It’s not quite dishing, but Palin chats to Oprah about Levi, Couric
Apparently all is forgiven.
Sarah Palin tells Oprah Winfrey she wants to welcome Levi Johnston back into the fold.
Her daughter’s ex-fiance and father of her grandchild has been all over TV shows and in print media making unflattering comments about Palin, but the former Alaska governor says he’s part of the family.
Palin, who ran for vice president on the Republican ticket with Senator John McCain last year, also had nice things to say about Oprah, who had supported the other party’s candidate — Barack Obama.
The interview with Oprah Winfrey will air Monday to kick off a book tour for Palin’s memoir, “Going Rogue: An American LIfe.”
Last year, Palin was skewered for fumbling a question about what she read, and she tells Oprah she knew that interview with CBS anchor Katie Couric had gone badly.
“The campaign said ‘Right on, good. You’re showing your independence. This is what America needs to see’ and, of course, I’m thinking ‘if you thought that was a good interview, I don’t know what a bad interview was.’ So I knew it wasn’t a good interview,” Palin says in a clip of the taped Oprah interview released Thursday.
Palin says she was “exploited” by Fey, Couric
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says TV doppelganger Tina Fey and CBS News anchor Katie Couric have her to thank for the career boost they are getting.
In fact, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee says, the pair of TV stars exploited her.
Fey, who has an uncanny resemblance to Palin, played a loopy version of the Alaska governor in “Saturday Night Live” skits on NBC during the campaign season.
And an interview Palin gave to Couric was damaging to Palin while also giving a ratings shot to Couric’s CBS Evening News, which generally is the No. 3 major broadcast news show behind NBC and ABC.
“I did see that Tina Fey was named entertainer of the year and Katie Couric’s ratings have risen,” Palin told documentary filmmaker John Ziegler on Monday.
“And I know that a lot of people are capitalizing on, oh I don’t know, perhaps some exploiting that was done via me, my family, my administration. That’s a little bit perplexing, but it also says a great deal about our society,” she said.
sarah palin was “picked on” by the media because they, and the vast majority of americans, saw that she was completely unfit to serve in the oval office. please – her interview with katie couric simply exposed her ingnorance on many – most issues. Not saying she might not be ready in 10-15 years, but McCain chose an inexperienced running mate to try to get the female vote, and it backfired for him, and must have been embarrassing for Palin to be so exposed.
Palin talks abortion and newspapers — sort of — in Couric interview
KANSAS CITY, Missouri – Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is happy to discuss her views on social issues like abortion and homosexuality, but reluctant to list what she usually reads to keep up on world events. That’s the takeout from a series of interviews the Alaska governor did with CBS anchor Katie Couric, which aired on Tuesday night. Palin, whose opposition to abortion rights has ignited support among social conservatives, some of whom were wary of presidential nominee John McCain, discussed whether rape or incest victims should be allowed to have an abortion. “Personally, I would counsel the person to choose life, despite horrific, horrific circumstances that this person would find themselves in,” she said. “If you’re asking, though, kind of foundationally here, should anyone end up in jail for having an … abortion, absolutely not.” When asked about her views on homosexuality, Palin talked about a close friend who is gay. “One of my absolute best friends for the last 30 years happens to be gay, and I love her dearly,” Palin said. “She is one of my best friends, who happens to have made a choice that isn’t a choice I would have made. But I am not going to judge people.” Palin has faced criticism for lacking experience in foreign policy. Before becoming governor some two years ago she was the mayor of a small town. Couric asked Palin what newspapers and magazines she read regularly before becoming McCain’s running mate “to stay informed and to understand the world.” Here is her response, according to a transcript provided by CBS: Palin: I’ve read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media. Couric: What, specifically? Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years. Couric: Can you name a few? Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn’t a foreign country, where it’s kind of suggested, “Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?” Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.
Photo credit: REUTERS/Stephen Mally
Wow Crash-
The US going to war with a religious group? Muslims, Islamic peoples. Wow.
And if I might add, I don’t thinkt that someone’s name has anything to do with whether or not they are right to run our country. And I’m not even pro-Obama!
I think everyone should take Couric’s interview worth a grain of salt. She’s left-wing and will therefore try to persuade her viewers as such, regardless of the facts. I think everyone needs to let the premise register that Sarah Palin can freaking read and start moving on to things that matter.
TV anchors hunt for Obama exclusives on foreign trip
WASHINGTON – Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama drags with him a gaggle of reporters (wire services, newspaper, radio and television) wherever he goes, but when he heads overseas soon, he will have some television news stars accompanying him.
All three broadcast television network anchors, ABC’s Charlie Gibson, CBS’s Katie Couric and NBC’s Brian Williams, are negotiating to tag along, and according to the Washington Post they could each have an exclusive interview in different countries.
Obama is expected to travel through Europe (there has already been a kerfuffle about where he speaks in Berlin) and the Middle East, and he is also expected to make stops in Iraq and Afghanistan to see firsthand the status of the wars. He has been an outspoken critic of the conflicts, arguing the Bush administration took its eye off al Qaeda in Afghanistan to go to war with Iraq.
The interesting contrast the Washington Post and New York Times make about Obama’s trip is that when his rival, Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain, went to London, France and the Middle East no television network anchors joined the trek.
But there are risks associated with having high-profile anchors and bright television spotlights along for the ride — if Obama makes a gaffe, it has the potential to lead the nightly newscasts and give McCain an opening to attack.
One need only look at McCain’s March trip when got tangled up in Amman, Jordan, where he mistakenly accused Iran of backing the Sunni extremist group al Qaeda in Iraq. The United States believes it is Shi’ite militants that Iran is backing and Democrats jumped all over him.
LATEST OBAMA GAFFE — He said he was meeting with some leaders that he’d be meeting with as president — FOR THE NEXT 8 TO 10 YEARS.
8 to 10 years? HUH? So the president now can be elected for TEN (10) years? I suppose this works — JUST LIKE THE 57 STATES HE VISITED!
LOLOL. Obama — the idiotic gift that keeps on giving.
What an arrogant jerk!
With everything that money could have been used for in an effort to “CHANGE” as the slogan goes, the O’Carter regime is busy painting “O’s”.
I’m voting for John McCain in 2008.
I am having a difficult time figuring out whether J. VanA is pro-Obama or pro-Palin. The early remarks suggest the latter, but after attempting to visualize (as the invitations go) the future under Obama, I can’t help but see 1) a thoughtful, carefully considered and effective military presence in Afghanistan, one that allows more American soldiers to avoid the massive trauma of armed conflict while providing the necessary support to that country’s own autonomy and safety, 2) a society in which, though the value of the dollar admittedly declines, the basic needs of all Americans are met to a much fuller degree than they have been for decades, 3) a newly self-consistent, fair and humane legal system in which justice is served without the use of impulsive, desperate techniques that have more in common with terrorist tactics themselves than with a humane and enlightened society, 4) a society in which people do not feel like the act of purchasing a fire-arm is their only guarantee of personal safety, security, and control, 5) industries that operate efficiently, honestly, and with the intent of generating the highest quality products, not simply of undermining the competition, of maintaining a strangle-hold on the market, or of serving the bottom line, and 6) a society in which all voices are heard, considered judiciously and weighed before final decisions are made, not a society in which all differing opinions and contributions are stamped out by a stubborn reliance on single principals, very few of which would ever apply singly to a given decision.
I’m in agreement that Sarah Palin is a woman of principle, and I also agree that the ability to answer televised questions extemperaneously does not make or break a person’s decision making or leadership ability; the skill is obviously one that requires serious practice and drill, neither of which Palin had time to recieve during the campaign.
But I have never understood the argument that supports “principle” as the sole factor upon which to base decisions that will affect many people of diverse backgrounds. Not everyone, after all, believes in the same principles as everyone else. The best decisions seem clearly to be those that weigh several different principles and include elements or shadings of each in a well thought out way. The trade-mark of a good decision maker is the ability to see and understand as many of these existing principles as possible, and to arrive at a decision that combines the most valid and compatible elements of each. The process takes time, requires a very open mind and a strong sense of empathy, and often results in a decision that advances no one particular view point or principle completely, but that somehow manages to advance the greater good by a little rather than the smaller good by a lot. This seems to me the very meaning of “The Democratic Process,” and it is not only a skill that a given person can have, but a skill built into the operation and structure of our government.
It is also a skill that, as best I can see, Sarah Palin does not have, and one that she in fact seems to diminish as much as possible despite being a self-described fan of a country built on the democratic process. In a country in which there has never been complete national support for any one cause or value or system of beliefs, shouldn’t we continue to have a president who acknowledges that debate and due process are essential, that having many beliefs, opinions and voices actually makes us stronger instead of weaker, and that no single governmental decision should ever be a simple appeal to something as safe from scrutiny and debate as a one person’s private principle?