing her son's military service. Observing that Governor Palin would be giving a speech later in the day at a deployment ceremony to send her son off to Iraq, Berman critiqued: "And it [the speech] will be open to television cameras. It's such a drastic difference, from the way her own running mate John McCain handled his own son's deployment." A few seconds later, Berman again referenced the deviations between McCain's son Jimmy, also in the military, and Palin's child. "Jimmy's six-month deployment came and went with hardly any public notice. Why? Because John McCain never mentioned it on the stump." He added: "That stands in stark contrast to what Governor Sarah Palin told more than 40 million viewers about her son during the Republican convention last week."

4. Barbara Walters: Palin 'Had Such a Glorious Ride with the Media'
What media outlets are the ladies of ABC's The View watching? After Joy Behar the previous day spoke of an alleged media love affair with Sarah Palin, Barbara Walters echoed Joy's charge on Thursday's show. Responding to Joy Behar's statement that a "Bush operative" wrote Palin's speech, Elisabeth Hasselbeck noted the media's double standard in that they never inquired as to who wrote Obama's speech. Barbara Walters then jumped in and exclaimed that Governor Palin has "had a glorious ride with the media." Elisabeth Hasselbeck sarcastically responded: "It was glorious when they attacked her daughter too."

5. Women at McCain-Palin Event 'Recoil' from New York Times Reporter
A New York Times reporter told two women at a McCain rally who considered the paper to be biased: "You have to read the New York Times. Don't just listen to what Bill O'Reilly says." Jennifer Rubin of Commentary magazine had a great on-the-ground report from Wednesday's McCain-Palin rally in Fairfax, Va., in which an anonymous Times reporter (who could be Elisabeth Bumiller) demonstrated why many Americans don't trust the paper. Rubin was in the designated media area next to "a well-known New York Times reporter" who was trying to get some interviews with the pro-McCain crowd, when Rubin overheard the flustered reporter trying to convince the women, who "recoiled" when they heard she was from the New York Times, to talk to her.

Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and
Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War'

Charles Gibson's interview with Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, the first since her selection, not surprisingly focused mostly on pressing her to prove she's qualified for the job and quizzing her about foreign policy issues. While Gibson certainly treated her with more respect than would have many other national media figures, he did suggest her willingness to unhesitatingly accept John McCain's offer demonstrated "hubris" and he delved into what he described as her "provocative comments" on the Iraq war being part of "God's plan." When he seemingly caught her unaware of the definition of the "Bush Doctrine," he outlined its tenets without embarrassing her, yet he also veered close to condescension in asking if she had "ever travel[ed] outside the country" and: "Have you ever met a foreign head of state?"

Gibson began the World News excerpt, of the session recorded in Fairbanks, with what he termed "the central question," namely: "Can you look the country in the eye and say 'I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just Vice President, but perhaps President of the United States of America?'" When she denied any hesitation about her abilities, Gibson asserted: "Doesn't that take some hubris?" After she cited her energy expertise, he countered: "National security is a whole lot more than energy." He moved on to quizzing her about how, if the U.S. followed her advice to admit Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, "wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?", whether she'd let Israel attack Iran and if she would approve of cross-border raids into Pakistan.

That segment consumed the first ten minutes or so of World News which ended with another interview excerpt in which Gibson paraphrased her as saying in June that "our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." After supporting You Tube video of Palin, Gibson demanded: "Are we fighting a holy war?" Unconvinced by her answer about how she only meant, as Lincoln urged, "let us pray that we are on God's side," Gibson pounced: "But you went on and said, 'There is a plan and it is God's plan.'" He soon followed up again: "Are you sending your son on a task that is from God?"

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Thursday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Plugging that second segment after the first one, Gibson declared: "Governor Palin made some provocative comments about the war in a recent appearance at an Alaskan church."

This first interview was dedicated to national security. A second session, to be/which has been done since the first one will deal with other topics and these and other excerpts will air on Thursday's Nightline as well as Friday on Good Morning America, World News and 20/20.

ABCNews.com has posted a story about the interview, with video clip: abcnews.go.com

Another ABCNews.com page has a transcript of much of the interview, including portions which did not air on World News, but is missing some of what aired: abcnews.go.com

Below is my corrected transcript of what ran on the Thursday, September 11 World News.

This first segment aired over about the first ten minutes of the newscast and includes a couple of paragraphs that are not part of the posted transcript and, again, matches the editing of what aired and so does not include all of what ABC posted online:

CHARLES GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you, and it is really the central question. Can you look the country in the eye and say "I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just Vice President, but perhaps President of the United States of America?"
SARAH PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20th, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, we'll be ready. I'm ready.
GIBSON: When McCain asked you to take the number two spot on the ticket, for a moment did you think "no"?
PALIN: I did not. I thought yes right off the bat. When he offered me the position as his running mate, the first thing I said to him was, "If you really think I can help the ticket, if you really think I can help this country," absolutely I want to do this with ya.
GIBSON: And you didn't say to yourself, "Am I experienced enough? Am I ready?"
PALIN: I didn't hesitate, no I-
GIBSON: Doesn't that take some hubris?
PALIN: I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink. So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.
GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage in a very dangerous world. When I asked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact that you have command the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close to Russia. Are those sufficient credentials?
PALIN: But it is about reform of government and it's about putting government back on the side of the people, and that has much to do with foreign policy and national security issues Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energy independence that I've been working on for these years as the Governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy, that I worked on as Chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas developments in our state to produce more for the United States.
GIBSON: National security is a whole lot more than energy.
PALIN: It is, but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It's that important. It's that significant.
GIBSON: Did you ever travel outside the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?
PALIN: Canada, Mexico, and then, yes, that trip, that was the trip of a lifetime to visit our troops in Kuwait and stop and visit our injured soldiers in Germany. That was a trip of a lifetime and it changed my life.
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state.
GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.
PALIN: Sure.
GIBSON: Let's start, because we are near Russia, let's start with Russia and Georgia. The administration has said we've got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
PALIN: First off, we're going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain's running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep-
GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.
PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.
GIBSON: Favor putting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia. Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but-
GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: 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.
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.
GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.
GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agree with that?
PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?
PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme and they are violent and they do not believe in American ideals, and they attacked us and now we are at a point here seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post-9/11 world, where we're able to commit to never again. The only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that all Americans have instilled in us, because we're a democratic, we are a free, and we are a free-thinking society.
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view?
GIBSON: No, the Bush Doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country.
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: As for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, a last option.
GIBSON: But, Governor, I'm asking you: Do we have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government.
PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.
GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes? That you think we have the right to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government, to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?
PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table.

Interview segment at the end of the newscast:

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God."
YOUTUBE VIDEO OF PALIN IN JUNE: 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 them out on a task that is from God.
GIBSON: Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: The reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words. But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was 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. That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.
Today is the day that I send my first-born, my son, my teenage son overseas with his Stryker Brigade, 4,000 other wonderful American men and women to fight for our country, for democracy, for our freedoms.
GIBSON: But you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.
GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?
PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do in serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than self and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

Part 2: Gibson Pushes Palin to Concede
Global Warming 'Man-Made'

ABC's Charles Gibson pressed Sarah Palin repeatedly, in a fresh interview excerpt aired on Thursday's Nightline, to cry uncle and concede global warming is "man-made" -- but even when she did he wasn't satisfied and pushed for more of a mea culpa. Nightline, which made "War, God and Oil" the on-screen header for excerpts from Gibson's interviews, began with a slightly longer version of what World News carried earlier, mostly about foreign policy, followed by new video from a second interview Gibson conducted as the two walked alongside the Trans-Alaska oil pipeline.

Gibson presumed not believing global warming is "man-made" is some kind of shameful oddity as he wondered: "Do you still believe that global warming is not man-made?" Palin offered that "I believe that man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming," but that wasn't enough for Gibson, who held up John McCain as the oracle and lectured: "But it's a critical point as to whether or not this is man-made. He says it is. You have said in the past it's not." To which Palin promised "John McCain and I are gonna be working on what we do about it." Still not satisfied, Gibson argued: "Yes, but isn't it critical as to whether or not it's man-made, because what you do about it depends on whether its man-made?" Palin repeated herself ("That is why I'm attributing some of man's activities to potentially causing some of the changes in the climate"), which finally led Gibson, "color me a cynic," to gloat "it sounds to me like you're adapting your position to Senator McCain's."

Palin, the Republican VP nominee, rejected his premise: "I think you are a cynic because show me where I have ever said that there's absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any affect, or no affect, on climate change?"

Gibson moved on to how Palin and McCain "agree to disagree" on drilling in ANWR. Will Gibson ever push McCain to adapt to Palin's pro-drilling position?

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted late Thursday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Anchor Martin Bashir introduced the program: "War, God and Oil: What does this relative unknown, who soon could be just a heartbeat from the presidency, think about the key issues facing America today?"

ABCNews.com transcript of most of what aired on Nightline from Gibson's second interview with Palin: abcnews.go.com

My earlier NewsBusters post, "Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War,'" with a complete rundown of what aired on Thursday's World News which was from Gibson's first session with Palin -- the same interview with which Nightline started.

What aired on the September 11 Nightline from Gibson's interview with Palin conducted as the two walked beside the oil pipeline near Fairbanks, picking up after Gibson asked her about where her proposed gas pipeline would run:

CHARLES GIBSON: Let me talk a little bit about environmental policy, because this interfaces with energy policy and you have some significant differences with John McCain. Do you still believe that global warming is not man-made?
SARAH PALIN: I believe that man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming, climate change. Here in Alaska, the only arctic state in our union, of course, we see the effects of climate change more so than any other area with ice pack melting. Regardless, though, of the reason for climate change, whether it's entirely, wholly caused by man's activities or is part of the cyclical nature of our planet -- the warming and the cooling trends -- regardless of that, John McCain and I agree that we gotta do something about it and we have to make sure that we're doing all we can to cut down on pollution.
GIBSON: But it's a critical point as to whether or not this is man-made. He says it is. You have said in the past it's not.
PALIN: The debate on that even, really has evolved into, okay, here's where we are now: scientists do show us that there are changes in climate. Things are getting warmer. Now what do we do about it. And John McCain and I are gonna be working on what we do about it.
GIBSON: Yes, but isn't it critical as to whether or not it's man-made, because what you do about it depends on whether its man-made?
PALIN: That is why I'm attributing some of man's activities to potentially causing some of the changes in the climate right now.
GIBSON: But I, color me a cynic, but I hear a little bit of change in your policy there. When you say, yes, now you're beginning to say it is man-made. It sounds to me like you're adapting your position to Senator McCain's.
PALIN: I think you are a cynic because show me where I have ever said that there's absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any affect, or no affect, on climate change?
GIBSON: ANWR. You favor drilling in the Arctic National Refuge. He does not.
PALIN: I sure do.
GIBSON: You changed him on that? He changing you?
PALIN: I'm going to keep working on that one with him. ANWR, of course, is a 2,000-acre swath of land in the middle of about a 20 million-acre swath of land. Two-thousand acres that we're asking the feds to unlock so that there can be exploration and development.
GIBSON: So, you'll agree to disagree on ANWR?
PALIN: That's exactly right. We'll agree to disagree, but I'm gonna keep pushing that, and I think, eventually, we're all gonna come together on that one.

ABC's John Berman Suggests Palin Politicizing
Son's Iraq Service

On Thursday's Good Morning America, reporter John Berman raised the issue of whether Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was politicizing her son's military service. Observing that Governor Palin would be giving a speech later in the day at a deployment ceremony to send her son off to Iraq, Berman critiqued: "And it [the speech] will be open to television cameras. It's such a drastic difference, from the way her own running mate John McCain handled his own son's deployment."

A few seconds later, Berman again referenced the deviations between McCain's son Jimmy, also in the military, and Palin's child. "Jimmy's six-month deployment came and went with hardly any public notice. Why? Because John McCain never mentioned it on the stump." He added: "That stands in stark contrast to what Governor Sarah Palin told more than 40 million viewers about her son during the Republican convention last week."

[This item, by the MRC's Scott Whitlock, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Berman continued to make his point clear by citing John Nagl, a senior fellow at the Center for New America Security. He asserted that the Alaska governor's frequent references to her son's deployment date "impose, conceivably, some risks on the soldier and the unit." The ABC journalist went on to draw contrasts between Beau Biden, son of Democratic vice presidential candidate, and the Palins. (The younger Biden is also being sent to Iraq in the fall.)

Berman insisted: "But many candidates say they don't want to politicize service and have held back on specifics like deployment dates because of safety concerns." Of course, a simple Google search finds many references to Beau Biden's deployment date: October 3, 2008. See this Washington Post item: voices.washingtonpost.com

It seems a bit odd to suggest that speeches by a politician would encourage terrorists to take extra initiative.

A transcript of the segment, which aired at 7:05am on September 11:

ROBIN ROBERTS: And Governor Palin is there in Alaska to attend a deployment ceremony for her son, Private First Class Track Palin, whose army unit is heading to Iraq. In this election, the issue of the Iraq War, a deeply personal one for both the Republican and the Democratic tickets. And our John Berman has more on that now. Good morning.
JOHN BERMAN: Good morning, Robin. You know, Sarah Palin won't just be attending that, she'll be giving a speech. And it will be open to television cameras. It's such a drastic difference, from the way her own running mate John McCain handled his own son's deployment. And it's part of what makes this campaign so fascinating. Three out of the four candidates have sons headed to Iraq or have been there already. Private first class Track Palin. Captain Beau Biden. Both headed to Iraq in the next few weeks.
SENATOR JOE BIDEN [talking to troops]: If any of you get shipped back over, keep an eye out for my son, will you?
BERMAN: Marine Lance Corporal Jimmy McCain has been there already. Jimmy's six-month deployment came and went with hardly any public notice. Why? Because John McCain never mentioned it on the stump. Literally never. That stands in stark contrast to what Governor Sarah Palin told more than 40 million viewers about her son during the Republican convention last week.
GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN: One week from tomorrow, September 11th, he'll deploy to Iraq with the Army infantry in the service of his country.
JOHN NAGL (Senior fellow, Center for New American Security): It is the mark of an enthusiastic mother, I think, and a very proud mother. But it does impose, conceivably, some risks on the soldier and the unit.
BERMAN: There are no military restrictions about what family members can say about their kids. But many candidates say they don't want to politicize service and have held back on specifics like deployment dates because of safety concerns.
NAGL: There's always a risk when you talk about troop movements. There's a risk that terrorists could try to take advantage of the fact that they know when flights are leaving. BERMAN: As for the children themselves, there are some rules. They're not supposed to discuss the details of their missions, which explains Beau Biden's coded speech at the Democratic convention.
BEAU BIDEN: But, because of other duties, it won't be possible for me to be here this fall, to stand by him, the way he stood by me. So, I have something to ask of you. Be there for my dad, like he was for me.
BERMAN: Military officials and analysts tell us the Palin and Biden kids will not get special treatment while overseas. But the one thing that will almost definitely change that is when someone wins the election. They say in this day and age, the military would almost definitely have to take into account the child of a president or vice president in service. Robin?
ROBERTS: Well, of course, we appreciate all of the young men and women who are going over and serving for us. All right, John. Thanks so much.

Barbara Walters: Palin 'Had Such a Glorious
Ride with the Media'

What media outlets are the ladies of ABC's The View watching? After Joy Behar the previous day spoke of an alleged media love affair with Sarah Palin, Barbara Walters echoed Joy's charge on Thursday's show. Responding to Joy Behar's statement that a "Bush operative" wrote Palin's speech, Elisabeth Hasselbeck noted the media's double standard in that they never inquired as to who wrote Obama's speech. Barbara Walters then jumped in and exclaimed that Governor Palin has "had a glorious ride with the media." Elisabeth Hasselbeck sarcastically responded: "It was glorious when they attacked her daughter too."

Sarah Palin's ride with the media has been anything but glorious. In Tuesday's "Worst of the Week" on the "Trashing of Sarah Palin, the MRC's Rich Noyes summarized the media's rough, often unfair treatment of the Alaska Governor: www.mrc.org

[This item, by the MRC's Justin McCarthy, was adapted from the posting on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Barbara Walters dismissed such charges of anti-Palin bias, stating "the easiest thing to do is to blame the media." Curiously, Joy Behar, after essentially accusing Palin of being a Bush mouthpiece, joined Elisabeth Hasselbeck in charging sexism in the media. Behar humorously ended the segment declaring: "I want to be open minded."

At the end of the first segment, after recounting where all of the co-hosts were on September 11, 2001, Barbara Walters, to an applauding audience, credited the Bush administration for keeping America safe for seven years. Joy Behar passively replied, "okay, we'll give him credit."

Relevant portions of the September 11 program:

BARBARA WALTERS: And one more thing because we're very critical, all of us, of different candidates. And the country is very critical of George Bush. And we keep hearing that we're not prepared yet for terrorism. But whatever it is and however it happened, we've been, have not been attacked for seven years. So I think, I think maybe [applause] this is a day to give George Bush a little credit.
JOY BEHAR: Okay, we'll give him credit.
....

BEHAR: Her speech at the Republican Convention was written by a George Bush operative.
ELISABETH HASSELBECK: And who was Barack Obama's speech written by?
BEHAR: I think it was written by him. We all know he's a great speech writer.
HASSELBECK: No, no. Everyone who makes a speech at the convention has someone-
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: So you're saying a George Bush operative wrote Barack Obama's speech too?
BEHAR: No, no, no. All I'm saying is that, let me just finish my point. I'm just saying that so far we've heard her with points that have been basically written by other people. I want to see how she is in an extemporaneous mode.
HASSELBECK: You're going to be blown away. Mark my words there. But I will say that in terms of people's speech writing, it is interesting that people have come after her as a woman having someone write her speech when there have been men and men and men, and layers of men who-
WALTERS: Nobody is coming after her as a woman. Nobody is coming after her as a woman.
GOLDBERG: This is not about that woman.
HASSELBECK: They did it right after her speech.
GOLDBERG: Not at this table. That's not what we're doing at this table.
HASSELBECK: No, no. I'm saying that the media went after her right after the speech, one of the first things they said was-
WALTERS: The media! This woman has had such a glorious ride with the media.
HASSELBECK: It was glorious when they attacked her daughter too.
SHERRI SHEPHERD: They went after Hillary too.

....

WALTERS: It's so easy, and maybe I feel this having done interviews with so many candidates. The easiest thing to do is to blame the media. It's sexist, it's that. You know, the woman had, the woman has captured the attention of this country and she does have a magnetic one to fill.
BEHAR: Yeah, but Barbara-
WALTERS: But, but, but, but what I'm saying is when you say the media and it's sexist. I'm so tired of everything being sexist. You know what? It really isn't. [applause]
HASSELBECK: Wait a minute.
BEHAR: Wait, wait, wait.
HASSELBECK: We were all over the media and we were on Hillary Clinton-
BEHAR: Let me say it. Everybody said it was sexist against Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton got the, got the wrap and Sarah Palin is in the position now to get a pass because some of the things they are saying are sexist. Give her the- give it to her. Give her the pass because she is a woman. She is a hockey mom. She does hunt. She does a lot of stuff that I don't relate to.
WALTERS: She's being praised.
BEHAR: Fine, some people like that Barbara.
WALTERS: I just don't want to give labels, it's the fault of the media, or it's sexism.
BEHAR: But we did it to Hillary. We can do it for Sarah.
WALTERS: That's true and I'm not sure it was sexist with Hillary.
BEHAR: A lot of it was, a lot of it. A lot of it was. And maybe some of this is too. We have to be opened minded. I really want to be open minded.

Women at McCain-Palin Event 'Recoil'
from New York Times Reporter

A New York Times reporter told two women at a McCain rally who considered the paper to be biased: "You have to read the New York Times. Don't just listen to what Bill O'Reilly says." Jennifer Rubin of Commentary magazine had a great on-the-ground report from Wednesday's McCain-Palin rally in Fairfax, Va., in which an anonymous Times reporter (who could be Elisabeth Bumiller) demonstrated why many Americans don't trust the paper. Rubin was in the designated media area next to "a well-known New York Times reporter" who was trying to get some interviews with the pro-McCain crowd, when Rubin overheard the flustered reporter trying to convince the women, who "recoiled" when they heard she was from the New York Times, to talk to her.

[This item is adapted from a Thursday posting, on te MRC's TimesWatch site, by Clay Waters: www.timeswatch.org ]

An excerpt from the September 10 posting on Commentary magazine's blog:

When she told two middle-aged ladies that she was from the Times they recoiled. She breathlessly assured them that "editorial has nothing to do with the news." They stared blankly. She grabbed a copy of the Grey Lady from her bag, as if to point out that there were different pages for opinion and news. They looked skeptical. She pressed on, "Do you read the New York Times?"

One of the ladies meekly replied, "I read about the New York Times." I began to chuckle softly. She turned, "Who do you write for? Why are you laughing?" I began to respond that her line was likely not effective with this crowd, but she interrupted, "I do this all the time." She then turned to her interviewee (who was now on the receiving end of a painful sales pitch) and continued, "You have to read the New York Times. Don't just listen to what Bill O'Reilly says."

END of Excerpt

For the blog post: www.commentarymagazine.com

Bumiller's story in Thursday's Times on the rally only quoted one "real" person in the crowd, a man. The incredibly awkward metaphor that appeared in Bumiller's Wednesday evening online post was retained in the print version: "For now, Mr. McCain seems a happy captive in a hijacked campaign. Before Ms. Palin joined the ticket, he typically attracted crowds in the low hundreds for what his own aides admit were at times soporific events." See: www.nytimes.com

-- Brent Baker