Obama and the bear

By far the most bizarre element of this election. It trumps the lipstick and pig thing, the Palin interviews with Couric and Gibson and that Barney Frank impression from Saturday Night Live:

Bear found dumped at WCU with Obama signs

from the Asheville Citizen-Times

CULLOWHEE – A dead bear was found dumped this morning on the Western Carolina University campus, draped with a pair of Obama campaign signs, university police said.

Maintenance workers reported about 7:45 a.m. finding a 75-pound bear cub dumped at the roundabout near the Catamount statute at the entrance to campus, said Tom Johnson, chief of university police.

“It looked like it had been shot in the head as best we can tell. A couple of Obama campaign signs had been stapled together and stuck over its head,” Johnson said.

University police called in N.C. Wildlife Resources officials to remove the body and help in the investigation. Bear season is currently under way in Western North Carolina.

“This is certainly unacceptable,” Johnson said. “Someone was wanting to draw attention to the election. If we find out who they are, we’ll make sure they’ll get some attention themselves.”

“Western Carolina University deplores the inappropriate behavior that led to this troubling incident,” said Leila Tvedt, associate vice chancellor “We cannot speculate on the motives of the people involved, nor who those people might be. Campus police are cooperating with authorities to investigate this matter.”

Sarah Palin/Charles Gibson interview

Since I have about 10 minutes for this right now, I’ll make some cursory comments on the recent Sarah Palin/Charles Gibson interview, then perhaps expand in a later post.

First, Gibson started right out with the pivotal question. He asked Palin if he could look into the camera, pointing to it with his hand, and tell the American people that she was ready to be vice president or president. She obviously answered, looking at Gibson, in the affirmative, but didn’t look into the camera. It was a nice try on Gibson’s part, though he knew she wouldn’t do it in the first place.

Second, the Bush doctrine thing was stunning. The transcipt, if it read like a Shakespearean play, would have went something like this:

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

[Awkward moment of silence, coupled with small grin by PALIN]

PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His world view?

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq War. You know what, just forget it. I’m done. Interview over. …

[GIBSON takes mic off, leaves chair, punches cameraman and walks off in exacerbation.]

And finally, the best quote I’ve heard in an interview of this kind. As Palin was droning on, not directly answering anything, saying something about extremists, terrorists, freedom, our troops, whatever, Gibson said:

GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes, that you think we have the right to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government? To go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?

PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying America, and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table.

Most of the time, journalists don’t really want to ask “Yes” or “No” questions because it leaves no room for elaboration. But here, Gibson was asking for a simple yes or no, but the ability to give clear, direct answers escapes nearly every politician, thus confounding us and confirming that, if they can be trusted in leadership, they sure don’t make a great case for themselves.