I must admit that clip makes her look ignorant, and her saying she's read "any of them that have been in front of her over the years" is a bad sign. On the other hand, I can understand not wanting to name a *specific* paper.
Unfortunately, I rather suspect its not an effort to evade endorsing one paper and really *is* because she doesn't seek out these sources herself. She just reads whatever she is given, like how somebody gave her a piece of literature that said humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time.
Another way in which she sounds like Bush. Bush has expressed similar sentiments: He doesn't need to go out and get data, he has aides to bring him data and tell him what to read.
Her other motive may have been to avoid mentioning a newspaper that would alienate part of her audience (for instance, The Christian Science Monitor would give a soundbite for the people worried about her religious positions, even though CSM isn't much more conservative than, say, The Wall Street Journal).
Would that be all the 20-or-so Alaskan newspapers big enough to have websites, the 3000-or-so US newspapers big enough to have websites, the 10K-20K world papers big enough to have websites, or is she also throwing in the myriad smaller papers as well?
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Unfortunately, I rather suspect its not an effort to evade endorsing one paper and really *is* because she doesn't seek out these sources herself. She just reads whatever she is given, like how somebody gave her a piece of literature that said humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time.
Reply
Her other motive may have been to avoid mentioning a newspaper that would alienate part of her audience (for instance, The Christian Science Monitor would give a soundbite for the people worried about her religious positions, even though CSM isn't much more conservative than, say, The Wall Street Journal).
Reply
Inquiring minds want to know.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment