What's the big deal?

I don't think it was a bad question and I don't think it was a good answer. People's viewpoints are shaped by the things they read. They subscribe to periodicals that support their viewpoints or give them insight into issues that are important to them. "Can you give me an example? Like which ones?" is a perfectly reasonable followup to a vague, "Oh, I read lots of them." Better answers? "Katie, I don't form my world view based on what's printed in magazines, and I haven't had the time or luxury to sit down and read for enjoyment in a long time. I ask questions and talk to people and form my own opinions. Next question?" No followup allowed to make me admit that I don't read anything - I just said it flat out, and turned it into a positive. As I said in another post, I -do- believe that if the campaign would stop trying to micromanage her and let her have her head after giving her a few general cautions, we'd be seeing that she is an intelligent woman who can think on her feet when she's not hobbled by inflated fears of being made to look stupid.

I believe no matter what Sarah Palin answered to Couric's question, Gov. Palin would have been subjected to criticism. Therefore, Gov. Palin did just fine with her answer. Good for her as she was at least polite, which is more than I would have been.

All I can say is that never in my life have I heard that question asked of a candidate. I think any answer would have put her under fire.

For one thing, I believe that our candidates have a lot of people working for them who read and research a lot on the various issues and the information that is gleaned as being useful is then communicated to the candidates. I hardly think that they have much time to be sitting down with a magazine themselves! No matter what publication she would have cited - someone would have picked it up and run that it was negative for some reason. Also, citing any one particular publication would have given the impression that she supported the views of that media source.

I heard this clip during lunch and was surprised that she didn't just mention her home town newspaper and add "among other things", but she couldn't even manage to do that. I don't think the question was out of line and I don't think folks would be making such an issue of this if Palin hadn't made herself look completely uninformed and clueless. [i]COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world? PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media — COURIC: But what ones specifically? I’m curious. PALIN: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me over all these years. COURIC: Can you name any of them? PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news.[/i]

Maybe it was a stupid or frivolous question, but it was so simple, why the heck couldn't Palin have just answered it? She either doesn't read ANYTHING and was lying (by claiming she reads EVERYTHING), or she drew a blank and couldn't recall a single name of a newspaper or periodical. Once again, it shows that she doesn't know how to handle interviews, and of course the Republicans will just cry "the media is biased" like they always do. How on earth is a question like "What newspapers do you read?" showing bias towards the other side or a "gotcha" question? You can't ask a Republican ANYTHING without it being called a biased question - unless of course the Republican answers it well, then the question is okay. But whenever a Republican fails or does something wrong, why, it's the liberal media's fault! It's such a petty excuse, and in many cases it simply isn't true. I'm an independent, I watch CNN, I've been watching them since they existed, and I have NEVER seen bias, except of course when they put partisans on the air, but they have an equal mixtures of people on the left and on the right.

The left keeps accusing the DNC of keeping Palin from the press. My question is, why would any Republican subject themselves to the presses total incompetence?

I must say, I've never seen so many people get so defensive about anything and everything said about or asked about a politician who has willingly put herself on the public stage! I've come to the conclusion that the only acceptable way to deal with Sarah Palin is like Sean Hannity's "infomercial" format. Ask her about her accomplishments without questioning their accuracy like when he said something about the claims that she'd said "Thanks but no thanks" to the "Bridge to Nowhere" had come under question and she answered, "Sean, I killed the Bridge to Nowhere," and the subject was closed. Sarah herself had stated she'd learned a lot about the world through reading so Katie's question as to specifically what she'd read is hardly a "gotcha" question! I think she could have easily said, as someone else here mentioned, that recently she hasn't had much time to read but she could mention one or two papers and one or two magazines that she'd liked to read when she did have the time. Maybe something to the effect of, "I read both the Nation and National Review to get both perspectives" would have been acceptable. As it was, it naturally raised some questions when she kept saying "All of 'em" or "Lots of 'em" like she couldn't think of the name of a single one. Sorry, but it hasn't seemed like the MSM has had to use any "gotcha" moments with her. Annie

We all know that some publications are very much right-wing and others are very much left-wing. The ones that would give a clear picture of what's going on would be the ones that present all sides fairly and equally. They're few and far between. If there's a good balance, however, those publications would show an attempt to get a fair picture of the issues. The question is quite innocuous, and the answer made Mrs. Palin look far less than intelligent. If she only hinted that she doesn't read, and she really does, it would be nice for the public to know that. If she chooses only one side of each issue, we would know she is not open to ideas she hasn't already formed, as she implies. Voters are less interested in whether the woman is on one extreme or the other as much as they care whether she tries to learn all sides to make an informed decision.

People please do some independant research of Sarah Palin, I don't care what you think of McCain, Obama, or Biden, and I don't care what party you're for. This woman is crazy and batty. She lies about everything and has been caught repeatedly. Go do some research, please.

Any answer would have gotten her criticism for something that is rather trivial. I agree that Palin must have many advisers who play a much bigger role in her political decisions that what happens to be in her magazine rack.