Transcript from Palin & Charlie Gibson (ABC interview)...Part 1 inside

[Sammy]

Her ignorance was shocking. She was very nervous and it is obvious she is in over her head.

 

Completely agree. I'm actually surprised a supporter would want to promote this interview, it was so bad.

[Sammy]

I'm sure you all know that there are 50 states too, but

My point is that in the midst of talking and being interviewed people misspeak, they sometimes hear questions and don't really hear them. I don't know if SP knows what the Bush Doctrine is, I'm pretty sure Obama knows how many states are in the union. I just don't think a misstep from one interview should be pointed to with an "Ah ha!" reaction.

 

It's not just one Aha! moment. It's a snowball of them. Sort of like the snowball that is her personal and political life.

[Michele B]

It's not just one Aha! moment. It's a snowball of them. Sort of like the snowball that is her personal and political life.

 

 

Whaaat? A political figure that has a family that is not "perfect"?

 

Accusations that there is some dubious connection in the past?

 

Oh, please...Look at the "concerns" about Obama's past connections. He had a pretty good snowball going and it didn't cost him the nomination.

 

Michele

[Dawn E]

Whaaat? A political figure that has a family that is not "perfect"?

 

Accusations that there is some dubious connection in the past?

 

Oh, please...Look at the "concerns" about Obama's past connections. He had a pretty good snowball going and it didn't cost him the nomination.

 

Michele

 

Yes. I'm afraid Obama's past connections concern me a great deal more than Palin's.

[Sammy]

Please don't put words in my mouth or twist my words - thanks. I didn't say I support Obama or that he doesn't have issues, but I also won't rationalize away someone's negative aspects just because I happen to like them, or allow their stance on one issue to blind me to anything else about them.

[TXMomof4]

Yes. I'm afraid Obama's past connections concern me a great deal more than Palin's.

 

Amen! In fact, why are we discussing a church that prays for God's will to be done when we could be discussing those connections of Obama's. He says he didn't agree with his pastor and everyone sighs and says, "Oh good." His pastor was preaching GD America - and I'm supposed to smile and say, well, that's alright.

 

I will say that Sarah Palin has done a tremendous service for Obama. No one is talking about all of the people he "barely knew" that he's having to denounce now. If nothing else, the company he has chosen to keep is questionable.

 

Now, I'm going to have a tea party with my sweet children and not think about politics the rest of the day! (at least until I get back on the computer....:glare:)

[RebeccaC]

Please don't put words in my mouth or twist my words - thanks. I didn't say I support Obama or that he doesn't have issues, but I also won't rationalize away someone's negative aspects just because I happen to like them, or allow their stance on one issue to blind me to anything else about them.

 

 

Sammy,

 

folks have different points of view.... what you may see that needs rationalizing others may not see a need. It really does matter who your candidate is. I write this respectfully, knowing that this is an emotional subject btdt :blush:

 

I like Pain not just because of her pro-life stance but more importantly because of her stance on Israel, and then energy, ect......... Quite a few Evangelicals will feel the same about her, she covers more than just one issue in the manner we would like to see our candidate. It is a fallacy of the liberal press and of Democrats to think that the only reason we like her is for pro-life issues that might be the meat of it but there are a lot of potatoes that sure look good with her too.

[Michele B]

My point was not to rationalize away negative issues.

 

Palin has some alleged issues that are being investigated. She has not been convicted of any crime. So what can be held against her at this point? My point was that politicians don't make everyone happy and they all get accused of some irregularity by someone. It goes with the territory. It does not mean she or anyone else is guilty.

 

She handles a career and a family with grace. She is a supportive wife and mother. Her daughter got pregnant. It happens. It does not mean Palin is a hypocrite. She believes abstinence is a good thing. Her daughter does or does not. I believe not eating a whole key lime pie is a good thing. But have I fallen into gluttony? Sure! She appears to be a loving mother - where is this personal life snowball?

 

If the snowball you speak of is a snowball of accusations, that goes with the territory. People sling mud. It is not always justified.

 

Michele

[Debbie in OR]

There have and will continue to be gaffaws by all people for all time, including kings, presidents and we commoners (aside from Obama having been in "57 states" and that he would be serving in office for "8-10 years" or McCain not knowing how many houses he has or calling the Czech Republic "Czechoslavakia"). It is just part of being human. Yes, we expect more from those in positions of leadership, but they are still going to flub. There is no way around it.

 

This thing with Palin is a whole different issue. She did exactly the smart thing by asking for clarification. She knows how quickly comments get twisted, omitted, revised and was going to make sure she spoke precisely to the definition that was floating around in Gibson's mind. Smart. Very, very smart.

[Elaine]

Yes. I'm afraid Obama's past connections concern me a great deal more than Palin's.

 

I feel like your stalker, Dawn, because I always agree with you.:D

 

 

Yes, indeed. Tony Rezko, Rev.Wright, hardly any time actually spent being a governor, etc. concern me more. Especially because he is running for president, not Palin.

[Zelda]

:leaving:

[Debbie in OR]

:leaving:

Oh, don't go! I love reading your posts!

[sleepy]

Yes, indeed. Tony Rezko, Rev.Wright, hardly any time actually spent being a governor, etc. concern me more. Especially because he is running for president, not Palin.

 

Elaine, sometimes I just wish you would tell us how you really feel. ;) :D

[RebeccaC]

I thnk the conversation has been directed down another path because too much is coming to light about the so called Bush Doctrine. Sarah's non gaffe is realy being exposed, here is a quote from the Washington Post article by Dan Froomkin,

Jacob Weisberg, in his book "The Bush Tragedy," actually identified six Bush Doctrines: Bush Doctrine

• 1.0 was Unipolar Realism (3/7/99--9/10/01);
• Bush Doctrine 2.0 was With Us or Against Us (9/11/01--5/31/02);
• Bush Doctrine 3.0 was Preemption (6/1/02--11/5/03);
• Bush Doctrine 4.0 was Democracy in the Middle East (11/6/03--1/19/05);
• Bush Doctrine 5.0 was Freedom Everywhere (1/20/05-- 11/7/06);
• and Bush Doctrine 6.0 (11/8/06 to date) is the "absence of any functioning doctrine at all."

 

There are quite a few others in the artcile but I thought this was good and clear........... Again I do not think or ever have thought that there was a Bush doctrine. I have always felt that there was a morphing Bush policy.

 

Mr.Gibson must be feeling a little less smug and a tad bit unconfortable with his got ya question.

[Elaine]

Elaine, sometimes I just wish you would tell us how you really feel. ;) :D

 

:lol: I can be a bit much, I know.

 

My husband has actually said to me, "You know Lane, you don't have to tell me everything that you are thinking all the time.":lol: Just be glad you don't live with me, Sleepy.;)

[sleepy]

My husband has actually said to me, "You know Lane, you don't have to tell me everything that you are thinking all the time.":lol:

 

:lol::lol: Poor, poor, unfortunate man. :lol::lol:

[Elaine]

:lol::lol: Poor, poor, unfortunate man. :lol::lol:

 

:lol::lol: He keeps me around because I make him laugh. Putting out the recycling helps, too.;):lol:

[CactusPair]

I'm not voting for McCain and don't agree with Gov. Palin on a variety of issues. I think she's a poor choice for VP. i don't trust her, but I don't trust any politician really.:confused:

 

Her puported statement about the war being a "task from God" appalled me.

 

****But what makes me really mad is finding out ABC News left out a large chunk of her statement during her prayer at the church.***

 

Her words were misconstrued and taken out of context. When read in full, they give a different tone and impression. I think foxnews.com listed the statement in its entirety, which I appreciate. I still don't agree with her sentiment, but I understand it now and don't fear it.

 

It really bugs me that the media are portraying her in extremes: either all good, or all bad, a fanatic one way or the other. The McCain campaign is not doing her or us any favors by keeping her under wraps so much.

 

Charlie Gibson bugs me, too. ;) I just had to add that. He's just yucky. We listened to the interview on the computer. I wish it had been Diane Sawyer instead or Aaron Brown.

[Spy Car]

Is there a link to unedited transcripts or video?

 

I'd like to read (or see) the full interview.

[Debbie in OR]

****But what makes me really mad is finding out ABC News left out a large chunk of her statement during her prayer at the church.***

 

Her words were misconstrued and taken out of context. When read in full, they give a different tone and impression. I think foxnews.com listed the statement in its entirety, which I appreciate. I still don't agree with her sentiment, but I understand it now and don't fear it.

 

I'm clear on how you feel about Palin (!) and you make an excellent point. Which is why she was being so careful in making sure she was answering as precisely as possible.

[Saille]

Amen! In fact, why are we discussing a church that prays for God's will to be done when we could be discussing those connections of Obama's. He says he didn't agree with his pastor and everyone sighs and says, "Oh good." His pastor was preaching GD America - and I'm supposed to smile and say, well, that's alright.

 

The two are very different, IMO. One pastor is talking about it potentially being God's will to engage in military action against another country. The other was engaging in overblown hyperbole to express that ingrained societal racism made him feel disenfranchised from the American dream. When I look at which is more dangerous, the only way Reverend Wright comes out ahead is if I count all the injuries resulting from jerking knees.

[6packofun]

I too, know what the "Bush Doctine" is and was surprised that she did not... and it was obvious that she did not. And, although I'm sure that many people don't know what the Bush Doctrine is that is not an excuse. She does know where Russia is. However being able to see it across the Bering Strait is not valuable foreign policy experience.

 

I really want to see her answer some tough questions from the press. This was hardly a rough interview.

 

I've gotta say that I think it's so funny that the ones here who feel that they know exactly what the Bush Doctrine is just happen to be the more liberal folks. So, you all believe in the version of the "Bush Doctrine" that Charlie Gibson gave and would have defined it just that way if asked in conversation or do you define it as one of its other incarnations or a combination?

 

Just for fun info, I like Charles Krauthammer: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html LOL ;)

[lovemyboys]

Her puported statement about the war being a "task from God" appalled me.

 

****But what makes me really mad is finding out ABC News left out a large chunk of her statement during her prayer at the church.***

 

Her words were misconstrued and taken out of context. When read in full, they give a different tone and impression. I think foxnews.com listed the statement in its entirety, which I appreciate. I still don't agree with her sentiment, but I understand it now and don't fear it.

 

It really bugs me that the media are portraying her in extremes: either all good, or all bad, a fanatic one way or the other. The McCain campaign is not doing her or us any favors by keeping her under wraps so much.

 

Charlie Gibson bugs me, too. ;) I just had to add that. He's just yucky. We listened to the interview on the computer. I wish it had been Diane Sawyer instead or Aaron Brown.

 

We've seen more of all this too in the last couple of days. It's eye-opening how the editing has been done. I underlined the bits here that hit me too.

 

The supposed prayer was a concern, definitely. But when I saw the lengthier video, I realized what the editing had done. I've been raised in the judeo-christian tradition where we do pray for our world, we're supposed to pray for our leaders from the top to our most local, and our faith leader too. Her prayer seemed to fall right in that tradition. She has since mentioned a number of our former presidents who have done likewise. I agree with you that it just changes the whole tone.

 

One thing that I've wondered is whether this will cause the media to look more carefully into candidates' issues in general or is this just the new person on the block?

 

I didn't watch much news during the primaries due to our life situation at that point, so I'm sure I missed a bunch. I've always wondered, besides the obvious political connection and bona-fides, why the Obamas stayed so strongly associated with a church with that rhetoric. Having moved a good bit, I know that you can get the tenor of the pastoral leadership without attending every service or hearing every sermon. Just a thought.

[Debbie in OR]

I've always wondered, besides the obvious political connection and bona-fides, why the Obamas stayed so strongly associated with a church with that rhetoric. Having moved a good bit, I know that you can get the tenor of the pastoral leadership without attending every service or hearing every sermon. Just a thought.

 

I've wondered this very thing and have tried (in vain) to find somewhere that the Obamas have discussed this. Anyone? Anyone?

[Sharon in SC]

It is a fallacy of the liberal press and of Democrats to think that the only reason we like her is for pro-life issues.

 

:iagree:

[tibbyl]

The problem with using one's god/s as justification for war is that the god/s never step up to podium to confirm their support or endorsement of the war.

[Saille]

Hmm...this doesn't totally answer the question, unless you take from this that he doesn't feel matters came to a head until the charged matter of the election ramped things up, but here's a clip of the press conference in which Obama explains why he left, and he explains what he and his wife look for in a church.

 

Newsweek article that discusses the issue more fully, although it all sounds pretty theoretical to me.

[Sammy]

The problem with using one's god/s as justification for war is that the god/s never step up to podium to confirm their support or endorsement of the war.

 

Or any other stance which is so often attributed to one's god. :)

[LizzyBee]

I wish I could find the website (and if I do find it, I'll edit to add the link), but a few days ago, someone published the entire "task from God" sentence. Sarah Palin didn't say the war in Iraq is a task from God, she said we need to pray; we need to pray that it is God's plan.

 

Context makes a huge difference in the meaning!

[Sharon in SC]

Sarah Palin didn't say the war in Iraq is a task from God, she said we need to pray; we need to pray that it is God's plan.

 

Context makes a huge difference in the meaning!

 

:iagree:

 

GOV. SARAH PALIN: Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan. So bless them with your prayers, your prayers of protection over our soldiers.

 

In her interview with Charlie Gibson, she used Abraham as an example. He did the same thing - emphasized the need to make sure that men were walking in the will of God in their endeavors. HUGE difference from what folks are trying to say that Sarah said.

 

When one believes in a higher power, it is crucial to remember that what *man* thinks is a justifiable thing to do may not be in keeping with what *God* desires to have done. When I read Sarah's *exact* quote, I am led to strongly believe that she was recognizing that very principle.

[TXMomof4]

I wish I could find the website (and if I do find it, I'll edit to add the link), but a few days ago, someone published the entire "task from God" sentence. Sarah Palin didn't say the war in Iraq is a task from God, she said we need to pray; we need to pray that it is God's plan.

 

Context makes a huge difference in the meaning!

 

 

And the fact remains that both pastors are calling on the same God. One of them praying that his will be done. The other praying that he d*mn America. If you don't believe in God, that's one thing, but to question her pastor calling on God for his will to be done without questioning Obama's pastor for condemning America shows a disparity of ...questioning?

 

And maybe it was just anger at the racial situation in America. Kimber has given insight into that in another post that really brought it home to me the divide that still exists. But that man is perpetuating it rather than working in any way to heal it. That a presidential candidate is given a pass on supporting a man like that is ridiculous.

[LizzyBee]

Thanks, Sharon.

[tibbyl]

A "task from god" or "god's plan." Mere semantical nitpicking. I'm glad she is being upfront about her god and his support of Iraqi war.

[Melinda in VT]

And the fact remains that both pastors are calling on the same God. One of them praying that his will be done. The other praying that he d*mn America. If you don't believe in God, that's one thing, but to question her pastor calling on God for his will to be done without questioning Obama's pastor for condemning America shows a disparity of ...questioning?

 

 

LOL. The Obama/Wright issue got a ton of media play time. I definitely don't think there was a disparity of questioning.

 

But we've been talking and thinking about Obama, McCain, et al for months and months. (This election cycle seems to be lasting forever.) It's only natural that Palin, who hasn't been on the national radar before, is going to be the focus of interest and questioning for a while. All of her media attention is consolidated into a couple of months. Obama's, Biden's, and McCain's have been spread out over months and years.

 

As for Palin, I agree with those who think she came across as uninformed in the interview AND I agree with those who don't understand what the fuss is about the prayer.

 

Still voting for Obama.

[Sharon in SC]

A "task from god" or "god's plan." Mere semantical nitpicking. I'm glad she is being upfront about her god and his support of Iraqi war.

 

Hmmmm - you either did not hear one of her responses to Charlie in the interview (on the note of verbalizing the war as God's will) or you have chosen to not take her at her word. Specifically, she said that she would never presume to speak for God. To reiterate: Her prayer request at that Alaskan church was not an indication of her belief that the war was God's will but a sincere desire to see the American people walk in God's will, whatever that may happen to be.

[buddhabelly]

I am a staunch democrat, but I thought she did extremely well in the interview. I had to take out my earphones, though (I was at the gym) when she said NUCULAR. I haven't heard anyone else say that except for George Bush.

 

So has Georgie been coaching Ms. Sarah in energy policy? Hee.

 

By the way, you may know that Alaska is a solidly Republican state. (Though we have managed to elect a few Democratic governors here and there.) However, downtown Juneau is almost 100 percent Democratic. I know this because they publish voting results by precinct, and there are three downtown precincts. I live downtown, so I am always amused to see that all my neighbors vote exactly like I do. Here's an example: there was a ballot initiative on the primary ballot a few weeks ago. It suggested, quite reasonably I think, that no person or organization should be allowed to put anything into the water that is harmful to fish or humans. Downtown precincts passed it with flying colors. The initiative FAILED. Might add some extra cost to the price of doing business in Alaska, you know? Wouldn't that be a shame. The mines might not be as profitable.

 

The governor's mansion is downtown. She hasn't lived there in over a year (she lives in Wasilla -- not sure how she communicates with the legislators, who are all here!!!), but she used to in the beginning. She said it was weird living in a neighborhood where she was absolutely positive that NOBODY voted for her! Hee.

[cin]

I also realized, after my previous post, she also sent her son to Iraq earlier in the day. In theory, anyway. The farewell ceremony was then. He actually leaves later this month, I believe. I, for one, wouldn't be able to do ANY interviews after that. Whether I supported the war, or not.

[Spy Car]

Hmmmm - you either did not hear one of her responses to Charlie in the interview (on the note of verbalizing the war as God's will) or you have chosen to not take her at her word. Specifically, she said that she would never presume to speak for God. To reiterate: Her prayer request at that Alaskan church was not an indication of her belief that the war was God's will but a sincere desire to see the American people walk in God's will, whatever that may happen to be.

 

 

I heard it, but I also watched the entirety of the speech she gave at her former church (the speech that provoked the question) and the answer she gave Charlie Gibson didn't jibe with her extended commentary during the delivered at her local Assemblies of God church.

 

So many of us must question, what is her real position?

 

Bill

[Sharon in SC]

I heard it, but I also watched the entirety of the speech she gave at her former church (the speech that provoked the question) and the answer she gave Charlie Gibson didn't jibe with her extended commentary during the delivered at her local Assemblies of God church.

 

So many of us must question, what is her real position?

 

Bill

 

Well, I guess, then, that the mystery is solved and you have "chosen to not take her at her word", yes? :tongue_smilie:

 

I presume that is an accurate assessment in light of the fact that, given the opportunity to clarify by Charlie Gibson and her response being what it was (that she was not attempting to speak for God) that you still wonder anything about it. Certainly, because of the freedoms we celebrate, that is your prerogative! :)

[RebeccaC]

Hmmmm - you either did not hear one of her responses to Charlie in the interview (on the note of verbalizing the war as God's will) or you have chosen to not take her at her word. Specifically, she said that she would never presume to speak for God. To reiterate: Her prayer request at that Alaskan church was not an indication of her belief that the war was God's will but a sincere desire to see the American people walk in God's will, whatever that may happen to be.

 

 

:iagree: Both your posts on this have been good imho just can't rep ya any more :glare:

[LizzyBee]

A "task from god" or "god's plan." Mere semantical nitpicking. I'm glad she is being upfront about her god and his support of Iraqi war.

 

But the difference is, she didn't say it is God's plan. She said we'd better be praying that it is. My paraphrase would be "We're doing this and it's a huge big deal. If it's not part of God's plan, we're in some deep do-do!"

 

Totally different meaning.

[RebeccaC]

I heard it, but I also watched the entirety of the speech she gave at her former church (the speech that provoked the question) and the answer she gave Charlie Gibson didn't jibe with her extended commentary during the delivered at her local Assemblies of God church.

 

So many of us must question, what is her real position?

 

Bill

 

Bill,

 

I think that part of your and other liberals problems is that you do not understand the cultural lingo of conservative Christians which is different from Catholic, all the Orthodox flavors and most of the other high church denominations lingo.

She said Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right.

 

They are doing their sworn duty regardless of how they view it.

 

 

Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God.

This means pray that they are not being sent on a task that is not from God or against the will of God. She is not saying that the task is from God and the only way you would really understand this is to know the lingo. It is a cultural thing and you are viewing it from out side the culture not understanding the language or ideas of those in the culture. I saw her speech to the church long before the Gibson interview and I knew that Gibson had got it wrong and did not understand the culture or the world view of those she was talking to. I have family members who are pastors in the Assemblies of God and I grew up in the culture.

 

That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan. So bless them with your prayers, your prayers of protection over our soldiers.

 

Hasn't the mantra of the liberals and Democrats been there is no plan? Here she is saying pray that the leaders are getting God's plan for conducting, fighting, ending the war. Lastly she is asking for prayers of protection.

 

Now one can argue that there is no God so therefore this is wasted energy but that is something totally different.

[Kimber]

For many Christians, when something is God's plan it doesn't automatically mean it's a good thing or that it is his best for us. You can't take biblical talk out of context. Basically, the scripture to back this up goes something like, "all things work together for those who love the Lord."

 

So when I know this bit of background scripture then I know that's what she means, especially when it's church dialogue. Church dialogue has different meaning that day to day words.

 

It's the same kind of talk we hear at church during funerals about the death of loved ones. It's God's will that he or she be called home.

 

It's very complicated because there are fuzzy lines between God's will and Him working everything out for our good. And then there is our permissive will that He allows which is also His will but it was our choice. Try explaining deep doctrinal ideas like that in the answer to one question to people who don't understand the context of the speech she gave. It was an unfair question because there is too much doctrine behind it, and non-Christians read it at face value without understanding the religious context. Charlie Gibson tried to over simplify that issue by asking it in that context--one question.

 

Honestly, it'd take a book to really explain the difference between God's will and his permissive will and free will for us.

 

ETA And I figure that she couldn't really explain it that way because then she runs the risks of alienating non-believers because then the explanation boils down to you don't understand because you're not a Christian or you don't read the bible. Basically, there was no way she could really win with that question.

[TXMomof4]

For many Christians, when something is God's plan it doesn't automatically mean it's a good thing or that it is his best for us. You can't take biblical talk out of context. Basically, the scripture to back this up goes something like, "all things work together for those who love the Lord."

 

So when I know this bit of background scripture then I know that's what she means, especially when it's church dialogue. Church dialogue has different meaning that day to day words. So if she says that something is God's will.

 

It's the same kind of talk we hear at church during funerals about the death of loved ones. It's God's will that he or she be called home.

 

It's very complicated because there are fuzzy lines between God's will and Him working everything out for our God. And then there is our permissive will that He allows which is also His will but it was our choice. Try explaining deep doctrinal ideas like that in the answer to one question to people who don't understand the context of the speech she gave. It was an unfair question because there is too much doctrine behind it, and non-Christians read it at face value without understanding the religious context. Charlie Gibson tried to over simplify that issue by asking it in that context--one question.

 

Honestly, it'd take a book to really explain the difference between God's will and his permissive will and free will for us.

 

 

I have to spread rep around before I can get you again, but I really appreciate your posts. Thanks!

[RebeccaC]

For many Christians, when something is God's plan it doesn't automatically mean it's a good thing or that it is his best for us. You can't take biblical talk out of context. Basically, the scripture to back this up goes something like, "all things work together for those who love the Lord."

 

So when I know this bit of background scripture then I know that's what she means, especially when it's church dialogue. Church dialogue has different meaning that day to day words.

 

It's the same kind of talk we hear at church during funerals about the death of loved ones. It's God's will that he or she be called home.

 

It's very complicated because there are fuzzy lines between God's will and Him working everything out for our God. And then there is our permissive will that He allows which is also His will but it was our choice. Try explaining deep doctrinal ideas like that in the answer to one question to people who don't understand the context of the speech she gave. It was an unfair question because there is too much doctrine behind it, and non-Christians read it at face value without understanding the religious context. Charlie Gibson tried to over simplify that issue by asking it in that context--one question.

 

Honestly, it'd take a book to really explain the difference between God's will and his permissive will and free will for us.

 

Good Post! :iagree:

[Sharon in SC]

So when I know this bit of background scripture then I know that's what she means, especially when it's church dialogue. Church dialogue has different meaning that day to day words.

 

Try explaining deep doctrinal ideas like that in the answer to one question to people who don't understand the context of the speech she gave. It was an unfair question because there is too much doctrine behind it, and non-Christians read it at face value without understanding the religious context. Charlie Gibson tried to over simplify that issue by asking it in that context--one question.

 

Basically, there was no way she could really win with that question.

 

:iagree:, wholeheartedly. Very well said.