Charlie Gibson's interview with Obama and Sarah Palin

Well Obama spent the majority of his campaign only doing scripted fluff interviews, and fluff stories for magazines. Gibson's interview with Obama was centered around trying to portray him as history in the making. His interview with Palin was centered around trying to make her seem unqualified and uninformed. That's why he tried to trick her with that "Bush Doctrine" crap. She answered properly based on the definition he himself has used in the past. He just chose a new definition that day to make it seem that she didn't know what she was talking about.

Obviously Gibson is bias in his interview. He is pro Obama and his questions to Palin is something like he wanted to put her down. Media suppose to be in the middle not siding any party though they have their own party to vote, they should be fair in treating candidates.

Hello Barb42, Excellent discussion! It would be unfair for me to question the veracity of Nancy Kallitechnis' presentation of the content of the Gibson/Obama interview -- since I did not see it myself. In the spirit of fairness and honesty, I will ask you (and the reader) if anyone is aware of a YouTube version of the Gibson/Obama interview? I see great benefit in watching the two interviews back to back. Having not seen the Gibson/Obama interview, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to present the differences between the content of the two interviews. Perhaps it's just me, but having observed handling differences in other parts of the media between Sen. Obama and Gov. Palin, I'm still bemused to see that any seasoned, serious journalist would have 'fluffed' and 'kid gloved' any candidate to this degree. Call me silly for over-estimating Charlie Gibson, but I expected a greater sense of gravitas from Mr. Gibson. Quite frankly I'm stunned that Charlie Gibson would have asked Sen. Obama so many questions about how he and his family 'felt' about Sen. Obama's White House run. One would think that Charlie Gibson may have perceived Sen. Obama's presidential run as a personal achievement for the Senator, rather than as an electoral choice of national leadership for 'We The People'. I cannot help but wonder if Mr. Gibson prepared for the interview from the perspective of the candidate as the first African-American person to be nominated by a major political party, rather than as a man who wishes to be elected as the leader of the free world. This of course is a huge pet-peeve of mine. Specifically, when a political candidate is running for the Office of the Presidency of the U.S.A., there should be no hyphenation in his or her designation as an American. Our President is never male-American, or female-American. Our President is never Irish-American, or African-American. He or she is, and should always be simply AMERICAN! I did see the Gibson/Gov. Palin interview. While I concluded that the tone was rather condescending, I did not take issue with the content of the questions that Mr. Gibson asked Gov. Palin. I want my next president to be ready, willing, and able to tackle the tough questions and issues. I want to know that Charlie Gibson is a 'walk in the park' as compared to the challenges that our leaders will be ready to handle, as presented by the maniacal tyrants of the world. Charlie Gibson should be no more flustering than a fly circling one's freshly grilled hamburger at a Fourth of July picnic. I walked away from the Gibson/Palin interview with that sense that Gibson failed to 'trip her up'. Instead, she cemented my perspective that she will not let anyone walk all over her. If she believes that being forthcoming will be beneficial, then she'll be forthcoming. If it is more beneficial to keep one's hand close to the chest, then she will act accordingly. The Israel/Iran question IS such an issue. Rather than give Mr. Gibson (and the viewer) any room to speculate or fabricate what she may have intended from her answer, she quite deliberately refused to engage the topic. That is exactly how the Israeli/Iranian situation must be played out. We can NEVER tip our hand to America's enemies. While the comparison is not yet feasible, I did see a glimmer of the makings of another 'Iron Lady' in the mix. For which I was pleased and assuaged. Part of what has been so troubling for me personally has been that so many Americans seem willing to ignore how fundamental experience, judgement and readiness really are as it relates to stepping into the job of the nation's top Executive position. For me personally, the popularity of a leader isn't nearly as important as is whether he or she knows how to conduct the business of the nation. If, as some have suggested, the race to the White House is part of the training process, then it would seem that Gov. Palin is following an Olympic training model. If this Gibson interview is indicative, then I cannot say the same for Sen. Obama. Shame on you Charlie Gibson for providing little more than fluff & fodder for 'We The People' to use in our electoral vetting process!

I personally don't put much emphasis on the media interviews as something that influences my choice. I feel that they automatically put the person being interviewed on the defensive and do not reflect a true picture of the candidate or their positions on the issues.

This it the reason why many regular citizens cannot run for President or VP. Becuase we are not as sneaky about avoiding the question as they are, they are good at pretending to answer the question, without giving the answer even when pressed for an answer of "yes" and "no" they know how to politely and intelligently give an answer without the answer. I know I be caught off guard and not know what to say.