ELB wrote:This business about Glenn Beck "setting her up" or "ganging up" on her is eyewash. He asked her straightforward questions, which had straightforward no-nonsense answers, and instead she hemmed and hawed and ran around the bush like Clinton trying to explain he really didn't have sex with that woman. He gave her TWO chances, asked very clear and direct questions, and gave her all the time she needed -- he did not cut her off, he did not interrupt, she got to ramble on as long as she wanted, and all she did was duck and weave. In other words, she is truther, or she's afraid of alienating her truther followers, and either one means she should not be dog catcher, never mind Governor.
I agree she rambled on incoherently and avoided answering the question directly. To not right away and say no the government wasn't behind the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Shanksville Pa. was absurd, it was not a trick question or set-up, she spoke what was in her heart. Later the campaigns statement "attempted" to correct the record with what she "attempted" to say. And the rambling about psychological evaluations, sounds very unstable to me. She had multiple opportunities to answer the questions without interruptions and just came off as one in the tin-foil hat crowd.
Kind of reminds me of someone else that was elected on what people "thought" they knew about the person.
Jim
