Contratimes: Good evening. Tonight, ABC News' Charlie Gibson, who just brought us the
first-ever televised interview with Gov. Sarah Palin since her ascendancy to the national spotlight. Mr. Gibson, welcome, and thank you for being with us.†
Charlie Gibson: It's my pleasure.
Contratimes (CT hereafter): I would like to begin with a question you asked Gov. Palin, a question you say you also posed -- in modified form I assume -- to Sen. McCain about his choice for running mate. You asked her, and I quote, "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?'" Mr. Gibson, can
you look America in the eye and say that you asked essentially this same question of Barack Obama?
Gibson: Well, I did not. He was not being interviewed anyway, so --
CT: But it is the "central question," as you said, that's before us: Are the people running for president and vice president capable of doing the job? So I ask, why have you not asked Barack Obama whether he can look America in the eye and honestly say that he's got the experience to be not only vice president, but president?
Gibson: Well, I don't think I need to ask him that. Millions of Americans already accept him as the Democratic Party's nominee. Besides, he has been, first, the editor of the Harvard Law Review --
CT: So you're saying that anyone who has served as the editor of the Harvard Law Review is qualified to be president?
Gibson: No, no, I am not saying that at all. I am saying that when you combine that with his time as a community organizer who --
CT: So you're saying an editor of a law review who has done some community organizing is fit for the presidency?
Gibson (chuckling): Please, that's not what I am saying. I am saying that a
US Senator who has also been an editor of the Harvard Law Review and earned his JD, who came from a career of community organizing and state legislative work has proven himself --
CT: So, what you're saying is that someone who has the relatively limited qualifications of a Barack Obama should not be treated with skepticism by the press, but someone who has actually served as the governor of a state should be subjected to your
a priori skepticism. I mean, there is the barely hidden assumption in your question that she can't look America in the eye without dishonesty or arrogance.
Gibson: I don't think there is that assumption at all.
CT: With all due respect, Mr. Gibson, the question is laden with presumption. It's a When-Did-You-Stop-Beating-Your-Husband? kind of question, loaded to the gills. But let's move on. What did you mean when you said, "Exact words" when Gov. Palin wondered whether a quote you attributed to her was true to what she said?
Gibson: I meant
exactly that they were her
exact words, and they were.
CT: Were her words quoted
exactly like Barack Obama's words are quoted here. Take a listen:
(Barack Obama during a campaign speech: "We want four more years of George Bush." Then, during a recent interview: "You're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.")CT: Those are Barack Obama's
exact words. Did you know he wants four more years of George Bush and that he was a Muslim?
Gibson: Well, it's obvious those words are taken out of context. Obama was probably saying the exact opposite in those clips so I --
CT: But you said that the following were Sarah Palin's, quote, "exact words". Mr. Gibson, you said to Gov. Palin, and I quote, "You said recently, in your old church, 'Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.' Are we fighting a holy war?" But that is only part of what she said; I should think you must be furious with your research staff for getting it so wrong.
This is what she actually said, something that has been widely reported by the way, and I quote:
"Pray for our military. He's [Palin's son Track] going to be deployed in September to Iraq. Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do also what is right for this country--that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
So, it is quite clear Gov. Palin was merely urging people to pray that the right thing would be done. She was not at all suggesting that American was involved in a holy war or that God was on the side of America. So, I am wondering, how could you have been so mistaken?
Gibson: Well I stick with what I said, those are her actual words. And you can see why people might be scared of that sort of extreme language, as it --
CT: You mean scared in the same way as when they hear Barack Obama say he's a Muslim or that he wants four more years of George Bush?
Gibson: No, that is not what I am saying at all, you are putting words in my mouth.
CT: And you've been clipping words from Gov. Palin's. Let me ask you: When you so clearly have her "exact words" wrong, are you actually engaged in journalism, or something else?
Gibson: Look, I am a journalist, so I am engaged in journalism. What else is there?
CT: Well, Mr. Gibson, it seems perfectly obvious that you are engaged in propaganda. To be so wrong about something so simple, and yet present it with the unshakable certainty that you are right -- "exact words" -- must have your viewers at ABC wondering whether you have fallen into the tank for the Democratic Party. But I think we should move on. Were you stumped when Gov. Palin asked you to clarify
your question, which I will quote: "Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?"
Gibson: Well, I wasn't shaken, but clearly she was, which is why she asked me --
CT: But her question was quite shrewd, Mr. Gibson. She appeared to know something you did not. After all, one look at the media reportage and commentary over the last six years reveals that the media continuously reported, and bemoaned, a Bush Doctrine that was always changing. News and political analysts initially complained that the doctrine was about pre-emption, and then they complained that nations who merely harbored terrorists were deemed to be America's enemies by the Bush Doctrine, and then they complained that the doctrine was about conducting foreign affairs and national security autonomously, without international approval, or that Bush was set on establishing democracies where democracies did not exist, you know, when President Bush asserted that "true democracies do not attack their democratic neighbors." It could be argued that the Bush Doctrine is neither a doctrine nor President Bush's, and that to refer to it as the "Bush Doctrine" is to speak simplistically and even anachronistically: such a thing does not even really exist. So when Gov. Palin asked for clarification, she was quite justified, don't you think, considering how members of your own fraternity have been so confused or bemused by the doctrine's various incarnations?
Gibson: Well, I think a genuine interpretation of the Bush Doctrine is what I said in the interview, that it's about preemption.
CT: So to you the Bush Doctrine only means one thing. Don't you see why the governor was unsure what you were asking, since the Bush Doctrine is not one thing? Let me ask you, sir, whether you now find anything actually wrong with her answer, now that you yourself have come to see that the Bush Doctrine is fairly broad, more reflective of, as the governor put it, the president's "worldview" and not the clear and singular foreign policy principle you believed it was.
Gibson: Well, I can't say she answered the question satisfactorily, because it was quite clear she felt uncomfortable with it. If she had the breadth of foreign policy experience necessary to be president, she should have been able to explain to viewers the nuances of --
CT: Don't you think, Mr. Gibson, that she might have felt uncomfortable for you?
Gibson: Well, I don't see why, since I am not running for office.
CT: No, you're not. No one in the media is -- or should be. Let me ask you, finally, how it is that 43 words could have lost you when they did not lose me?
Gibson: I am sorry. I don't know what you mean.
CT: Well, you said to Gov. Palin, and I quote, "I got lost in a blizzard of words there." You were referring to her answer to your hypothetical question regarding our nation's right to invade Pakistan from Afghanistan. I found her answer quite thoughtful, nuanced, and clear. What was so hard for you? It was only 43 words in length, 42 if we delete your first name. Where was the blizzard? Or were you just looking for a place to insinuate that she was evasive and obfuscatory?
Gibson: I just thought her answer was unnecessarily complex. I wanted a simple yes or no. I would expect that from any candidate.
CT: I am sure you find both Barack Obama and Joe Biden utterly succinct; they're legendary in giving direct yes and no answers. Am I right? Anyhow, that's all the time we have. Thank you.
©2008. All Rights Reserved.
†(For you literalists out there, please note that this is a
fictitious interview.)
