(via pete)

Make sure to watch the whole clip. I particularly like it when he points out the difference between "covering" news and "promoting" news:

Here [are] the facts. We did cover the event. What we didn't do was promote the event. Just like when thousands marched on Washington to protest the war in Iraq we covered it as well - probably not as much as this event. But we didn't promote it. [...] That's not what real news organizations are supposed to do. We covered it. We didn't promote it. I invite you [Fox News] to look into the distinction between those two words.

This is exactly what Fox News likes to do - tell a lie, get a lot of press over it, then apologize. Fewer people will hear the apology (and thus the lie lives on). Faux News indeed.

It's a wonder that these "news" commentators don't choke on their own hypocrisy. Sometimes I wish they would.

...and go read a book

...and stop watching Faux News

...and Jesus, REALLY? What the hell is wrong with you?

My first thought was Plessy v. Ferguson (which was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education). Hmm... maybe she should read some newspaper articles about herself since she was quoted as being against the recent (2005) Supreme Court ruling for "Baker vs Exxon". That ruling gutted the punitive settlement for Alaskans hurt by the 1989 Exxon spill. You'd think such an "involved" governor of Alaska would be able to at least think of rulings that recently and directly affected citizens in her own state.

But be warned: I have listened to Palin's previous debates during her bid to become governor and she is a very good debater. Most debates aren't about policies, and she is excellent with sound bites and connecting with people on a personal level.

And this is Katie Couric - not exactly a hardball interviewer (in fact, given the "crisis" those questions were all very softball). I can't wait for the VP debates.

Oh well - at least it would make a neat Disney movie (best quote: "You pucked with the wrong ice president!").

UPDATE: Oh man, another clip from the interview where she is trying to explain how being close to Russia gives her foreign policy experience. It's almost comical at this point (until you realize that this person might actually be one heartbeat away from the presidency!).

Also, while I have your attention, do you remember back when Clinton was squawking about how Obama reused parts of a close friends speech? Well, turns out she does the exact same thing:

• Less than 1% of the results have been reported, but Fox has already projected a winner (note the check next to Romney).
• The actual third place candidate, Ron Paul, is only shown on the small list at the bottom. Paul has almost twice as many votes as Huckabee - why isn't he pictured in one of the top slots?

I know all news sources have some bias in their reporting, but Fox "News" is disgraceful. When this flashed by on the screen most people probably didn't have time to actually read the information, assuming they cared that much. Pretty pictures tell a pretty story... it's a shame that this picture is a pretty lie.

Please, please remember this the next time you are watching a Fox "News" program: the vast majority of what they spew is heavily biased and, as is the case here, intentionally misleading.