The Trouble With Charlie

I finally watched GOP Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin's interview with Charlie Gibson from Thursday night. Contrary to convential wisdom, I think he actually did her a favor.

Gibson was VERY tough on Palin. And, to my surprise, she held up fairly well.

Sure, she stumbled a couple of times. Her answer to the "Bush Doctrine" question was ackward and she could have handled it better. But then again, Gibson's question was a tad ambiguous. The "Bush Doctrine" isn't really a clear cut thing like the Monroe or Truman Doctrines.

Charles Krauthammer, a McCain supporter, who's cited in Wikpedia as the first one to use the term, writes in the Washington Post:

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

I still oppose the Palin pick and agree with David Frum who says it better than I could:

I have been disturbed about the choice from the start, as you know. And I have not seen any reason to feel less disturbed ... She really could be president! And here's where my fellow conservatives really worry me. They are so attracted by the symbolism of the selection that they show no concern — never mind for her executive competence — even for her views.

However, I didn't see anything from last night that scared me off.

And from a "performance" standpoint, I think Martin Sieff best summed it up for me:

Whatever her inexperience and other shortcomings, Palin did not fall into that trap in her ABC interview. At no point did she appear fearful or threatening. Gibson's aggressive questioning on her religion and her son's coming military service in Iraq, by contrast, runs the risks for the Democrats of strengthening support for Palin among working-class, married women, especially those with husbands or sons serving in the military.

The pattern of previous presidential election interviews and debates has always been that individuals who come across as intellectually superior, arrogant and condescending forfeit support that goes to their perceived victims. This dynamic played a crucial role in propelling George W. Bush into the White House eight years ago. It remains to be seen if Gibson's perceived arrogance and condescension will give Palin another boost.