Why would Hewitt challenge Palin on anything? He is a hack.

Agreed.  Technically, he is a (bad) journalist, so he is part of the media, but is this really surprising to anyone?

MMFA doesn't need a headline pointing out that the sky is blue, water is wet, or the sun rises in the East...

I think the point of the article is that Hewitt acts like he is a journalists and some people may believe he is.

C'mon Doris, if anyone believes that Hewitt is some independent journalism capable of a real interview with Palin, then they are a lost cause, and no amount of MMFA conservetive misinformation correction would ever suffice.

Please, I grill my corn flakes more than Hewitt grilled Palin.

"C'mon Doris, if anyone believes that Hewitt is some independent journalism capable of a real interview with Palin, then they are a lost cause, and no amount of MMFA conservetive misinformation correction would ever suffice."

All of which is completely beside the point.  He allowed misinformation to air without challenge.  So MMFA challenged his lack of judgment.  That's what MMFA is here for.  To challenge that kind of misinformation EVERY TIME.

"He allowed misinformation to air without challenge."

   So, is it a fact O'bama did not support legislature that would provide for medical care to a baby born alive? Either he supports medical care for babies born alive or not, which way did he vote? Missinformation or not, did he vote to support medical care or not?

   I didn't think I'd hear from any of you who claim miss-information. O'bama DID in fact vote against the legislature that would provide medical care to a baby born alive. All your spinning cannot change that fact. O'bama's voting record speaks for itself. Well, it does during the few times he actually voted, instead of just saying 'present'.

Tommy, that does not  excuse Hewitt. MMFA also questions and puts Limbaugh, Hannity and FOX up for task.  Your standards seem low for fairness. 

Right, he's a right-wing propagandist with the same outfit as Medved, Prager, Gallagher and others. They try to put on air of sophistication.  Hewitt has bragged on the air about being a lawyer for big polluters.  He wrote or co-wrote a book on Romney just in time for the GOP primaries.

I've been following politics for a long time. It seems that ther in as inordinant(sp?) amount of flat out lying in  the McCain campaign. And then when shown to be lying, they keep on repeating the lie. It just seems that its gotten so blatant.

No the McCain camp lies, they lie alot.

No. Actually, when shown to be lying, they attack the MEDIA for calling them out on their lies, repeat the baseless things about "liberal media", and then take out, or take away all media access to Palin and or McCain. McCain, who used to be chummy chummy with the vast majority of the media has now taken to hiding away from them, not answering questions unless in a very controlled environment, and forgot about Palin. She's hot had hardly any contact with the media. I wonder what a McCain-Palin administration would look like in front of the media, at this point, I'd say they might be worse than the Bush administration.

mccain is still lying, in a meeting with the editorial board of the des moines register, about that ad that claimed obama wanted to teach "sex education" to kindergarteners.   he did no such thing.  what he was talking about was warning against sexual predators and inappropriate behavior.  when you think about it, that's actually telling kids to stay away from anyone who wants to engage in any sexual behavior.  the boy scouts teach the same thing.  also, mccain is still running an ad claiming that obama has been "mum" on the wall street crisis.   utter horse----.  

he's also portraying anyone criticizing palin's abilities as georgetown cocktail sippers, in other words, the "elite".  the fact is that palin is far from being qualified for the office of president, and it's not a good job for training in office, especially considering the fact that it's not that long a shot that mccain's health could deteriorate.   palin is unable to put a coherent complex thought together, she merely strings together a lot of sound-good cliches and smiles a lot.   mccain made a rash decision in naming her. 

Let's drop this culture of life bullsh¡t until we respect all life. 

Palin has been rattling her saber at Iran, Russia, Pakistan and Iraq ever since she was picked by McCain. She's quite the warmonger

Let's call it what it is, a culture of fetal life.

Once you're born, you're on your own. And if you happen to be born in a country that might need regime change, watch your ass.

Do you think Palin is smart enough however to even understand her stupid comments about Iran and Russia etc?

And that Alaska is a microcosm of the Unites States. HUH ????? they got spring breakers over there ????

OMG. If Palin can't even form a coherant answer to a friendly interviewer like Hewitt how is she ever going to get through a debate? I wouldn't expect Hewitt to challenge her anyway but I doubt if he could even understand what she was trying to say. She's an idiot.

She will do very well in the debate, don't worry about that. She is sharp, she's stays on message and always finds a way to turn the discussion into an attack on her opponent. 

Look, it really doesn't matter if her answers are coherent, the most important thing she has to do is make those emotional appeals to voters. 

Biden on the other hand is not that impressive. He lacked any wow factor in the primary and while he is very well educated on the issues, he comes off cold and detached. He also has a propensity for making bone head gaffes with his run on mouth. I can only hope he has been well coached.

I predict Palin will outright win this debate in the minds of viewers.

"Look, it really doesn't matter if her answers are coherent, the most important thing she has to do is make those emotional appeals to voters. "

Since you predicted she will tomorrow, can you give an example?

Let's assume the question is "You said you are versed in foreign policy because AK is next to Russia. Can you elaborate?"

What is an acceptable coherent answer, and an emotional appeal to that question?

Thanks.

Please read "predicted she will tomorrow" as "predicted she will WIN tomorrow".

You're delusional.

And you're a sweetheart. Have you not been paying attention? Do you not remember how Bush lost the debates on substance but wn on emotional appeal?

I suggest you read up on the work of Drew Westen.

"The vision of mind that has captured the imagination of Democratic campaign strategists for much of the last 40 years -- a dispassionate mind that makes decisions by weighing the evidence and reasoning to the most valid conclusions -- bears no relation to how the mind and brain actually work. When campaign strategists start from this vision of mind, their candidates typically lose." 

Bush lost the debates and the media turned it around and said he won.  Nothing to do with emotional appeal.

True and false. He lost and the media said he won, but did that fact alone make Bush connect with voters enough to persuade them to vote Republican? Nope.

Look, you can keep denying the science, practice this political creationism, as it were, that says adhere dogmatically to laundry lists of policy and rely on voters calculated rationality to discern our liberal values on their own. And you can continue to lose elections. Or you can get with the 21st century, educate yourself on how the brain is an emotional instrument and that it takes emotional political language to activate pathways to logical associations with your point of view. 

Decades of study in the field of neuroscience says you're the one who's delusional.

You certainly seem to be able to tell a lot about me from a couple of brief posts on a web board.;)  I'm only vaguely familier with Weston's theories but I do agree with most of what I've heard.  I don't think emotion is going to overcome the nonsensical answers Palin has given every indication she is likely to give though.  It's not absolutely black and white emotion counts for all and knowledge counts for nothing.  But in terms of emotion I think you are underestimating the media's ability to influence voters.  They aren't just reacting to the debate.  Most voters probably won't watch the debate.  They are reacting also to how the debate is framed by the media.  I doubt most viewers noticed Gore's sighing in the 2000 debates in real time.  But after the media cranked up the volume on a couple of sighs and played and analyzed the clips over and over again people had that emotional reaction you're talking about.  But make no mistake Gore won those debates and most viewers knew that in real time emotional reaction or not.  I take back what I said about you being delusional because Palin may surprise me but if she give crap answers like she did in her interviews with Couric and Gibson (and Hewitt) no amount of perceived passion is going to be enough to save her.  That's all I will say on the subject.   I hate it when two people take over threads going back and forth.

There is no doubt that the corporate media is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican propaganda machine and they do influence elections. On that I know we agree. But we disagree that everyone knew, in real time, that Gore won those debates. I thought he won, not because I'm so smart and I know the issues but because I share Gore's values and he didn't have to explain them to me. I'm not a swing voter, I'm a dedicated left wing liberal. Gore made the same mistake that Kerry repeated; he didn't make his values explicit and he allowed the GOP to build false narratives about him and he refused to respond to them because he thought it would only legitimize the attacks. He avoided that all important test of character, assumed everyone would analyze the facts, ignore the pettiness and make a well reasoned conclusion. He was wrong. We all wanted to see a candidate who would push back aggressively and let those jokers know that if they wanted to go there that he wouldn't stand for it, that he would hit back hard and stand on the right side of the issues at the same time.

To your other point, the thing is that this highly micromanaged debate (we only get one vp debate this year) is not like an interview. It's not a what you know format where the candidate can be pinned down on misstatements, it's a how would you react scenario and the moderator won't be having too many opportunities for follow ups. And for the record, 57 million people watched the Obama-McCain debate, those were record numbers, and probably more will watch tonight. So I don't think there is too much validity to the argument that most voters won't watch the debate. But I have been known to be wrong

Now, I think we're having a bit of a disconnect here. I'm sensing that you think I'm overly devaluing the role rationality, no, I know you think I am. You say, "It's not absolutely black and white emotion counts for all and knowledge counts for nothing." And there's the disconnect because if you look at what I wrote I think you'll see that I highly value human rationality. What I'm saying to you, from my meager understanding of the science, is that people relate to each other not based on the facts alone. I'm saying that logic is emotional. I'm saying that the brain is a series of neural networks and pathways of ideas, thoughts and stories and that logical connections in the brain are created by activating these networks and fusing them with language that appeals to character, values, courage, integrity, patriotism etc. You have to be factually correct, otherwise it's merely manipulation, but you have to give the facts a context that elicits those interpersonal connections.

I don't know, I'm not an academic, I can't do this subject justice. I'll encourage you again to read this link.

If Palin can't even form a coherant answer to a friendly interviewer like Hewitt how is she ever going to get through a debate?

Easy...by acting adorable and attacking Barack Obama.

Easy...by acting adorable and attacking Barack Obama.

The thing is she is not adorable, she is sleezy. (My opinion)

She IS sleazy.  But she's also attractive and appeals to "Conservatives" (the quotes because people who call themselves "Conservative" really tend to be Neocons) values, so they won't care what she says, they'll claim she won anyway.  She could tie her own shoelaces together and fall off the stage and they would still claim she is intelligent, graceful, and qualified for office.

Of course Palin sees Obama's position on abortion as "extreme".  His position is different from hers.  

PALIN: "...even though I knew that 13 weeks along that Trig would be born with Down syndrome, and I said, you know, he's still going to be a most precious ingredient in this sometimes messed-up world that we live in."

Uhhh...and so that's why you concealed your pregnancy until you were over seven months pregnant?  And took risks that endangered your pregnancy...?  I believe you are sincere in your opposition to abortion, Gov. Palin, but some observers might opine that perhaps your heart would not have been broken had this pregnancy ended prematurely.  Your actions don't mesh with your words...

Irony

Do you not think it is safe to say that Palin did infact exploit her downsyndrome baby?

Do you not think it is safe to say that Palin did infact exploit her downsyndrome baby?

You could say that. They certainly paraded the poor kid around like a curiosity piece...or as a prop in a heavily stage-crafted play.

I have to agree with both of you. I find the whole thing offensive. Palin makes me cringe.

Obama's "extreme position" on abortion?

You mean the position held by over 50% of the country?

The position that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare?

That position?

I think anyone making a prediction about the debate should just wait. The Vice Presidential debate is only once, and very forgettable. Obama still has 2 more to go. Hey, Cheney lied many times in the VP debate in 2004, and it had no impact whatsoever. People realize that this election is about, primarily, who will be PRESIDENT, not the VP.

Palin could win because the bar is low and Biden often puts his foot in his mouth. However, when confronted in interviews, she sucks, and she has yet to match her teleprompter-reading performance of a speech she didn't write from the convention.

It's a toss up right now. Just my opinion.

I have to dissagree with you a little bit here. People care about this debate because...

A. There is a very good chance that Palin will be President, if something happens to McCain

B. Cheney while not popular, had a lot of experience in Washington (not to mention running a evil empire for so long, although he lost points because rebels destroyed his Death Star not only once, but twice.)

C. Plus there is the possibility of the potentional for comedy, you know the SNL writers will be watching and recording every second of this debate. And besides parody, private citizens and groups will watch to create clips to post of anticipated fumbles by Palin (and Biden)