Charlie Gibson Gives Birth to Human Child During Palin Interview

Well, he was apparently giving birth, though no confirmation yet on the species. Has there ever been a man so clenched while giving an interview? He looked like he was afraid Palin would leap at him, skin him and start grilling Chuck Burgers.

Charlie's interview turns on the use of the phrase "Bush Doctrine." The news story from this hasn't gone away, but started with Palin seemingly not being familiar with Bush Doctrine. Suddenly he media says she didn't know that Bush Doctrine was "preemptively attacking countries that posed a threat to US security." That's how Gibson explained it and how others in the media have explained it since then.

Really? So that's Bush Doctrine? The left considers pre-emptive strike to be one of the 7 deadly sins. Thou Shalt Not. So no surprise that Gibson turned pop-quiz moderator tried to foist that opinion on Palin. The media continues to ask her about Bush Doctrine to remind viewers that she "didn't know". Isn't the real problem that the media has re-invented Bush Doctrine, and now defines it as whatever they don't like about Bush at the moment?

Some fact checking: I can think of two doctrines. We learn about Monroe Doctrine in school, but the fact is the phrase "The Monroe Doctrine" didn't come into use until 13 years after that president created the policy. In more modern times, Reagan and Bush both had doctrines. The media coins the phrase when they hate the president so much that they attach the doctrine moniker to some aggressive stance. Reagan Doctrine was, in part, about aiding anti-communist movements who were resisting the USSR. Central America and Afghanistan come to mind. It was about advancing technology to force the USSR to compete against america's super-charged economy. The left hated that. Papa Bush wasn't president long enough to get a doctrine named after him, but we can bet that if McCain wins, and is president for 8 years, hmmmmm, well he will have a doctrine named after him.

Bush Doctrine in reality is much more than Charlie Gibson's pretense. What about “unilateral action is okay when defending the US“. What happened to “if you’re not with us, you are against us”. These have been Bush Doctrine in the past. The fact is Palin could have answered the question better, but Charlie’s question was far more vague than he and the rest of he main stream media have been making out. Vague questions deserve vague answers.

In a presidential campaign, the media always casts one of the republicans as The Dummy. Never one of their candidates of course, always a republican. They need it so SNL and the Daily Show and armies of comedians can use the same jokes year after year. Reagan was cast as The Dummy and “crazy nuclear war starter“, Quail got it next, then they skipped the 96 campaign because Dole never had a chance, then Bush in 2000.

Gibson‘s interview question gives the official media “The Dummy” title to Palin, with media follow-up already working to build on that. The creation of the newest media mythology begins.

Chris Matthews Forced to Cover Topics Against His Will

See last week Chris took the middle of his show Hardball and gave a soliloquy on how terrible it was that the media was spending all it's time talking about lipstick, when they should be talking about "issues". He had just spent the first half hour teaming up with another Democrat to try to get Republican talking heads to admit that John McCain really believed that Obama called Sarah Palin a pig.

There is at least one online ad that makes the claim, and in fact the ad pretty much implies Obama called her a pig. The ad has appeared over and over on TV, being played for free by shows like Hardball. But Mathews wants to read their lips.... hear them admit that McCain really believes this. Both Republicans he dragged into the arena talked around the question, refusing to actually speak for McCain... and that really set off Matthews., he's yelling at them to confess!

So after that ordeal and then his denouncement of the coverage of lipstick, he brings on friends so they can spend the last half hour talking about lipstick, and whining... "when are we ever going to get to talk about the issues."

He is oblivious to his own irony.... it's his show! He can talk about anything he wants, but he cannot get off lipstick! He MUST talk about lipstick. It's not his decision you see, it's all the republicans' fault for making the accusation. Now he has no choice, and they have poisoned the conversation. I admit I was just watching because I was hoping to glimpse some of the msnbc Lord of the Fly's action Jon Stewart has covered. No such luck, but what I caught was equally bizaar. One entire hour about lipstick from a guy who decries the media talking about lipstick.

Oh by the way.... there is no doubt that the audience knew what Obama meant... they squealed like... well, you know.