In answering a question about the Bush doctrine, Palin's long hesitation and obviously stressed voice make it clear she doesn't know what the Bush doctrine is in the first place. Palin's nervousness likewise makes all the more terrifying her casual statement that "perhaps" going to war with Russia may someday be necessary to defend Georgia and the Ukraine.

Click the video player at top to watch.

Credit goes to Gibson for selecting the right questions, which were far weightier than the campaign minutiae he reveled in during the Democratic primary debates, and more importantly for adopting a serious tone that became vaguely condescending — with sighs, a twitching foot, interruptions — only when impatience was justified. Palin surely would love to cancel two additional interviews scheduled with Gibson this weekend. But such a move would only compound her public humiliation. More likely, she'll be told to keep her future answers extremely short in an attempt to get this mess over with as soon as possible.

[ABC]

ABC is war-gaming tough questions – not gotchas [no??], but some requiring policy knowledge — with the thoroughness that a network prepares for a debate.

...Officials wouldn’t say how the ABC anchor was chosen. “There were lots of tremendous and credible and fair journalists to choose from,” an aide said. “Somebody had to go first.”

After the interview, Palin will supposedly move on to actually speaking with the rest of the press and hoping everyone ignores the revelation she billed her state government for sleeping in her own home, or whatever would-be scandal is sliding right off of her at the time. But as the Observer writes, the lengthy interview will actually just take much of the pressure off the McCain campaign to make Palin available to the media, assuming the candidate doesn't screw up.

[Politico]

Palin is expected to do the interview in the middle of this week, when she gets back to Alaska. The ABC/Gibson treatment will probably suit campaign manager Rick Davis, who has been whining that the press dares to ask questions about Palin's beliefs and record, but insisted on Fox News this morning, "She's not scared to answer questions."

Joe Biden, meanwhile, challenged Palin on today's Meet the Press, saying, "Eventually she's going to have to sit in front of you like I'm doing and have done. Eventually she's going to have to answer questions and not be sequestered. Eventually she's going to have to answer questions about her record." [Newsweek]

Yeah, but not on Meet the Press.

From the Times:

In the last couple of weeks Mr. Obama has graced the front of Rolling Stone for the second time this year, and the cover of Us Weekly (both of which are owned by the company of a prominent Obama supporter, Jann S. Wenner). Beth Jacobson, a spokeswoman for Wenner Media, said the issues were among the better-selling magazines of the year.

Ned Martel, the deputy editor of Men’s Vogue, said, “He’s what is called in the magazine world an ‘interest driver.’ ” The magazine put Mr. Obama on its cover in 2006 and recently dispatched the photographer Annie Leibovitz to produce another spread for a coming issue. It did a feature on Mr. McCain in 2006 as well that did not make the cover.

So, basically, Obama drives ratings, which makes sense. He's a fresh face. McCain is more familiar to the media due to his longer tenue as a senator and his 2000 presidential campaign.

What should McCain do to get more attention for himself? You have to love this suggestion, from "one news executive:"

“If McCain went to Vietnam, all three anchors would jump at the chance to go with him.” This executive requested anonymity to speak candidly.

Excellent: A Rambo trip!! Which might sound crazy at first, but all bets are off when you do a professional wrasslin' video and refer to your supporters as "McCainians."

Also, Michelle Obama will not join Barack in Iraq or anywhere else on the trip to make her customary "God Damn Whitey" speech, because she will be raising her daughters, at home, like a proper Christian.

[Times]

Honestly, even if the evening newscasts were watched by people without colostomy bags, why is this all about viewer "trust" and "trusting" our "trusted" network anchors? It's not like anyone's giving Charlie Gibson the keys to their apartment or asking Brian Williams to breastfeed their newborn baby. Who cares if Katie Couric looks like she'd stab you in the back with her stiletto? Hell, we choose our newscasts based on set design (NB to GMA: the rust tones have got to go). "Trust" really doesn't matter when we're talking about the person who reads what the producers put on the teleprompter. In the end, all people want in an anchor is "not Nancy Grace."

CBS Is All Katie, but Rivals Aren't Standing By [NYT]