On 20/20, Gibson Aggressive w/ Palin on Taxes, Abortion and Guns --9/15/2008

1. On 20/20, Gibson Aggressive w/ Palin on Taxes, Abortion and Guns
In portions of Charles Gibson's third interview with Sarah Palin aired on Friday's 20/20 and Nightline, but not earlier on World News, Gibson demanded to know why she and John McCain "keep saying" Barack Obama will raise taxes when he says he won't, followed up her wish that Roe v Wade be overturned by -- in a question left out of the ABCNews.com transcript -- contending "it's a critical issue for so many women. You believe women should not have that choice?" and after Palin expressed support for gun rights, he asserted "we spend billions of dollars a year every year treating people who are victims of gun violence" and pleaded, as if more gun control is the only solution: "Nothing we can do about that?"

2. Gibson: Economy 'Sick,' Makes Palin Affirm Conservative Views
In Charles Gibson's third interview session with Sarah Palin, conducted at her home in Wasilla and featured on Friday's World News, Gibson asserted "we've got a very sick economy," pressed her to list how she'd change Bush economic policy, insisted she concede "it's now pretty clearly documented you supported that bridge before you opposed it" (and to defend Alaska's continued earmark requests), all before he ran through several social issues -- from abortion to guns -- forcing her to state positions Gibson certainly realized would cement her to ideologically conservative positions seen as extreme by many of his viewers. "Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?...John McCain would allow abortion in cases of rape and incest. Do you believe in it only in the case where the life of the mother is in danger?...Would you change and accept it in rape and incest?"; "Embryonic stem cell research, John McCain has been supportive of it"; "Homosexuality, genetic or learned?"; and "Guns: 70 percent of this country supports a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. Do you?"

3. Gibson Advanced to Palin What Hume Calls an Obama 'Dishonesty'
Speaking of "dishonesty" in McCain's TV ads, on Fox News Sunday Brit Hume pointed out Barack "Obama goes around claiming he's going to cut the taxes of 95 percent of the public, which is literally impossible" since "40 percent of American taxpayers don't pay any income tax," but that hasn't stopped ABC (directly) and CBS (implicitly) in recent days from advancing that Obama claim as fact. Charles Gibson, in his third interview session with Sarah Palin excerpted on Friday's 20/20 and Nightline (see earlier NB item), stated that Obama will extend the "Bush tax cuts on everything but people who own or earn more than $250,000 a year -- cuts taxes on over 91 percent of the country." On Tuesday's CBS Evening News, Anthony Mason looked at how the Obama and McCain tax plans would impact three Ohio families, including Charles and Joi Beacham who earn $32,000. Mason asked them: "In terms of taxes, what do you want from the next President?" Joi, a school teacher with an astounding level of chutzpah, replied: "Relief." Chutzpah because the Beachams paid no taxes in 2007.

4. In 2007 Interview, ABC's Gibson Greeted Obama With Softballs
Nearly a year ago, when the inexperienced presidential candidate Barack Obama sat for his first interview with Charles Gibson, the ABC anchor did not try and expose any gaps in Obama's foreign policy knowledge or press him about his readiness for the job he was seeking. Instead Gibson emphasized Obama's personal story, about how his parents met, how Obama met his wife, etc. But just as he did with his Thursday night interview with GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, Gibson did ask Obama about the "hubris" he displayed in seeking the presidency. Here's the exchange from the November 1, 2007 World News interview, which Gibson started off by pointing out how Obama began thinking about himself as President while attending Harvard Law school.

5. Gibson Didn't Pound Edwards in '04; Asked If Attacks Made Him Mad
As Charles Gibson interviewed young vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin, some might wonder: did Gibson (then a co-host of Good Morning America) throw tough foreign-policy questions at John Edwards in 2004, since he had only four and a half years experience in public office? No. Gibson's first John Edwards interview after he was nominated for Vice President came on the September 2, 2004 Good Morning America, on the Thursday morning of the Republican convention in New York. Gibson didn't ask any quiz questions about his readiness or about foreign policy. Instead, he asked six questions about how the Democrats would respond to the GOP going after the Democrats "hammer and tong last night." Gibson merely asked Edwards how he felt about it, and then demanded to know: "You speak with such equanimity this morning. Didn't they make you mad last night?" Edwards replied in part: "Oh, I thought they were over the top, completely over the top." Gibson repeated: " Did you get mad, though?"

6. Most of Washington Post's Biden Tax Story Devoted to Palin
Democratic VP nominee Joe Biden's Friday release of his tax returns embarrassingly revealed, according to a Bloomberg item in Saturday's Boston Globe, that Biden and his wife have, over the past ten years, donated a piddling "two-tenths of 1 percent" of their income to charities, but Saturday's Washington Post article didn't mention that and instead allocated six of ten paragraphs to how "progressive groups...want to determine whether [Sarah] Palin skirted tax obligations." (In the middle of a paragraph deep into its story, Saturday's New York Times reported the mere "$995 in gifts to charities" by the Bidens in 2007, but made no further note of it.)

7. CBS Channels Liberal Fretting Over Obama: 'Where's the Fight?'
With "Where's the Fight?" on screen under video of a man in New Hampshire who pushed Barack Obama ("When and how are you going to start fighting back?"), Katie Couric teased Friday's CBS Evening News: "Supporters of Barack Obama are frustrated and letting him know it." Couric set up the story by highlighting how "an Obama campaign official sent out a memo saying 'today is the first day of the rest of the campaign,' and vowing to take the fight to John McCain. But Dean Reynolds reports the new edge Obama tried out today wasn't sharp enough for some of his supporters." Indeed, Reynolds, who soon asserted that "many think" McCain's ads are "lies," began his piece by showcasing the one questioner: "At a stop in New Hampshire today, Glenn Grasso of Dover asked Barack Obama a question on the minds of many Democrats." Grasso pleaded: "When and how are you going to start fighting back against attack ads and the smear campaigns?" After a clip of Obama insisting "our ads have been pretty tough," Reynolds focused on how "the audience here was clearly expecting more" and "what bothers many Democrats is what happened next. The audience literally coaxing a word from him that baldly describes what many think of the McCain camp's tactics." Viewers then heard a man in the audience yell "lies!" before Obama endorsed his word.

8. Newsweek on MSNBC: McCain 'Down & Dirty' So Obama Must Fight Back
Newsweek reporter Suzanne Smalley declared on MSNBC shortly before 1 PM EDT Friday afternoon that "over the past few weeks, the McCain campaign has really gotten down and dirty. A lot of their ads have been flat-out lies." So, she pleaded: "Obama needs to really take the steering wheel back. Many Democrats in Washington are worried."

9. CBS's Smith Adamantly Denies Giuliani's Charge of Pro-Obama Bias
On Friday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith talked to Rudy Giuliani about Sarah Palin's performance in an interview with ABC's Charlie Gibson on Thursday's World News and Giuliani observed: "The whole issue of whether she knows world affairs or not, these are questions that were never asked of Barack Obama, never asked of him to this day." A visibly upset Smith vigorously denied such a bias: "That's not true. That's not true." Giuliani continued: "To this day he hasn't been asked these questions, about travel-" Smith kept up his defense: "That's not true. That is absolutely not true...That is absolutely not true. Those -- all those questions have been asked over the last 19 months." Giuliani got in the last word: "I don't know where." Despite Smith's assertions that Obama has been pressed on his foreign policy credentials, since October of 2007, Smith has interviewed Obama eight times and asked the less than one-term Senator a total of two foreign policy questions.

10. Washington Post Slaps Palin's Wasilla for Typical Suburban Sprawl
In a Sunday Washington Post hit piece on Sarah Palin, "As Mayor of Wasilla, Palin Cut Own Duties, Left Trail of Bad Blood," reporter Alec MacGillis took this inadvertently humorous shot at the growth of Wasilla during her years as Mayor, an observation that could be made just as well about many booming suburban and ex-urban areas of the lower 48: "The light hand of government is evident in the town's commercial core, essentially a haphazard succession of big-box stores, fast-food restaurants and shopping plazas." Sounds like most of Northern Virginia outside of Washington, DC, or many other areas of the country, most with a pretty heavy hand of government-ruled zoning.

On 20/20, Gibson Aggressive w/ Palin
on Taxes, Abortion and Guns

In portions of Charles Gibson's third interview with Sarah Palin aired on Friday's 20/20 and Nightline, but not earlier on World News, Gibson demanded to know why she and John McCain "keep saying" Barack Obama will raise taxes when he says he won't, followed up her wish that Roe v Wade be overturned by -- in a question left out of the ABCNews.com transcript -- contending "it's a critical issue for so many women. You believe women should not have that choice?" and after Palin expressed support for gun rights, he asserted "we spend billions of dollars a year every year treating people who are victims of gun violence" and pleaded, as if more gun control is the only solution: "Nothing we can do about that?"

As the two sat in Palin's Wasilla home, Gibson scolded her and McCain: "Why do you both keep saying that Obama is going to raise people's taxes? It's been pretty clear what he intends. He's talked about middle-class tax cuts, extending Bush tax cuts on everything but people who own or earn more than $250,000 a year -- cuts taxes on over 91 percent of the country. Why do you keep saying he's going to raise people's taxes?" (See #3 below for how Gibson conveyed an impossible Obama claim.)

Palin retorted: "Well, I would argue with the whole premise of that, that his mission is to not increase taxes. He's had 94 opportunities to either vote for a tax cut or not support tax increases. And 94 times, he's been on the other side of what I believe the majority of Americans want."

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted late Friday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [1] ]

As excerpted on Friday's World News (see CyberAlert item #2 below), Gibson asked: "Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?" Palin affirmed: "I think it should and I think that states should be able to decide that issue." But in a follow up question carried on 20/20 and Nightline, Gibson portrayed Palin as anti-women: "It's a critical issue for so many women. You believe women should not have that choice?"

At another point in the interview as shown on World News, Gibson made the dubious claim that "70 percent of this country supports a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. Do you?" Palin replied: "I do not..." 20/20, however, then played Gibson's thesis: "Isn't gun violence in America a health issue? We spend billions of dollars a year every year treating people who are victims of gun violence. Nothing we can do about that?"

Palin delivered a perfect conservative response: "Do I think that all of that gun violence, though, is caused by people pulling a trigger who would have followed any law anyway? No. You start banning guns and you start taking away guns from people who will use them responsibly and use them ethically. You put more and more laws on guns and you start taking away a Second Amendment right, it's going to be, Charlie, the bad guys who have the guns, not those who are law-abiding citizens."

For the ABCNews.com posted transcript of Gibson's third session with Palin: abcnews.go.com [2]

For the previous rundowns of all three Gibson sit-downs with Palin (part 1 on Thursday's World News, part 2 on Thursday's Nightline, with some of portions 1 and 2 on Friday's Good Morning America), and part 3 as aired on Friday's World News, check:

For part 1: "Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War,'" check the September 12 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org [3]

For part 2: "Gibson Pushes Palin to Concede Global Warming 'Man-Made,'" see another September 12 CyberAlert article: www.mrc.org [4]

For part 3: "Gibson: Economy 'Sick,' Makes Palin Affirm Conservative Social Views," scroll down to #2 below in this CyberAlert.

Gibson: Economy 'Sick,' Makes Palin Affirm
Conservative Views

In Charles Gibson's third interview session with Sarah Palin, conducted at her home in Wasilla and featured on Friday's World News, Gibson asserted "we've got a very sick economy," pressed her to list how she'd change Bush economic policy, insisted she concede "it's now pretty clearly documented you supported that bridge before you opposed it" (and to defend Alaska's continued earmark requests), all before he ran through several social issues -- from abortion to guns -- forcing her to state positions Gibson certainly realized would cement her to ideologically conservative positions seen as extreme by many of his viewers.

On the economy, with the Palin's airplane visible lakeside in the background, Gibson proposed: "John McCain and you are now talking about the GOP as a party of change. We've got a very sick economy. Tell me the three principal things you would do to change the Bush economic policies." Amongst his follow-ups: "Summarize the three things that you'd change in the Bush economic plans." Gibson soon ran through a list of social issue topics:

# "Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?...John McCain would allow abortion in cases of rape and incest. Do you believe in it only in the case where the life of the mother is in danger?...Would you change and accept it in rape and incest?"

# "Embryonic stem cell research, John McCain has been supportive of it."

# "Homosexuality, genetic or learned?"

# "Guns: 70 percent of this country supports a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. Do you?"

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Friday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [5] ]

For my rundowns of the first and second Gibson sit-downs with Palin, which aired on Thursday's World News and Nightline (with some of both on Friday's Good Morning America), check:

For part 1: "Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War,'" check the September 12 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org [3]

For part 2: "Gibson Pushes Palin to Concede Global Warming 'Man-Made,'" see another September 12 CyberAlert article: www.mrc.org [4]

For more of part 3, as aired later on 20/20, scroll up to #1 above in this CyberAlert. Part 1: "Gibson Accuses Palin of 'Hubris' and Seeing Iraq as 'a Holy War'"

Gibson promised tonight's (Friday's) 20/20 would include his questions about "Trooper-gate" and whether she banned books. In a clip at the very end of World News plugging more on 20/20, Palin dismissed the book-banning as an "old wives tale."

Below is the full corrected transcript, for the record, of what aired on the Friday, September 12 World News (9 minute and 3 minute segments) -- with the exception that the show also ran a bite of Palin, as she and Gibson stood by her seaplane, telling Gibson that Barack Obama now probably "regrets" not picking Hillary Clinton.

(The ABCNews.com posted interview transcript of Gibson's third session with Palin is in a different topic sequence and includes portions not aired on Friday's World News, but ran on 20/20: abcnews.go.com [6] )

CHARLES GIBSON: Governor, John McCain and you are now talking about the GOP as a party of change. We've got a very sick economy. Tell me the three principal things you would do to change the Bush economic policies.
SARAH PALIN: And you're right, our economy is weak right now and we've got to strengthen it, and government can play an appropriate role in helping to strengthen the economy. Our 6.1 percent unemployment rate is unacceptable, also, across our nation. We need to put government back on the side of the people and make sure that it is not government solely looked at for all the solutions, for one.
Government has got to get out of the way, in some respects, of the private sector, being able to create the jobs that we need, jobs that are going to allow for the families to be able to afford health care, to be able to afford their mortgages, to be able to afford college tuition for their kids. That's got to be the principal here, reform government, recognize that it's not government to be looked at to solve all the problems. Taxes, of course, I think is one of the most important things that government can obviously control and to help with this issue.
GIBSON: What you said to me at the beginning I don't think anybody in the Bush administration would disagree with. What do you change in the Bush economic plans?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that we reform the oversight, also, of the agencies, including the quasi-government agencies, like Freddie and Fannie, those things that have created an atmosphere here in America where people are fearful of losing their homes. People are looking at job loss. People are looking at unaffordable health care for their families. We have got to reform the oversight of these agencies that have such control over Americans' pocketbooks.
GIBSON: So let me summarize the three things that you'd change in the Bush economic plans. One, two, three.
PALIN: Reduce taxes, control spending, reform the oversight and the overseeing agencies and committees to make sure that America's dollars and investments are protected.
GIBSON: So let me break some of those down. You talk about spending. How much smaller would a McCain budget be? Where would you cut?
PALIN: We're going to find efficiencies in every department. We have got to. There are some things that I think should be off the table. Veterans' programs, off the table. You know, we owe it to our veterans and that's the greatest manifestation that we can show in terms of support for our military, those who are in public service fighting for America is to make sure that our veterans are taken care of and the promises that we've made to them are fulfilled.
GIBSON: So you'd take military off the table and veterans' benefits. That's 20 percent of the budget.
PALIN: Benefits should be off the table.
GIBSON: Do you talk about entitlement reform? Is there money you can save in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?
PALIN: I am sure that there are efficiencies that are going to be found in all of these agencies. I'm confident in that.
GIBSON: But agencies are not involved in entitlements. Basically, discretionary spending is 18 percent of the budget.
PALIN: We have certainly seen excess in agencies, though, and in -- when bureaucrats, when bureaucracy just gets kind of comfortable, going with the status-quo and not being challenged to find efficiencies and spend other people's money wisely, then that's where we get into the situation that we are into today, and that is a tremendous growth of government, a huge debt, trillions of dollars of debt that we're passing on to my kids and your kids and your grandkids. It's unacceptable.
GIBSON: One of John McCain's central campaign arguments, tenets of his campaign, is eliminating earmarks, getting rid of them. Are you with John McCain on that?
PALIN: I certainly am. And of course the poster child for the earmarks was Alaska's, what people in the lower 48 refer to as the bridge to nowhere. Of course, it was a bridge to community with an airport in southeast Alaska. But that was excessive. And an earmark -- an earmark like that, not even supported necessarily by the majority of Alaskans. We killed that earmark. We killed that project.
GIBSON: But it's now pretty clearly documented you supported that bridge before you opposed it. But you turned against it after Congress had basically pulled the plug on it. Do you want to revise and extend your remarks?
PALIN: It has always been an embarrassment that abuse of the ear form -- earmark process has been accepted in Congress. And that's what John McCain has fought. And that's what I joined him in fighting. It's been an embarrassment, not just Alaska's projects. But McCain gives example after example after example.
And now obviously, Charlie, with the federal government saying, no, the rest of the nation does not want to fund that project. You have a choice. You either read the writing on the wall and understand okay, yes, that, that project's going nowhere. And the state isn't willing to fund that project. So what good does it do to continue to support something that circumstances have so drastically changed? You call an audible, and you deal in reality, and you move on. And, Charlie, we killed the bridge to nowhere and that's the bottom line.
GIBSON: You said you now agree with John McCain that earmarks should be eliminated. The state of Alaska, Governor, this year, requested $3.2 million for researching the genetics of harbor seals, money to study the mating habits of crabs. Isn't that exactly the kind of thing that John McCain is objecting to?
PALIN: Those requests, through our research divisions and fish and game and our wildlife departments and our universities, those research requests did come through that system, but wanting it to be in the light of day, not behind closed doors, with lobbyists making deals with Congress to stick things in there under the public radar. That's the abuse that we're going to stop.
GIBSON: In the time I have left, I want to talk about some social issues.
PALIN: Okay.
GIBSON: Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?
PALIN: I think it should and I think that states should be able to decide that issue. I am pro-life. I do respect other people's opinion on this, also, and I think that a culture of life is best for America. What I want to do, when elected Vice President, with John McCain, hopefully, be able to reach out and work with those who are on the other side of this issue, because I know that we can all agree on the need for and the desire for fewer abortions in America and greater support for adoption, for other alternatives that women can and should be empowered to embrace, to allow that culture of life. That's my personal opinion on this, Charlie.
GIBSON: John McCain would allow abortion in cases of rape and incest. Do you believe in it only in the case where the life of the mother is in danger?
PALIN: That is my personal opinion.
GIBSON: Would you change and accept it in rape and incest?
PALIN: My personal opinion is that abortion allowed if the life of the mother is endangered. Please understand me on this. I do understand McCain's position on this. I do understand others who are very passionate about this issue who have a differing view.
GIBSON: Embryonic stem cell research, John McCain has been supportive of it.
PALIN: You know, when you're running for office, your life is an open book and you do owe it to Americans to talk about your personal opinion, which may end up being different than what the policy in an administration would be. My personal opinion is we should not create human life, create an embryo and then destroy it for research, if there are other options out there. And thankfully, again, not only are there other options, but we're getting closer and closer to finding a tremendous amount more of options, like, as I mentioned, the adult stem cell research.
GIBSON: Homosexuality, genetic or learned?
PALIN: Oh, I don't -- I don't know, but I'm not one to judge and, you know, I'm from a family and from a community with many, many members of many diverse backgrounds and I'm not going to judge someone on whether they believe that homosexuality is a choice or genetic. I'm not going to judge them.
GIBSON: Guns: 70 percent of this country supports a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. Do you?
PALIN: I do not and, you know, here again, life being an open book here, as a candidate, I'm a lifetime member of the NRA. I believe strongly in our Second Amendment rights. That's kind of inherent in the people of my state who rely on guns for not just self-protection, but also for our hunting and for sport, also. It's a part of a culture here in Alaska. I've just grown up with that.

Segment at end of the newscast:

GIBSON: Is it sexist for people to ask how can somebody manage a family of seven and the vice presidency? Is that a sexist question to ask?
PALIN: I don't know. I'm lucky to have been brought up in a family where gender has never been an issue. I'm a product of Title 9, also, where we had equality in schools that was just being ushered in with sports and with equal opportunity for education, all of my life. I'm part of that generation, where that question is kind of irrelevant, because it's accepted. Of course, you can be the Vice President and you can raise a family. I'm the Governor and I'm raising a family. I've been a mayor and have raised a family. I've owned a business and we raised a family.
When people have asked me when I was Governor and I was pregnant, "Gosh, how are you going to be the Governor and have a baby in office, too," and I replied back then, as I would today, "I'll do it the same way the other governors have done it when they've either had baby in office or raised a family." Granted, they're men, but do it the same way that they do it.
GIBSON: When we posted this question on the Internet, we had 15,000 replies within 48 hours and every woman with young children struggles with this question, should I, how can I, will I be able to. And I'm curious to hear you talk just about how you've internalized that.
PALIN: Sure. And I understand what that struggle is, what those internal questions are. I've gone through the same thing over these 19 years from having my first born to today having a newborn. In these 19 years, a lot of circumstances have changed. I stayed home with my son until he was seven years old, had just worked part-time, until I got into full-time employment again when he was seven. I had that choice then and I've had choices, of course, along the way.

Gibson Advanced to Palin What Hume Calls
an Obama 'Dishonesty'

Speaking of "dishonesty" in McCain's TV ads, on Fox News Sunday Brit Hume pointed out Barack "Obama goes around claiming he's going to cut the taxes of 95 percent of the public, which is literally impossible" since "40 percent of American taxpayers don't pay any income tax," but that hasn't stopped ABC (directly) and CBS (implicitly) in recent days from advancing that Obama claim as fact. Charles Gibson, in his third interview session with Sarah Palin excerpted on Friday's 20/20 and Nightline (see CyberAlert #1 above), stated that Obama will extend the "Bush tax cuts on everything but people who own or earn more than $250,000 a year -- cuts taxes on over 91 percent of the country."

On Tuesday's CBS Evening News, Anthony Mason looked at how the Obama and McCain tax plans would impact three Ohio families, including Charles and Joi Beacham who earn $32,000. Mason asked them: "In terms of taxes, what do you want from the next President?" Joi, a school teacher with an astounding level of chutzpah, replied: "Relief." Chutzpah because, as Mason only noted later (and deserves credit for doing so unlike many of his colleagues over the years), the Beachams "paid no taxes in 2007." Nonetheless, Mason proceeded to report how the Beachams would benefit more from Obama than McCain since they "would see no change in their taxes under McCain, but the Obama plan would help them" because they would get refundable credits and thus "receive a check from the government for more than $2,200."

As Hume explained, those who don't pay any income tax will get from Obama's plan "a subsidy. It's hardly a tax cut, it's in fact spending."

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Sunday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [7] ]

Hume was a little off in his 40 percent ratio for "taxpayers" who escape having to pay any income tax, though if you add in those who don't file and/or don't earn enough to require filing with the IRS, you probably get to 40 percent or beyond. A June report from the Tax Foundation listed 32.58 percent of IRS income tax returns for 2005 as "non-paying." See: www.taxfoundation.org [8]

Hume during the roundtable segment of the September 14 Fox News Sunday: "If we're going to get into this question of dishonesty, I mean, Obama goes around claiming he's going to cut the taxes of 95 percent of the public, which is literally impossible. The reason it's impossible is that 40 percent of American taxpayers don't pay any income tax and therefore can't get a tax cut. What they're going to get is a subsidy. It's hardly a tax cut, it's in fact spending."

Hume added, however, "that in the realm of normal exaggeration and hyperbole" of campaigns, "I don't think any of this stuff" -- from McCain and Obama -- "has been too far out of bounds so far."

In the September 9 "Where They Stand" report, CBS's Anthony Mason highlighted three Ohio families earning $32,000, $64,000 and $213,000.

Charles and Joi Beacham from Pataskala, Ohio with three kids, was the $32,000 family. He runs office supply business, she's a teacher. From the story as it aired):

MASON: In terms of taxes, what do you want from the next President?
JOI BEACHAM: Relief. ...
MASON: The Beachams, who remember made $32,000 last year, would see no change in their taxes under McCain, but the Obama plan would help them...The Beachams, who paid no taxes in 2007, would now receive a check from the government for more than $2,200.
JOI: That would be really nice.

Online version of the story: www.cbsnews.com [9]

In 2007 Interview, ABC's Gibson Greeted
Obama With Softballs

Nearly a year ago, when the inexperienced presidential candidate Barack Obama sat for his first interview with Charles Gibson, the ABC anchor did not try and expose any gaps in Obama's foreign policy knowledge or press him about his readiness for the job he was seeking. Instead Gibson emphasized Obama's personal story, about how his parents met, how Obama met his wife, etc.

But just as he did with his Thursday night interview with GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, Gibson did ask Obama about the "hubris" he displayed in seeking the presidency. Here's the exchange from the November 1, 2007 World News interview, which Gibson started off by pointing out how Obama began thinking about himself as President while attending Harvard Law school:

CHARLES GIBSON: So did you think to yourself, 'Barack, what kind of hubris is this that I am thinking about being President?"
BARACK OBAMA: Yes. I think if you don't have enough self-awareness to see the element of megalomania involved in thinking you can be president, then you probably shouldn't be president. I think there's a slight madness to thinking that you should be the leader of the free world.

[This item, by the MRC's Rich Noyes, was posted Friday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [10] ]

That's the only similarity to Gibson's approach to Palin. Gibson sat down with Obama only two months before the Iowa caucuses, when the Illinois Senator was running a strong second to Hillary Clinton in national polls. Yet the questions posed by Gibson at that time struck to the same positive biographical elements that greeted Obama when he first emerged on the national stage in 2004. (For Gibson's approach to Palin, see #1 and #2 above as well as the September 12 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org [11] )

Gibson could have been tougher with Obama, who had already inspired ridicule of his foreign policy acumen by suggesting he would meet hostile heads of state without preconditions.

For details on how the big three broadcast networks showered Obama with good press during the run-up to the Democratic primaries, see the MRC's Special Report: "Obama's Margin of Victory: The Media," at: www.mrc.org [12]

Here's the full transcript of the November 1, 2007 segment on ABC's World News, part of a series of profiles of the leading presidential candidates:

CHARLES GIBSON: Next, the presidential race and our attempt to explore the private side of the candidates, to learn about the events and the influences that have shaped them and brought them to this point in their political careers. So today in our "Who Is?" series, a Democrat relatively new to national politics, Senator Barack Obama.
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA: Every man is either trying to live up to his father's expectations or make up for his father's mistakes. And, you know, in some ways, I'm probably doing both.
GIBSON: Your mom comes from the Pacific Northwest, migrates to Hawaii, goes to college there, right away, meets a dashing young Kenyan, gets pregnant and the result-
OBAMA: That's me.
GIBSON: That's you. (Voiceover) His father got a fellowship to study on the mainland and never came back.
OBAMA: He became sort of a mythic figure. One, one of the great gifts that my mother gave to me was a positive impression of my father despite the fact that he didn't always behave very well towards her or to his family. And so he was gone by the time I was two.
GIBSON: Obama's mother would remarry and take her son to Indonesia for five years. Only once again did he ever see his father, that, when Obama was 10. (to Obama) He didn't care enough to stay.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: How did you internalize that?
OBAMA: My conclusion is that some of my drive comes from wanting to prove that he should have stuck around, that, that I was worthy of his attentions. There's no doubt that his absence had an impact on me. I engaged in a bunch of self-destructive behavior. I drank. I, you know, tried drugs. I didn't take my schoolwork seriously.
GIBSON: It all changed for Obama in his final college years. (to Obama) What flipped?
OBAMA: I like to think that, that at some point, the, the better angels of my nature took control and that I had some sense deep inside me that, you know, I could, I could make a contribution.
GIBSON: For five years out of college, he worked to pay off student loans and was a community organizer in Chicago, which led him back to school, Harvard Law School, and on a summer job, met this young woman. (to Obama) Did you know right away?
OBAMA: I knew I liked her right away. Michelle has this wonderful sense of humor. And I knew that right away, she would get the joke. She knew how I looked at the world and appreciated it.
GIBSON: They have two daughters, Malia and Sasha. At first, Obama was intimidated by the Harvard law students.
OBAMA: You got a sense, these folks are running on nuclear energy and I'm running on, on steam.
GIBSON: But he found he could more than hold his own, finishing first in his class and being editor of the 'Harvard Law Review." He's candid: it was at Harvard he first thought of running for President.
OBAMA: I thought these will be the people who will be leading at some point. And, you know, I feel comfortable within this group, being able to lead.
GIBSON: So did you think to yourself, 'Barack, what kind of hubris is this that I am thinking about being President?"
OBAMA: Yes. I think if you don't have enough self-awareness to see the element of megalomania involved in thinking you can be president, then you probably shouldn't be president. I think there's a slight madness to thinking that you should be the leader of the free world.
GIBSON: You have written, "I learned to slip back and forth between my black and my white worlds." The simple question I guess is in which world do you really belong?
OBAMA: I think it's both. What's interesting is, is how deeply American I feel, considering this exotic background, that, somehow, all this, this amalgam is part of who I am. And t hat's part of the reason I love this country so much.
GIBSON: And you can see extended versions of our 'Who Is?" series, which will ultimately include all the presidential candidates, at ABCNews.com.

Gibson Didn't Pound Edwards in '04; Asked
If Attacks Made Him Mad

As Charles Gibson interviewed young vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, some might wonder: did Gibson (then a co-host of Good Morning America) throw tough foreign-policy questions at John Edwards in 2004, since he had only four and a half years experience in public office? No.

Gibson's first John Edwards interview after he was nominated for Vice President came on the September 2, 2004 Good Morning America, on the Thursday morning of the Republican convention in New York. Gibson didn't ask any quiz questions about his readiness or about foreign policy. Instead, he asked six questions about how the Democrats would respond to the GOP going after the Democrats "hammer and tong last night." Gibson merely asked Edwards how he felt about it, and then demanded to know: "You speak with such equanimity this morning. Didn't they make you mad last night?" Edwards replied in part: "Oh, I thought they were over the top, completely over the top." Gibson repeated: " Did you get mad, though?"

[This item, by the MRC's Tim Graham, was posted Friday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [13] ]

Edwards appeared that morning on ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC. At the time, CyberAlert reported: "After being the most critical of last night's Republican speeches...ABC's Charles Gibson was the gentlest with Edwards, sticking largely to questions about the candidate's feelings. He asked if the Democrats went too easy 'not to engage as directly' in Boston....On CBS, Edwards stammered as Hannah Storm demonstrated a surprisingly hard-news approach, asking for Kerry-Edwards specifics" on counter-terrorism policy. For the September 2 CyberAlert PM edition: www.mrc.org [14]

The Gibson interview -- or lecture about how the Democrats failed to whip Republicans hard enough -- began with this introduction:

CHARLES GIBSON: In the first half-hour, we talked about how direct were the attacks from the Republicans on the podium last night, directed at the Democratic ticket of John Kerry and John Edwards. A response this morning from John Edwards, the vice-presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. I talked with him a few moments ago.

GIBSON: Senator Edwards, they went at you hammer and tong last night from the podium here at this Republican Convention, saying the fundamental security of this country was at stake in this election, questioning John Kerry's ability to be commander in chief. I wonder how you felt as you listened.
JOHN EDWARDS: I thought there was an enormous amount of anger coming out of the Republican Convention. The contrast couldn't have been more dramatic with our convention and what John Kerry and I talked about. We talked very specifically about our plan to keep the American people safe, to deal with the fact that five million people have lost their health insurance while John, while George Bush has been in office. That four million people have fallen into poverty and almost two million people have lost their private sector jobs, and what we're gonna do about the war in Iraq. Instead, what we heard last night was a lot of angry rhetoric.
GIBSON: Did it make you in any way second-guess the decision at the Democratic Convention not to mention George Bush from the podium so often, not to engage as directly?
EDWARDS: No. In no way. The truth is that what John and I did at the, at the Democratic Convention, which is to portray a vision and a plan of hope and optimism, it's who we are. It's what I believe the American people are, Charlie. I mean, if the American, the American people are not represented by what we heard in that room last night. I mean, that sort of anger and personal diatribe. I mean, they want something better. They believe in something better. They believe, in fact, what John and I believe, that if we're sensible and smart, that tomorrow can be better than today. And that's the kind of America that John and I want to create.
CHARLES GIBSON: You have used this line about two Americas and they have turned that from the podium night after night after night, saying, A, that there aren't two Americas, and, B, that what's really there are two of, two John Kerrys. And they get into this theme about John Kerry's conflicting votes on various issues. How are you going to answer that?
JOHN EDWARDS: Oh, very simply. They're in New York poking fun at, at the fact that there are two Americas and out here in the real world, I mean, I've been out on, meeting with people, meeting with folks who have lost their jobs. These people -across the country, they're living it. I mean, these people who have lost their, millions of folks who have lost their health insurance and whose incomes have gone down, they can't pay their bills anymore, they're struggling everyday just to get by. The millions of people who have fallen into poverty. A lot of folks who've worked hard all their lives and now have nowhere to turn. I mean, the truth is, we can do better than that, and they can make all the fun about it they want in New York, but out here in the real world, people are living it and we have a plan to make their lives better and we're going to fight for these folks.
GIBSON: This crowd was chanting "flip-flop" last night. It is this elemental issue that they're trying to make that there are two John Kerrys, citing his conflicting votes on a number of issues.
EDWARDS: Yeah, but the truth is, Charlie, I know this guy. I know him very, very well. He's somebody who's an American hero, which is actually what Zell Miller said just a couple of years ago. He's somebody that all of us look up to and respect. He's got inner strength and courage and these, these are the kinds of personal negative attacks that you see when you've got the kind of record that this administration has. I mean, the facts are overwhelming about what's happened in this country in the last four years, and what's happening on the ground in Iraq right now, and the American people are looking for an alternative and we want them to know what it is specifically we would do differently.
GIBSON: You speak with such equanimity this morning. Didn't they make you mad last night?
EDWARDS: Oh, I thought they were over the top, completely over the top. And, and actually what bothered me more than anything was in the midst of -I mean, there was, if you, if you got up and went to your refrigerator to get a Diet Coke, you would -you would miss everything Dick Cheney had to say about health care and everything he had to say about jobs. I mean, this is the first, we've had 11 straight presidents in this country, Charlie, who have created jobs. This is, until George Bush. You know, we've got all these folks who are having trouble with their health care premiums going up, 26, 27 hundred dollars, and what do they have to say about it? Nothing. I mean, don't people deserve to know from their president and vice president what it is they've done and what it is they're going to do? And instead, all we hear is a lot of rhetoric about, about their opponent. I mean, I just think leaders in this country, the American people deserve leaders who are better than that and do better than that.
GIBSON: Did you get mad, though?
EDWARDS: Oh, yeah. I was, I was, especially about the personal attacks against John Kerry, because they're false. I know this guy and I know what he's made of inside and he's ready to lead this country.
GIBSON: John Edwards, good to talk to you. Thanks very much.

Most of Washington Post's Biden Tax Story
Devoted to Palin

Democratic VP nominee Joe Biden's Friday release of his tax returns embarrassingly revealed, according to a Bloomberg item in Saturday's Boston Globe, that Biden and his wife have, over the past ten years, donated a piddling "two-tenths of 1 percent" of their income to charities, but Saturday's Washington Post article didn't mention that and instead allocated six of ten paragraphs to how "progressive groups...want to determine whether [Sarah] Palin skirted tax obligations." (In the middle of a paragraph deep into its story, Saturday's New York Times reported the mere "$995 in gifts to charities" by the Bidens in 2007, but made no further note of it.)

In the Post article, "Biden Releases His Tax Returns," reporters Lyndsey Layton and Matthew Mosk pointed out how Biden is the "poorest" U.S. Senator, and then pivoted to Palin: "The disclosure came as Democrats tried to put increasing pressure on the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, to release her returns. Progressive groups said they want to determine whether Palin skirted tax obligations on about $17,000 in per diem payments she received as part of an arrangement that paid her extra for the nights she stayed in her home in Wasilla instead of the governor's mansion in Juneau, 600 miles away...."

The tenth and last paragraph of the Post story, one I counted as one of the four of the ten about Biden, related Biden back to Palin: "Biden also prefers to sleep in his own bed at night. When the Senate is in session, Biden famously commutes by train between Washington and Delaware. But members of Congress do not receive a per diem."

For the September 13 Post article on page A-3: www.washingtonpost.com [15]

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted early Sunday morning on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [16] ]

The Post gave those "progressive groups" their hook with a very overplayed Tuesday, September 9 front page article, "Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home: Taxpayers Also Funded Family's Travel." See: www.washingtonpost.com [17]

In a Saturday Post "Free for All" section letter (not online), Matthew Raehl of Manassas, Virginia properly mocked the story:

I'd like to propose some alternatives to your sensationalistic headline, "Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home":

"Palin Saves Alaska Tens of Thousands"

"Palin Flies Coach"

"Palin Claimed Less Per Diem than Allowed"

The September 13 Globe story, "Bidens report giving fraction of income to charity," reported:

Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, the Democratic nominee for Vice President, and his wife reported giving a fraction of 1 percent of their income to charity during the past decade, below the national average, tax records show....

Biden and his wife, Jill, earned $319,853 in adjusted gross income and paid $72,787 in federal taxes last year, including $2,721 in alternative minimum taxes. They claimed $995 in deductions for charitable giving, about triple what they deducted in any of the nine previous years. Over the past decade they reported giving an average of $369 to charity....

The Bidens' giving represents a smaller portion of their income than the $353 then-Vice President Al Gore was criticized for donating on an income of $197,729 in 1997.

For The Globe story: www.boston.com [18]

In the Saturday New York Times story, "Biden Releases Tax Returns, in Part to Pressure Rivals," John Broder buried the skimpy charitable donation figure, and cited just one year:

....Mr. Biden's tax returns show why he consistently ranks as one of the least wealthy members of the Senate. He has virtually no outside or investment income and pays a substantial amount in interest on his home mortgage.

For 2007, Mr. Biden and his wife, Jill, paid taxes of $66,273 on an adjusted gross income of $319,853, which included $71,000 in royalties from his book. The couple, who file jointly, claimed $62,954 in deductions, including $995 in gifts to charities and $38,712 in interest payments. They earned $99 in interest on savings accounts and nothing in dividends....

See: www.nytimes.com [19]

CBS Channels Liberal Fretting Over Obama:
'Where's the Fight?'

With "Where's the Fight?" on screen under video of a man in New Hampshire who pushed Barack Obama ("When and how are you going to start fighting back?"), Katie Couric teased Friday's CBS Evening News: "Supporters of Barack Obama are frustrated and letting him know it." Couric set up the story by highlighting how "an Obama campaign official sent out a memo saying 'today is the first day of the rest of the campaign,' and vowing to take the fight to John McCain. But Dean Reynolds reports the new edge Obama tried out today wasn't sharp enough for some of his supporters."

Indeed, Reynolds, who soon asserted that "many think" McCain's ads are "lies," began his piece by showcasing the one questioner: "At a stop in New Hampshire today, Glenn Grasso of Dover asked Barack Obama a question on the minds of many Democrats." Grasso pleaded: "When and how are you going to start fighting back against attack ads and the smear campaigns?" After a clip of Obama insisting "our ads have been pretty tough," Reynolds focused on how "the audience here was clearly expecting more" and "what bothers many Democrats is what happened next. The audience literally coaxing a word from him that baldly describes what many think of the McCain camp's tactics." Viewers then heard a man in the audience yell "lies!" before Obama endorsed his word: "Lies, that's the word I was looking for."

In the next story, a "Reality Check" on inaccuracies in campaign ads, mostly McCain's, reporter Wyatt Andrews concluded by painting Obama as the victim being forced to respond in kind: "McCain has been the aggressor in this slide to negativity, and that is putting pressure on Obama to respond. Either way, this is not the elevated discussion both candidates promised to deliver."

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Saturday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [20] ]

Interestingly, while CBS News (and the Washington Post) found Grasso's question newsworthy -- maybe because it matched the concern of more than a few journalists -- neither of two articles on Saturday in the local Dover, New Hampshire newspaper, Foster's Daily Democrat, mentioned the question:

For "Obama goes after McCain on taxes, economic policy," see: www.fosters.com [21]

For "Obama woos undecided, but some voters still uncertain after visit," see: www.fosters.com [22]

In a Saturday Washington Post story, "Obama Campaign Begins Counterattack," reporter Jonathan Weisman recounted:

Even after being prodded by the audience in Dover, Obama appeared reluctant to get too aggressive. Glenn Grasso, 39, a doctoral student, pleaded: "When and how are you going to start fighting back?"

Obama responded by calling McCain's ads "just fabricated" and "just made up," an answer that spurred some to shout out: "Lies."

"Lies, that's the word," Obama said.

For the September 13 Post story in full: www.washingtonpost.com [23]

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the Reynolds story on the Friday, September 12 CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: Turning to the presidential race, Barack Obama is looking to get his campaign back on track and stop his opponent's momentum. An Obama campaign official sent out a memo saying "today is the first day of the rest of the campaign," and vowing to take the fight to John McCain. But Dean Reynolds reports the new edge Obama tried out today wasn't sharp enough for some of his supporters.

DEAN REYNOLDS: At a stop in New Hampshire today, Glenn Grasso of Dover asked Barack Obama a question on the minds of many Democrats.
GLENN GRASSO, OBAMA SUPPORTER: When and how are you going to start fighting back against attack ads and the smear campaigns?
REYNOLDS: Obama responded that his campaign is running new ads.
BARACK OBAMA: I have to tell you, our ads have been pretty tough.
REYNOLDS: This is the latest, suggesting the 72-year-old McCain is very old school.
CLIP OF AD: He admits he still doesn't know how to use a computer, can't send an e-mail.
REYNOLDS: But after a drum roll of promises that Obama would now toughen his approach, the audience here was clearly expecting more than this.
OBAMA: I just have a different philosophy, and that is that I'm going to respond with the truth. [APPLAUSE] I'm going to respond with the truth.
REYNOLDS: They applauded, but what bothers many Democrats is what happened next. The audience literally coaxing a word from him that baldly describes what many think of the McCain camp's tactics.
OBAMA: You have ads that are based, are just fabricated. They're just made up. And-
MAN IN AUDIENCE: Lies!
OBAMA: Lies, that's the word I was looking for.
REYNOLDS: Obama acknowledged that some of his supporters are getting nervous. They've seen this movie before, as he put it. But his campaign is assuring Democrats that what they will now see is a methodical and well-planned offensive in the 53 days left in this race. Dean Reynolds, CBS News, Concord, New Hampshire.

Newsweek on MSNBC: McCain 'Down & Dirty'
So Obama Must Fight Back

Newsweek reporter Suzanne Smalley declared on MSNBC shortly before 1 PM EDT Friday afternoon that "over the past few weeks, the McCain campaign has really gotten down and dirty. A lot of their ads have been flat-out lies." So, she pleaded: "Obama needs to really take the steering wheel back. Many Democrats in Washington are worried."

Smalley was encouraged, however, by how at Thursday night's National Service Forum "McCain gave Obama a present on a silver platter by talking about the fact that he's divorced from the every day challenges that people in America face. So I think Obama is going to be using that in the coming days."

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Friday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [24] ]

The September 12 exchange with MSNBC host Contessa Brewer's leading question and Smalley's only comment during the short 12:55 PM EDT segment:

CONTESSA BREWER: We saw at the National Service Forum at Columbia University last night Barack Obama and John McCain taking to the stage. Obama shows up having a national service plan, McCain doesn't have a national service plan. Suzanne, that's a big issue, so why not make a campaign ad about that?
SUZANNE SMALLEY: Well Contessa, I think you have to recognize that over the past few weeks, the McCain campaign has really gotten down and dirty. A lot of their ads have been flat-out lies. And Obama needs to really take the steering wheel back. Many Democrats in Washington are worried. There was a meeting yesterday that several high-placed people in the party had with Obama advisers, lots of hand-wringing. I talked to someone who was there and they said, "Look, you know, we think that Palin gave McCain a jolt, but swing voters in states like Ohio will decide on the difference between McCain and Obama." And that's how they're trying to re-frame this race. Really last night McCain gave Obama a present on a silver platter by talking about the fact that he's divorced from the every day challenges that people in America face. So I think Obama is going to be using that in the coming days.

CBS's Smith Adamantly Denies Giuliani's
Charge of Pro-Obama Bias

On Friday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith talked to Rudy Giuliani about Sarah Palin's performance in an interview with ABC's Charlie Gibson on Thursday's World News and Giuliani observed: "The whole issue of whether she knows world affairs or not, these are questions that were never asked of Barack Obama, never asked of him to this day." A visibly upset Smith vigorously denied such a bias: "That's not true. That's not true." Giuliani continued: "To this day he hasn't been asked these questions, about travel-" Smith kept up his defense: "That's not true. That is absolutely not true...That is absolutely not true. Those -- all those questions have been asked over the last 19 months." Giuliani got in the last word: "I don't know where."

Despite Smith's assertions that Obama has been pressed on his foreign policy credentials, since October of 2007, Smith has interviewed Obama eight times and asked the less than one-term Senator a total of two foreign policy questions. The first question came in a December 18, 2007 interview in which Smith asked: "Obama is positioning himself as a candidate for change, particularly on the war. Were you a fan of the surge?" The second question occurred on April 2, 2008: "And there is concern about China's violations of human rights. Should we be a full participant in the Olympic games?"

On July 9, co-host Russ Mitchell hit Obama from the left on the troop surge: "What do you say to those folks out there who are saying 'I voted for this guy because he told me he was going to bring the troops home in 16 months now he says he wants to refine his position.'" None of those questions challenged Obama's qualifications to be President of the United States.

[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Friday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [25] ]

During the Friday segment, Smith went on to ask Giuliani: "Let me ask you this. Do you have every confidence that she's ready to be president in case she needs to be?" However, on February 29, 2008 Smith interviewed Time magazine editor Richard Stengel, on a story in that publication about whether experience really matters in the presidency: "The question of experience dominating the Democratic campaign, does it really matter?...Time Magazine has two articles on the subject, on the issue that hits news stands today. 'Does Experience Matter in a President' and 'The Science of Experience.'" Stengel explained: "...character trumps experience...It's really the way you are as a person. Your temperament, your intelligence, all of those things make up for what you may lack in experience." For how Smith wasn't sure that experience mattered for a President: newsbusters.org [26]

Just prior to Smith's interview with Giuliani, co-host Maggie Rodriguez got reaction to Palin's interview from New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who argued: "I think in that interview she failed the national security threshold test." Smith then quoted Richardson in his first question to Giuliani: " First thing Bill Richardson said was that Sarah Palin failed the national security threshold test." Giuliani chuckled at the Democratic talking point and Smith admonished him: "Don't laugh for a second, just -- I need -- I want to have a serious conversation with you."

Here is the full transcript of the Friday, September 12 segment:

7:00AM TEASER:
HARRY SMITH: Palin unplugged. In her first interview, John McCain's running mate says she's ready for the job.
SARAH PALIN: I answered to him yes, because I have the confidence in that readiness.
SMITH: We'll ask Bill Richardson and Rudy Giuliani how they think she did.

7:01AM TEASER:
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Also ahead this morning, we'll talk about Sarah Palin's first interview, answering questions for the first time about everything from her readiness for the job, to her position and her knowledge on important issues. Ahead this morning, we have two former presidential candidates, one Republican, one Democrat, saying what they thought of the interview. We'll speak with Rudy Giuliani and Bill Richardson ahead this morning.

7:05AM SEGMENT:
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: On the political front this morning, Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has given her first big sit-down interview. CBS News correspondent Nancy Cordes reports from Alaska.
CHARLES GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of this state give you?
SARAH PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.
NANCY CORDES: The first-term governor says she's ready to be vice president and that she didn't hesitate when McCain asked her to join his ticket.
PALIN: I answered him yes, because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink.
CORDES: Palin conceded she has never met a foreign head of state, but argued that's not unusual for vice presidential candidates.
PALIN: 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% of the U.S. domestic supply of energy.
CORDES: On Thursday, Palin addressed 4,000 Alaska-based soldiers about to deploy for Iraq, with her 19-year-old son Track among them, she spoke not just as a governor, but as a proud and nervous mom.
PALIN: Because we're going to miss you. We can't help it. We're going to miss you.
GIBSON: Are you sending your son on a task that is from God?
CORDES: Gibson was referring to these remarks Palin made at an Alaska church.
PALIN: Our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. 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.
CORDES: She also seemed to distance herself from a previous stance where she questioned global warming.
GIBSON: Call 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. Sounds to me like you're adapting your position to Senator McCain's.
PALIN: I think you are cynic, because show me where I've ever said there is absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any effect or no effect on climate change.

RODRIGUEZ: That was Nancy Cordes reporting. We're joined now by New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. He is here to talk to us about what the Democrats thought about the interview. Governor Richardson, good morning.
BILL RICHARDSON: Good morning, Maggie.
RODRIGUEZ: You knew that you were going to disagree with her on issues simply because you're a Democrat and she's a Republican. But partisan policy differences aside, how do you think she handled herself in this interview?
RICHARDSON: Well, obviously, she's smart, she's telegenic, she's a governor, I'm a governor, I think you need executive experience, but I think in that interview she failed the national security threshold test. She didn't seem to know what the Bush Doctrine is, which is the foundation of our foreign policy for the last eight years. She seemed very casual about talking about war with Russia. She was factually incorrect in that many other vice presidential candidates and vice presidents, Cheney, George Bush I, Gore, had foreign policy experience and had met foreign leaders. I also noticed that she agreed with Barack Obama's position on going after the safe havens in Pakistan against the terrorists. John McCain has said that's naive so she's on our side on being tough with the terrorists and going after the Bin Laden's. My conclusion is-
RODRIGUEZ: She has differences -- she has differences with Senator McCain, I mean -- yes, as she said with drilling in ANWR, the global warming question, but isn't that a good thing? Senator Barack Obama said when he chose Joe Biden that he wants someone who will challenge him when he's in the White House.

RICHARDSON: Well, the point is that what you want is a vice president who's going to carry out your views. Yeah, you can challenge him internally, but you can't publicly disagree. And I also disagree with Governor Palin's view that because she has some experience on energy independence, that those are automatic national security credentials. Yes, becoming energy independent has become a national security issue, but the main issues affecting this country are nuclear proliferation, fighting terrorists and I know Governor Giuliani's been very, very strong on that issue. Global warming. Now she seems to be changing her position on global warming. So, look. I think these are factual substantive concerns that I have on the national security front which every vice president should have. They're, you know, a heartbeat away from the White House. And it's important that our national security credentials for that job be part of the qualifications and I saw Governor Palin-
RODRIGUEZ: Barack Obama has more national security qualifications, in your opinion, than Sarah Palin?
RICHARDSON: Absolutely. Senator Obama has traveled. He's a member of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. He has extensive experience in the Senate on foreign policy issues with Senator Luger. He passed a nonprolif -- nuclear proliferation issue bipartisan. He's traveled abroad extensively. Yes, absolutely, dramatically more national security experience and then with Senator Biden, who's been chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, who has specialized in national security for 30 years, yeah, the ticket of the Democrats is substantially stronger on national security.
RODRIGUEZ: Right, Governor Richardson, but Senator -- Governor Palin has Senator McCain, if you want to make the Joe Biden [inaudible] the Republicans will challenge you there. And also, on the travel issue, you and I as Latinos know that Barack Obama has never been to Latin America. Should something arise with Venezuela or Cuba, would he be equipped to handle that?
RICHARDSON: Well, he has been to Latin -- to Mexico, it's true. My hope is that there be a visit to Latin America before the election, but, yeah, clearly, I think what Barack Obama has said on issues that are familiar to you and me as Latinos that he's ready to look at a new policy towards Cuba because the embargo isn't working, but we want the Cuban government to do something. He's ready to deal with the Chavezs of the world, with the North Koreans, by having a dialogue, a tough dialogue, a tough and smart dialogue. Yeah, there is a fundamental difference in approach on foreign policy between Senator Obama and John McCain. John McCain is more of the same and Obama is ready to lead America into a moral, political, and economic leadership that the world wants us to take once again.
RODRIGUEZ: Alright. Governor Bill Richardson, thank you.
RICHARDSON: Thank you.

RODRIGUEZ: Now let's go over to Harry with Rudy Giuliani.
HARRY SMITH: Alright, good morning. Good morning, Mr. Mayor.
GIULIANI: Good morning, Harry.
SMITH: First thing Bill Richardson said was that Sarah Palin failed the national security threshold test. Don't laugh for a second, just -- I need -- I want to have a serious conversation with you.
GIULIANI: Sure.
SMITH: You would disagree because?
GIULIANI: Because first of all, there is no test. And he's making that a test. And she gave an acceptable definition of the Bush Doctrine. The Bush Doctrine can be preemptive war.
SMITH: Did you think she knew what it was, though?
GIULIANI: Well, she explained it's his world view, it's what he -- it's his desire to deal with Islamic terrorism, I think she said on offense. That would be at least an acceptable definition of the Bush Doctrine, which after all is not a formal doctrine anyway. It was kind of a -- I mean I-
SMITH: You think it was a gotcha question?
GIULIANI: Kind of, sure. It's not -- it's kind of like a quiz question rather than a real question.
SMITH: This wasn't-
GIULIANI: She handled the other questions terrific. I mean, the whole question about God. I mean, the way it was presented to her, they left most of her statement out so it was unclear. It sounded like she was talking about God's plan. If you go back to the early part of that, if you play the whole thing, she was talking about discovering God's plan and praying to discover God's plan which is, after all, acceptable Christian doctrine. It's-
SMITH: Here, as I was sitting in my kitchen watching it on the little TV.
GIULIANI: Right.
SMITH: Really wanting to listen and hear every single word, the one thing that gave me pause was when Charlie Gibson says, McCain comes to you and says be vice president. She says I didn't hesitate a second. I've done documentaries on this. People who think about the presidency and vice presidency, this is the most important decision of their lives. How do you not at least have a second when you think 'am I ready for this task?'
GIULIANI: Maybe she got herself ready before. Maybe she knew that John McCain was coming in order to ask that question and didn't want to show hesitation. Abraham Lincoln says that when he was going to sign the Emancipation Proclamation, he stopped. Everybody wondered: 'why did you stop?' He said 'well, I don't want my signature to show any signs of hesitation,' so he stopped and made sure it was a very definitive signature. So I got a sense of that. This is obviously a very decisive woman and gosh, that's what we want in a vice president. We want someone who's got some self-confidence. She's got tremendous experience. The whole issue of whether she knows world affairs or not, these are questions that were never asked of Barack Obama, never asked of him to this day.
SMITH: That's not true. That's not true.
GIULIANI: To this day he hasn't been asked these questions, about travel-
SMITH: That's not true. That is absolutely not true-
GIULIANI: About travel to other countries-
SMITH: That is absolutely not true. Those -- all those questions have been asked over the last 19 months.
GIULIANI: I don't know where.
SMITH: Let me ask you this. Do you have every confidence that she's ready to be president in case she needs to be?
GIULIANI: From everything I've seen. I thought she handled last night's interview about as well as anyone could handle it, even someone who'd been there for about 20 years. And the questions that she's being asked are very, very tough questions. Of course she's in it new, for the very first time, you expect that. But you've got to give here credit for the way she's handling it.
SMITH: Would she have been your choice for vice president?
GIULIANI: I don't know. You know, that's a hypothetical, could she have been? Yes. Would she have been? I don't know the answer to that. No one knows the answer to that until you're actually making a choice.
SMITH: Mayor Giuliani, thanks so much.
GIULIANI: Thank you.
SMITH: For coming in this morning. Do appreciate it.

Washington Post Slaps Palin's Wasilla
for Typical Suburban Sprawl

10) In a Sunday Washington Post hit piece on Sarah Palin, "As Mayor of Wasilla, Palin Cut Own Duties, Left Trail of Bad Blood," reporter Alec MacGillis took this inadvertently humorous shot at the growth of Wasilla during her years as Mayor, an observation that could be made just as well about many booming suburban and ex-urban areas of the lower 48: "The light hand of government is evident in the town's commercial core, essentially a haphazard succession of big-box stores, fast-food restaurants and shopping plazas."

Sounds like most of Northern Virginia outside of Washington, DC, or many other areas of the country, most with a pretty heavy hand of government-ruled zoning.

MacGillis, in the September 14 front page article, saw too little government ("the frontier philosophy") as causing Wasilla to be uglier -- with buildings made of "corrugated metal," hardly unusual anywhere in Alaska -- than the surrounding natural beauty:

Further constraining City Hall's role is the frontier philosophy that has prevailed in Wasilla, a town that was founded in 1917 as a stop along the new railroad from Anchorage to the gold mines further north. The light hand of government is evident in the town's commercial core, essentially a haphazard succession of big-box stores, fast-food restaurants and shopping plazas.

The only semblance of an original downtown is a small collection of historic cabins that have been gathered for display in a grassy area beside a shopping center. Most residents live in ranch houses scattered through the woods. Churches, offices, stores and most other buildings are made of corrugated metal or composite materials. Standing in contrast to the utilitarian architecture are the lakes and majestic peaks.

END of Excerpt

For the article in full from the September 14 Washington Post: www.washingtonpost.com [27]

-- Brent Baker