Video: Palin on the Bush Doctrine, 9/11, and Pakistan
posted at 8:27 pm on September 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Yeah, he came off condescending and asked questions of her no one ever thinks to ask The One, like how many countries he’d visited before becoming a senator. The exchanges were chopped to a fine mince too on the editing machine, which is why I didn’t include the bit where he asked her what insight Alaska’s proximity to Russia gives her into their actions and she said, “They’re our next-door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.” Did she really give a non-answer that goofy or did they just smear her by editing it that way? I would have given them the benefit of the doubt earlier but not after botching the prayer quote.
That said, it’s pretty clear she doesn’t know what he means by the Bush Doctrine and can’t answer the Pakistan question in anything but platitudes about stopping Islamic extremism. Even the gimme about the 9/11 hijackers’ motivations comes out garbled: She’s trying to make the basic neocon point that terrorism is a problem caused by political repression and solved by democracy, but it sounds as if she’s trying to patch it together from mental index cards, which … may in fact be what she was doing. Or maybe she was just nervous. Or thrown by Gibson’s demeanor. Not good, whichever it is, but 99% of the people who love her won’t care and the 1% who do can probably be brought around with a good interview tomorrow and, especially, a good debate with Biden. Now, tell me how brilliant she was and how wrong I am.
Update: Meant to say, I think ABC inadvertently did her a huge favor in their choice of excerpts to highlight. She came off fine in asserting that she’s ready to be VP and in making the mundane McCainish point about admitting Georgia and Ukraine to NATO. The Iraq prayer segment was iffier thanks to Gibson’s distortion, but she did okay in connecting it up to Lincoln. Fearless prediction: The Democrats will make more hay out of the stuff you see below than the stuff ABC was touting earlier.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 6 7 8
Your shtick isn’t coming off as pessimism, it’s coming off as the same Joe Klein, TNR like condescension.
That said, I watched the whole clip and she was quite good. You can’t expect her to be Henry Kissinger and everybody is holding her to that standard. But if you calmly breathe and don’t get all jumpy about how the other side will spin it and watch it with normal eyes, she comes off as quite good. I liked her very much.
promachus on September 12, 2008 at 4:23 AM
Yes. She is a Telfon Mom at the moment…thanks the Media pile-on over the past several weeks.
Waterboy on September 12, 2008 at 4:40 AM
Overall, a solid 6 on a 1 to 10 scale, imho.
I think we already see her as an iron willed person .. an early inquisition, from the MSM mind you and all of its intrigue, vagaries and traps, shows she has the balls to take it on, and will only serve to form that iron into steel. We the people see that.
The pessimism here is way off base. She is real. She makes a fundamental gut level contact with folks. This interview(one of a few I would think)is not going to hurt her or McC at all. I think it strengthens her and peoples view of her.
Benjamin9 on September 12, 2008 at 4:51 AM
I posted the ABC News interview on my site and just took it down. I was critical of Palin’s response. She looked like a novice. However, I just saw her on Nightline and in full context she was really good. Gibson or the ABC hatcheteers butchered the interview most people would see to make her look stupid. I was/am astonished at the difference in interviews when you see the ABC News version and the full(er) interview on Nightline.
ABC is dispicable.
And I wouldn’t be too hard on her for the Bush Doctrine. Aren’t Bush opponents the ones who coined the phrase? I couldn’t even define it, but Gibson sure could.
According to Wikipedia (I know, I hate them too, “The official term recognized by the White House for the concept of the Bush Doctrine is The National Security Strategy of the United States of America of 2006.[1]”
If she doesn’t know the term because it’s a leftist creation, good for her. It delegitmizes the National Security Strategy to call it the Bush Doctrine, which is why Gibson brought it up.
Amy Proctor on September 12, 2008 at 5:15 AM
Look at how the video jumps at 1 min 57 seconds. ABC edited out the entire discourse where she explains how vital Afghanistan is in dealing with Pakistan and how creating a surge in Afghanistan will affect what we do in Pakistan and how we should go after Bin Laden in that area with Pakistan’s help..it was quite good, I don’t recall it exactly… they just put inher short little reorts because Gibson kept asking her the same question over and over after she’d give a good long response. They edited that out and just put the short retort reiterating what she already said.
ABC should be ashamed.
Amy Proctor on September 12, 2008 at 5:21 AM
Actually, it’s more like 1:55 or 1:56. They also left out the description she gave of the role of commander in chief to act pre-emptively to protect the nation. The left in the little “We have to leave all options on the table” because after the 3rd time of answering the same question all she could do was revert to that basic concept.
Amy Proctor on September 12, 2008 at 5:25 AM
She answered that question the only way it could be answered. pakistan has a new wack job president and are on the verge of being taken over by the islamic influenced secret police and army. gibson was trying to get her to say something that would cause an international incident. She answered it the way a president would answer it. gibson was a condescending jerkoff and the editting was so blatantly poor it was obvious abc was doing it’s best to make her look bad. We know you’re disappointed hillary is out of the race but come on.
peacenprosperity on September 12, 2008 at 5:42 AM
AP, I wouldn’t say you’re wrong, exactly. He hit her with some pretty stupid questions, and she kept up with him. She didn’t get flustered (which Gibson obviously was trying to cause), and she can think on her feet.
We just may pull this out.
Squiggy on September 12, 2008 at 6:29 AM
Intrade shows McCain ahead of Obama by 7 points. Clearly, the professional gamblers are getting the info that this interview hasn’t harmed McCain.
lodge on September 12, 2008 at 7:18 AM
I’m sitting here listening to Fox and Friends and these guys talking about the Palin interview. What a bunch of condescending Jerks. Saying things like if she can’t handle Charlie Gibson she’s obviously not ready to be Vice President etc… And something about whining. Do they have any idea how pissed off women get when they are talked down to like that. Basically, they were saying yeah you’re a really sweet gal, but you can’t handle the big leagues baby… (Pats on head).I’m so damn mad right now as I’m sure a lot of women are. Why can’t they just give her a little basic respect?
spypeach on September 12, 2008 at 7:40 AM
Idiots don’t deserve respect, man or woman.
an_abstraction on September 12, 2008 at 7:49 AM
i didn’t watch the night line segment- anyone know if they are going to re-air it?
kareyk on September 12, 2008 at 7:52 AM
an_abstraction on September 12, 2008 at 7:49 AM
Are you calling Palin and idiot? Really?
spypeach on September 12, 2008 at 7:54 AM
I thought trolls only came out at night.
ManlyRash on September 12, 2008 at 7:59 AM
*pats you on head*
Yes, dear.
an_abstraction on September 12, 2008 at 8:01 AM
I hope Fox highlights how ABC edited Gibson’s mistake of “exact quote” on the prayer and took it out of the west coast feed and the ABC on-line version. Is ABC going to correct it but saying “we got this one wrong”? Crickets chirping.
deedledee on September 12, 2008 at 8:07 AM
You see that fellow Hot Air Posters?
an_abstractionan_abscess (FTFY)admits that it (an_abstraction) doesn’t deserve respect on this site.Nineball on September 12, 2008 at 8:08 AM
an_abstraction on September 12, 2008 at 8:01 AM
I’m so sorry that you have “mommy” issues. I’m sure with enough therapy you’ll be just fine over time. Don’t forget to take your meds.
spypeach on September 12, 2008 at 8:08 AM
Do they have any idea how pissed off women get when they are talked down to like that.
Palin is a women? really? never would have known that…
Tom_Shipley on September 12, 2008 at 8:11 AM
I have not read the 700+ comments above, so please forgive me if I am merely repeating points made already. Gibson defines the “Bush Doctrine” as preemptive strikes, but isn’t it also (at the very least) the notion that the spread of democracy and freedom is right in its own right, but also the surest way to assure peace, security, and to “drain” the terrorist “swamp.” Isn’t it also the position that our captured enemies should be treated as enemies in war, and not just criminal defendants entitled to all the rights of a U.S. citizen? Given that, why is Palin diminished for asking for clarification of the ambiguous term “Bush Doctrine.” Imagine the lefty spin had she not asked for clarification. The nutroots could define the “Bush Doctrine” as advocating the sale of cigarettes to 5 year olds by space aliens from Mars (h/t El Rushbo) and scream the Palin agrees with martians hooking kids on tobacco.
ncc770 on September 12, 2008 at 8:23 AM
Your ignorance is understandable, as women do not generally frequent the bath houses.
ManlyRash on September 12, 2008 at 8:25 AM
The so-called “Bush Doctrine” is a shorthand reference for a number of policy positions embraced by the Bush administration. It was coined by the Drive-By media. To my knowledge, no one in the Bush administration uses that term.
ManlyRash on September 12, 2008 at 8:30 AM
I haven’t seen the entire interview, but her answers were a little waffly to Gibson. Like many with native intuition, she leaps to the basic point but isn’t sure about the points in between. But there was another audience last night, the Putins, the Almawhazhisnames, the Chavezs, and so on, and so on. And to them her reply was excellent: Don’t get any ideas, boys.
dhimwit on September 12, 2008 at 8:33 AM
No, she’s a woman. And so are quite a few voters.
Jim Treacher on September 12, 2008 at 8:33 AM
Oops. In case, I didn’t make it clear, I meant you, Allah.
promachus on September 12, 2008 at 8:35 AM
I don’t remember reading anything about Biden..
but yes, Biden doesn’t deserve respect..
DaveC on September 12, 2008 at 8:43 AM
Condescending does not BEGIN to describe his freaking attitude.
It’s as if he’s an adult interviewing a child applying the job of VP.
Contrast that to this obsequious interview with Obama on August 7, 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtDnY5mPq2Q
Listen to the differnce in his voice.
What a jackass.
drjohn on September 12, 2008 at 8:45 AM
Yes.
Gibson asked for a yes or no answer to a multiple choice question. If she didn’t ask what he specifically meant, and addressed any one of the various elements of the Doctrine, then he could have interrupted her and pointed to different aspects of the Doctrine. So, she would have sounded like she didn’t know what the whole Bush doctrine is.
Instead, she smartly asked what Gibson meant by the Bush Doctrine. But now, the Obamacells are acting like she herself didn’t know because she asked for clarification. That was the gotcha aspect of the question.
Loxodonta on September 12, 2008 at 8:45 AM
Well, it’s been fun on this topic. But there’s work to do. We are seeing with this interview what is known as a “down”. They come in any great endeavor. The point is to persevere, learn from it, and move on. And so, I’m moving on to another topic.
An army sergeant I know once repeated a definition of “success” as, “Going from mistake to mistake with no loss of confidence.” I’m sure there’s more to success than that, but it makes for an interesting attitude.
For those supporting the Mac and the Cuda, let’s keep fighting. For those opposing, well…, whatever.
Back to work!
http://www.johnmccain.com
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM
ABC et al, Journalism 101 ……
1. How to pose a question to a Republican candidate.
….. Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?
2. How to pose a question to a Democrat candidate.
….. As you know, the Bush Doctrine centers on several key issues, it addresses the terrorist threat and the use of pre-emptive strikes to nip terrorism in the bud, it focuses on strengthening and supporting newborn democracies world-wide and what steps we should take to insure that democracy thrives when smaller nations are threatened by outside sources who are known enemies of the United States. Do you agree with this foreign policy?
See how it works?
fogw on September 12, 2008 at 8:51 AM
Gibson makes no friend in women with this interview.
drjohn on September 12, 2008 at 8:54 AM
Good series of posts on ABC’s hatchet editing. Thanks.
Hopefully soon there’ll be some side-by-side video comparisons.
petefrt on September 12, 2008 at 8:59 AM
I am surprised AP didn’t have the word OY in the heading.
She was fine, nothing to get upset about (unless you’re a Biden guy).
Fuquay Steve on September 12, 2008 at 9:00 AM
I caught ABC’s morning program for a bit and they did a ‘fact check’ with Palin, and used three examples. One was if VP’s have a lot of foreign experience, and the other was how close is russia, can you see it from Alaska. They used a huge rubber stamp to say ” TRUE ” for that one, because the last Alaskan island in a chain goes right to the first Russian island. Whoo.
But the one that they misled was her response to Gibson’s question, do you have enough experience to be president, given the fact that you just got your passport miss Alaska, how many foreign leaders have you meet. And her answer was, not many at all. And if you checked with former VP’s I’m not alone.
So their way to ‘prove her FALSE!’ (Huge rubber stamp over her face) was to check with the last 4 or 5 VP’s and show that they had extensive foreign travels. And that re-defines her answer – because she didn’t claim that the last few VP’s had less. It was a little annoying.
On another station,(I think NBC) James Carville gave her a “C” and he said he was a notoriously generous grader, and a woman on CBS who wrote a book about reading people gave her a “5″.
So yeah, it’s begun.
wise_man on September 12, 2008 at 9:06 AM
Yes. And the way he asked her about Georgia and NATO, made it seem that she’s itching to start a war with Russia. And yesterday on Fox, Fred Barnes said that her answer was almost the exact same as Barack Obama’s reply to a similar question. That, in addition to her use of mentioning GOD was the same as what John F Kennedy had spoken before.
I didn’t see anyone on ABC, NBC, CBS mention that. But I did on FOX. And some people say that FOX is biased. And of course the others are, for the democrats, and against the republicans, every time.
wise_man on September 12, 2008 at 9:10 AM
Bottom Line: in a carefully scripted and performed charade, ABC desperately attempts to right the sinking Obama Ship of Fools by asking GOP VP candidate Palin two hours worth of questions that they have never asked, and never will ask, Dem Presidential candidate Obama.
Heh.
This is even funnier than I thought it would be.
Jaibones on September 12, 2008 at 9:15 AM
Palin did fine, especially considering the circumstances. She certainly didn’t lose any votes, and she may well have gained some.
I haven’t seen yet the fuller version that aired on Nightline. If ABC did a hatchet job with the editing, as I suspect, then there’s the prospect of additional backlash.
What pleases me most is what this interview made clear to me: Give Palin a few more interviews and she’ll be eating these media people for breakfast.
petefrt on September 12, 2008 at 9:18 AM
Allahpundit’s voting for Obama. Can there be any more doubts?
Spanglemaker on September 12, 2008 at 9:21 AM
Charlie Gibson is a pr**k!
I wish they would just let her do a fully televised, commercial free sit down with regular Americans. Let them ask her questions, and let her answer, in full and have the people see all that she says, no more and NO LESS!
The media is so in the tank, I don’t think it is possible for her to have a fair chance. I really hate them. I hate them for making me hate them, because I’m not supposed to hate. But right now, I do. And so many idiots in this country suck it up. I buried an Enquirer at the Publix yesterday, because of the stupid headline. I was shaking so hard I could hardly type my pin to pay. The media has far too much power in this country. Some how we need to have the freedom of the press issue revisited. Freedom of speech should not be license for freedom of slander/liable/total distortion and missinformation.
That rant over, I love Sarah. No, she wasn’t smooth and polished, but I love her for it. I love her for being real. I’m sick of smooth politicians. How many times has Obama changed his positions, but because he can spout any and all of them confidently and elloquently (gags)he gets a pass. I AM SICK OF IT!
drjohn, I hope you are right, and for the ones who actually watch it for themselves, you should be. Sadly, there are a lot of stupid women (and men) who won’t watch and will only get their impressions from the media spin.
pannw on September 12, 2008 at 9:21 AM
It’s a very small fraction of this nation of people like us who are engaged in, and addicted to politics like this. And it’s not going to be people like us who end up deciding elections, it’s the soccer(possibly hockey) moms and sunday football addicts who’s votes might tip the scales to obama or McCain.
wise_man on September 12, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Great bit from Jay Nordlinger in today’s NRO:
Charlie Gibson: “Senator Obama, you have referred in the past to ‘my Muslim faith.’ How strong is your Muslim faith?”
Barack Obama: “You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.”
Charlie Gibson: “Exact words.”
You remember the old bit about the movie ad? Reviewer Joe Smith says, “This is far from a great movie.” And the ad comes out, “Joe Smith says, ‘This is . . . a great movie’!”
Gibson did not commit a capital offense — and if Palin performed poorly in this interview, the responsibility is hers alone. But the abbreviation of that quote — not so cool.
ManlyRash on September 12, 2008 at 9:30 AM
They just had a clip of the interview on Fox & Friends of Palin & Gibson touring a raised pipeline, and I gotta tell you, Gibson looks just like a penguin. He’s wearing a shirt & tie, with a soft grey sweater over that, and a navy sports coat over all. With that big round grey tummy … It’s hilarious. He ever waddles like a penguin. I know that this is a petty superficial swipe, but I just couldn’t resist. Palin so outclasses the guy. And when the hell did Charlie Morning Show become a senior statesman of the Establishment Media? Is he next in line after BrokawRather? I just don’t watch broadcast news anymore, so I find it all kind of spooky cute.
argos on September 12, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Funny as hell: The Red State Update guys weigh in on Palin vs. the Media. Have a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpHBPQyoYXQ
ErinF on September 12, 2008 at 10:01 AM
For those of us old enough to remember, the press tried to do this with an equally charismatic Republican candidate, Ronald Reagan, and they failed abysmally. I don’t think that so-called journalists realize that most Americans these days are well-educated, extremely well-informed, live in the real world and have real jobs, (rather than running around in front of a camera and a mike,) and can see right through this crap. Anyone who went to college – and that’s most of the US – recognizes the slant and the condescension, as our professors tried this on us in school. And with all of that attempt at inculcating us with their views, they really just taught us critical thinkers their game. They gave us insight into how their mind works, and if we didn’t play along in school, we didn’t get the grades. So many of us who could actually think for ourselves played along, learned their tactics, and went out into the world able to stomp them into dust in their field of play, which is why they can keep this up with Palin and it will boomerang in their faces. They aren’t smarter than us anymore.
foxforce91 on September 12, 2008 at 10:01 AM
I know we’re on page 8 of a two-day old post, and not many people are still paying attention, and beside – this posture is quite out of character for me, but here goes:
- Allah’s vote is his own.
- If you look with anything remotely like a clear eye at his posts on Obama over the past several months
Jaibones on September 12, 2008 at 10:17 AM
(oops, continued)
- If you look with anything remotely like a clear eye at his posts on Obama over the past several months, you will see these observations of Obama: he’s a smart and talented guy, with no worthwhile experience for the position; he’s a hard leftist, and his entire political career shows this; he’s a partisan Dem, despite his lofty post-partisan rhetoric; he’s an empty suit fraud. That seems to be Allah’s position.
If you think that adds up to AP voting for Obama, go ahead and throw in a protest comment. Been there, done that.
But I’m pretty sure you’d be completely wrong.
Jaibones on September 12, 2008 at 10:21 AM
Shouldn’t Gibson have asked her about McCain doctrine?
drjohn on September 12, 2008 at 10:38 AM
yeah yeah, more street creed for not being in the tank for the republicans. Earned that many times over. We get it already. We don’t need a cheerleader. And as evidenced by the many people making the comments, they are less than thrilled at the pessimism. But the counter argument always seems to come back to ‘if you want mindless gop talking points, go to the gop website.’ and that misses the point of what their complaint is.
wise_man on September 12, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Isn’t it “O” Dumby that is going to invade Pakastan?
Looking for sombody that might be already dead????
Rick007 on September 12, 2008 at 10:42 AM
They aren’t smarter than we are anymore.
foxforce91+1
If anyone is stuck in their ways,
it is the Left in quagmire ruts.
Progressive Liberals never gotten over a thing. And we’re not carrying their load, our demise, for them. If they must detonate themselves, best stay clear of the murderous “suicide” bombers if preventive open information, education and rule of law fail.
maverick muse on September 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM
I’ve been a prosecuting attorney and supervised prosecutors for about 10 years now, and I can tell you Gibson’s questions were nothing short of the leading, accusatory, cross-examination style of questioning that aim to illiciting specific answers to either trap the witness or make them look bad. He comes across as a jerk with an clear agenda. What’s up with the touching of the knees set-up?? Might as well be standing up and pointing down at her. He obviously was trying to do the bidding of his elite, liberal media pals. Where’s the No-bama intereview in this vein Charlie?
warriorlawyer on September 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM
[have]
maverick muse on September 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM
I’m really not up on all the ‘journalists’ moonbat score. I know Olbermann and Matthews are pathological. And Dan Rather was up there with them, But I thought that Gibson wasn’t that much of a lefty. I guess he is. Would it kill him and the others to just do a strong interview and let the chips fall where they may?
Why do they have to resort to this. Maybe when democrats would watch the interview, some would claim that he was too nice on her, and didn’t go far enough.
wise_man on September 12, 2008 at 10:55 AM
I would NEVER sit so close to an opponent. Palin must assert her own comfort zone, and delineate what is acceptable FROM Gibson or any aggressor.
R-E-S-P-E-C-T!
Absolutely no touching anything other than a shoulder, and only that from an established friend. Touching a shoulder is as far as polite friendly body contact goes should dialogue be conducted side to side seating arrangement. But in full frontal attack position, no touching. Westerners are very open, and need to protect themselves from Eastern feigned friendly mannerisms intended to denigrate.
Palin must realize that there is no reason to comply with being manipulated, and every reason to stipulate her own settings for interviews. Cast not yourself before swine.
maverick muse on September 12, 2008 at 11:02 AM
MUST SEE Dave In Texas‘ video @ Ace! That actually clarifies Obama’s “H” initial not to be for Hussein any longer but for HITLER.
Charismatic leaders hold their sway over their flock by maintaining a fascistic hold over their flock’s MINDS; no liberty of thought allowed.
Therein, Palin is a Liberator of Strife, not just a mere charismatic figure.
Palin welcomes her American audience ‘as they are’ to think from their own perspectives about her message. (The internationals are peeping toms.) THAT is unlike Obama who forces everyone through his vulgar “O” Marx hole or be damned by his goon squads to eternal torment.
I look forward to hearing Palin. She certainly has the way about her. I saw her before as the pebble in David’s sling that shot Goliath without metal armaments. Last night, Palin proved herself worthy of comparison with the young David who responded to the vile curses from the giant Philistine mouthpiece and warrior Goliath.
“Who is this uncircumcised Philistine” ABC Gibson with his self-made media fabricated Bush Doctrine?
maverick muse on September 12, 2008 at 11:11 AM
I love that she kept on calling him “Charlie”.
LtE126 on September 12, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Seeing how edited the interview was … I get the feeling Palin did much better than Charlie anticipated. The stuff on the cutting room floor is worth some bucks.
I also get the feeling that Biden is gonna get much, much more than he bargained for at the debate.
darwin on September 12, 2008 at 11:14 AM
ROFL. But please don’t feed the trolls.
Tennman on September 12, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Me too … she shoulda called him Chuck.
darwin on September 12, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Heck I had never heard that term before this interview and had to click the link to find out what they were talking about. I then did some research to find where this term came from and found it was what a few in the media decided to use to talk about the Presidents National Security Policy. After looking at the policy it involves a heck of a lot more then what Mr. Gibbons highlighted and wanted to focus on.
JeffinSac on September 12, 2008 at 11:25 AM
I don’t think that President Bush ever declared any “Bush Doctrine.” It may be a term that is popular use but it can mean different things to different people. She was right to ask Charles Gibson what he was referring to and she accurately recited President Bush’s world view.
scrubjay on September 12, 2008 at 11:25 AM
I think this interview was a flop for Sarah. She seemed nervous and vague in her answers. Her rookieness showed, or maybe the advisors got too much in her head
Baphomet on September 12, 2008 at 11:28 AM
You can just imagine the scene where a michael moore styled operative is trying to splice a new anti-Palin ad for the democrats. Taking the Gibson: ‘Bush doctrine’ Palin: ‘what is that’ and Gibson: ‘have you meet any world leaders’ Palin: ‘No’ type clips from that interview to make her look as bad as they can, by cutting off her responses after the first few words. Making it seem that this was her complete answer, and coming up with a title: “Sarah Palin. No experience whatsoever, Doesn’t even know what the Bush doctrine is.”
wise_man on September 12, 2008 at 11:31 AM
Wow, what a clever tactic by Gibson here: “Let’s ask her lots of ambiguous questions, to which there is no ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer and then insist repeatedly on having a yes or a no for an answer.” Hardball is not the word here, I think slimeball captures it better.
I also don’t think it “clear” at all that Palin doesn’t know the Bush doctrine. Knowing the Bush doctrine doesn’t mean being able to answer Gibson’s slimeballs with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’. Knowing the Bush doctrine means recognising the trap that Charlie is setting up here, and she was perfectly right in refusing to say ‘Yes, of course.’ which was of course what Charlie would have wanted.
Aylios on September 12, 2008 at 11:50 AM
You be the judge in terms of objectivity and spin: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2008/september/0912_palin_interview1.shtml
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Remember folks, ABC cut away during Lieberman’s speech at the RNC to ‘discuss’ with Gibson, Stephanopolous(sp?), et. al. I’m not necessarily a Lieberman fan, but that was straight-up wrong. Did they do that to Biden? Nahhh, I didn’t think so.
Biffstir on September 12, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Finally had a chance to see the interview.
Final analysis: Meh.
It’s really not going to hurt her, but she needs to polish up a bit before the debates.
I’ll add, I’m amazed at how many douchebags seem to have registered just to tell AllahP how much he sucks.
The “MICHELLE SHOULD FIRE YOU!!11!!eleventy!” are most amusing. I bet Malkin is aware of what AP posts, dumba$$es.
SouthernDem on September 12, 2008 at 12:55 PM
UGH! I covered The Bush Strategy (not doctrine) as Gibson claims…at NoQuarter. See the following: (it posts this afternoon) Charlie Gibson, The Bush Doctrine (Strategy) And Palin
ABC and Gibson need to go back to school for some good old Journalism 101 classes. They are definitely not objective. At 9 pm the AP had a one paragraph quote from Palin making her look hawkish….saying she left the door open for war with Russia. If Georgia and the Ukraine are admitted to NATO under treaty we must defend the. If we had admitted Georgia, Russia would never had done what they did.
Palin perfectly understands our NATO treaty but ABC and Associated Press do not or choose to portray themselves as uneducated journalistic fools!
navyvet48 on September 12, 2008 at 1:01 PM
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeexactly
Drunk Report on September 12, 2008 at 1:02 PM
Gibson: Many people are saying that Afghanistan is taking a turn for the worst, what do you have to say on the matter?
Palin: It’s not over until we say it’s over. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Gibson: Ok…whatever…what are you thoughts on the Monroe Doctrine?
Palin: I think its great, shocks and struts should last more than 3000 miles.
Gibson: A few quick questions on Russia. What are your impressions of Russia’s recent actions?
Palin: Russia is our next door neighbor.
Gibson: What do you think Putin and Medvedev’s intentions are?
Palin: Russia is our next door neighbor.
Gibson: Russia provides a lot of energy to Europe, how does that complicate matters in the region?
Palin: Energy is something I know a lot about because I am from Alaska, and that is near Russia, who is our next door neighbor.
LevStrauss on September 12, 2008 at 1:39 PM
real bang up job she did insisting that Georgia was invaded UNPROVOKED…
unprovoked people…i mean…i can understand someone saying that Putin had the idea to overreact to a critical overreach by an idiot georgian president drunk on american support…but UNPROVOKED!?!?!?!? WHAT?
ernesto on September 12, 2008 at 4:18 PM
So much more a statement about you than it is about her, Shipley. Doesn’t your merkin need combing or something?
smellthecoffee on September 12, 2008 at 4:40 PM
I’ll start caring about an ABC interview with a Republican the moment ABC “reporters” stop donning their usual kneepads when they interview a Democrat.
Gibson’s a clown act and has zero credibility. Just like his candidate, Barack Obama.
NoDonkey on September 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM
For those who care. This is supposed to be up to date Doctrine….
The CURRENT Bush Doctrine is from his 2nd inaugural address in 2005, it’s called the Freedom Agenda. ( look it up)
So when Sarah asked “His world view?” (meaning Bush’s) she was MORE correct than was Gibbon (not sic).
I just head that Gibbon ( monkey-brain) has actually used at least three different Bush Doctrines in his role as interviewer during the current Bush Admin.
He knew it changed and therefor this was a horrid attempt at a “gotcha”.
Shame on you Charlie Gibson.
Let us know what its like sleeping with Dan Rather, you two deserve each other.
Making up news as you go.
shooter on September 12, 2008 at 8:14 PM
I hate to quote myself to say I told ya so..but, I told ya so.
Charles Krauthammer:
Charlie Gibson’s Gaffe
And you could say.. Allahpundit’s knee-jerking gaffe
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_2.html
scotth on September 13, 2008 at 1:10 AM
I have been educated over the past couple of days on
what the Bush Doctrine is. I now realize that it can be
interpreted in severals ways. It is not a dictum.
palin was correct to ask gibson for clarification.
from the editorial originally found here, I was misled that
palin blew it.
I will more careful next time.
jimmer on September 13, 2008 at 12:26 PM
correction:
I will be more careful next time.
this election cycle continues to be an education.
jimmer on September 13, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 6 7 8