Following Jean Raber's suggestion, here's round two of Gibson with Palin on domestic issues:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBA-obGXEec[/youtube][youtube]http://www.... writes, "I think Palin did considerably better (lets all agree there should be fewer abortions and work from there) and Gibson considerably worse (asking about the nature of homosexuality and not her stand on laws regarding homosexual behavior; and failure to press on why, if Palins question about library book challenges was simply informational, the librarian was fired and only reinstated after a recall drive)."For what it's worth, here are a couple of New York Times editorials:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/opinion/13herbert.html?hphttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/opinion/13sat1.html?hphttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/opinion/13collins.html?hpI agree with Jean that she does a bit better discussing these issues, but she is still evasive in areas where she is clearly out of her depth. For instance, on the economy, she repeats the same answer on increasing agency efficiency when Gibson is pressing her on entitlements. It makes one wonder whether she understands what an entitlement is...that's a problem! Also, the three things she identifies that make her and McCain different than Bush are pretty weak. It seems clear to me from the Gibson interviews on the whole that when it comes to foreign policy and the economy, the two biggest issues in this election, she simply lacks sufficient understanding to co-lead the nation effectively.
Eric Bugyis teaches Religious Studies at the University of Washington Tacoma.