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 2 3 4 ... 8 Next »
No, it’s been going on for months. Missile strikes and incursions. NY Times publicized it recently, but its been obvious for a while.
I’m granting this. But, still, she clearly was not comfortable here. She was in total pageant mode, reciting the question back, tacking on his name, and doing a platitude. Not pretty.
lorien1973 on September 11, 2008 at 8:49 PM
The stakes were pretty high in this first interview, and I think she got the job done without coming off as the “hick” that the left want to portray her as. She’s not a “polished Washington” old pro, and it showed.
Obama just got done with a interview with O’Reilly, and when asked about past associations with internal extremists, his answer was “what can I say?”
Hog Wild on September 11, 2008 at 8:50 PM
Wow…the Trogs were just standing by to chime in on this one….
LefTard Trolls,
changing mindsstrengthening resolvewith reasoned conversation!!unhinged, spleen venting rants!!BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 8:50 PM
If she had said that, the left/media would have said Obama can’t be criticized for saying it. Some things are best left unsaid, until it’s absolutely necessary.
aikidoka on September 11, 2008 at 8:50 PM
She came off as uninformed. As a matter of fact she reminded me of Barack stammering out answers to basic questions. I don’t see the issue with Gibson in this clip. He asked some questions that she should be able to answer cogently but she couldnt’ and he called her on it. Granted he would have given Obama a pass (and probably a blowjob) but still it wasn’t unfair anymore than O’Reilly’s interview with Obama.
Big E on September 11, 2008 at 8:50 PM
Not that she’ll need it…
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 8:51 PM
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Oy. I have the video playing again. Why do I torture myself this way? Allah, pour me a glass of the good stuff…
On the flip side, re: Charlie Gibson: “…lost in a blizzard of words, there.” Nice snark, Charlie; I wonder how often the media asks the Lightworker to get specific on policies, between his “ums” and “ahs”?
SCI-FI on September 11, 2008 at 8:51 PM
He asks if she agrees with the Bush Doctrine as if he were asking something any idiot would know like what is 2 + 2 ? If he wants to know if she agrees with Bush’s ideas of pre-emptive strikes then ask the whole question. Most of the audience viewing wont know what the hell he is talking about either. “The Bush Doctrine” is specifically a term invented by beltway insiders and the media. Bush certainly never called it that. I had no clue until he clarified, at which point she awnsered the question. Stupid gothca games of insiders.
Resolute on September 11, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Oh? Gee, I’m all broke up about the Russians being humiliated and resentful after the decades they spent grinding their heels into the throats of their neighbors.
doubleplusundead on September 11, 2008 at 8:51 PM
The Bush Admin doesn’t even grasp the Bush Doctrine
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2Q2MTU5ZWY2ZGJmMDJlYWYwNWQ0ZjkyYzZmZThkMWY=
econavenger on September 11, 2008 at 8:51 PM
No stuttering or hesitation is necessary when she robotically throws out the talking points her speech coaches taught her.
McCain/Palin 2008: Crash & Burn
an_abstraction on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
I thought she did well. There were no “OH NO” moments, but I didn’t see a “YESSS!” moment either. I agree with many of the posters here & elsewhere that she will improve in these settings.
I am still looking forward to her debate with Biden. Stand up for Joe!!! Stand up!!!
sdm
stvdog on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
Magnificent comeback. Truly.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
Oh, didn’t know! Could you perhaps link us some military texts or documents or any kind of official paperwork which use that phrase?
Has Bush himself even uttered that phrase?
redshirt on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
From the Wickipedia discussion page:
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
Just because she clarified by what he meant doesn’t mean she doesn’t understand the Bush Doctrine. She was simply trying to figure out what he meant by it.
Conservative Voice on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
oh he said…um uh that is classic guilt by association fox news is like daily kos” in there as well….
what a fricken orator
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 8:52 PM
real question — did palin LOSE any support for MCCAIN that she had gained up til lnow?
no.
did she WIN support?
no.
but every time she speaks, it will get easier, and she’ll be more ’seasoned’. remember, obama sez: “running for president makes me QUALIFIED to be president”
battleoflepanto1571 on September 11, 2008 at 8:53 PM
I never said it was codified by a newspaper. You really aren’t very bright, although you’re doing well with copy and paste? Do you need someone to hold your hand and help you understand what codified foreign policy of the United States means?
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 8:53 PM
As I said earlier, not her best performance. A little out of her depth, but obviously a quick study.
Since this thread has become infected with people trolling for a fight, I’m off.
Slublog on September 11, 2008 at 8:53 PM
The ABC blog, the viewers are ripping Charlie a new one. I haven’t seen it yet but it already sounds like it was a bad job by CG. She is not expected to have all the answers. A team of people will be around her as the VP or POTUS. People who are undecided may be swayed, but this is her first “major” interview and we can’t expect her to have all the answers. Unlike OBIE, he is the almighty so he has all the answers and solutions!
Mercy4Me on September 11, 2008 at 8:53 PM
Where have all the Obamatards come from? It’s funny they are criticizing Sarah for “not knowing the Bush doctrine”, but then strive to say she’s 4 more years of the same. LOSERS.
SouthernGent on September 11, 2008 at 8:53 PM
Yeah, well it didn’t stop being a gamble just because it’s a week later. This vid, Gentlemen’s C.
JiangxiDad on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
I don’t really give a damn what hay the libs make. Until the MSM asks the questions of Obama this kind of crap will backfire on the MSM and their lib compatriots. Including the trolls on this thread.
d1carter on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Oh, and I do love the hyper-intense scrutiny of Sarah Palin, when compared to “no worries” for a man who thinks we have 58 states.
What a joke.
Hawkins1701 on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Agreed, her tone very much was like Bush. Well, at least the old Bush. I actually think Bush has gotten much better in interviews and press conferences.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Was the Pakistan question a Kobiashi Maru scenario? Perhaps, but she isn’t the first. Obama’s answer to the unanswerable question was to answer it: invade Pakistan.
Immolate on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Oh, didn’t know! Could you perhaps link us some military texts or documents or any kind of official paperwork which use that phrase?
Yes, since so many of you are shccked to hear that the policy broadly known as the Bush Doctrine has been codified.
Also, it’s not slang. Monroe didn’t officially name his policy the ‘Monroe Doctrine’.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 8:55 PM
She actually did answer what the Bush Doctrine was, so I don’t really understand the point of pigeon-holing her on a term coined by the Left, which many conservatives might not be feverishly obsessed with.
How about “Bush’s policy of pre-emption”, eh Charlie? No, had to go and fetch the media-created term for it to try and confuse her. Weak.
She obviously looked a bit flustered, this was not the knock-out she needed, but completely OK. Obama has come off a lot more uh-uh-uh-ish in almost every interview or appearance he’s made for over a year.
Seixon on September 11, 2008 at 8:55 PM
well buy’em I still don’t have that .gov link you need to show me….
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 8:55 PM
I thought she did great.
“I got lost in a blizzard of words there…”
DOUCHE.
nickj116 on September 11, 2008 at 8:55 PM
Fine, then post a link to the official United States government website that discusses the “Bush Doctrine.”
I’ll sit and listen to Jeopardy music while I wait.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 8:55 PM
I disagree on the Pakistan thing, that was an obvious trap. If she had answered with a yes or no she would have been relentlessly attacked by the leftists as either a warmonger or an idiot for completely ruling it out. She did the only thing she really could which is to say that we’d do whatever it took to fight terrorism. Which is kind of an answer, just not as definitive as yes/no.
I agree that she came off as kinda weaksauce. However, the important thing is that she didn’t really give anyone any real ammo to attack her with. So while it was definitely not a win, it was not really a loss either. Also, I think the obvious and extensive editing will help her too.
Let’s hope she does better in the later parts.
Kronos on September 11, 2008 at 8:55 PM
Wow, one asshole quoting another asshole…
Assholes Unite!!
BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
I thought she was fine, but I’m just a white mom who clings to my religion, so obviously I am easily misled by this woman.
She was as evasive in naming specifics on what we would do as Obama on O’Reilly the other night. Obama recycled the line that it isn’t right for Presidential candidates to specifically say what they would do, but that all options will be on the table in dealing with a nuclear Iran, blah, blah, blah. He’s such a practiced politician. That is a big reason I like Sarah.
She seemed serious, which is probably more about the timing – 9/11, and the day she sees her son go off to Iraq. Should she have been boisterous, grinning, flippant, giddy? No, this was not the time for that.
Did she feel totally comfortable? Would you? But she kept her chin up anyway and answered well and honestly. I think she did fine, and I disagree that she didn’t come off as presidential. One thing that Bush — and all of us — learned on 9/11/2001 was that US Presidents must be prepared for anything, and who they are at the core is going to be most important to America if we have to face another catastrophe. Sarah is decent, honest, and strong. To me, those are some really good presidential traits.
Frankly — and I mean this very sincerely — so what if she didn’t know the Bush Doctrine? I didn’t either. If she HAD, the other reader is correct, that would have been proof to many that she represents Bush III.
I think it’s more important for them to create the McCain-Palin Doctrine anyway.
eucher on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
What a total and complete shock! Who would expect a VP candidate to know anyting about this?
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/1202/ijpe/ijpe1202.htm
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
Why would any sane person want to read one of those liberal crapbaskets?
Patrick S on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
Broadly known as means other attribute to.
The Monroe Doctrine was explicitly expressed by JQA and Monroe. Explicitly.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
Now someone tell me what the Obama doctrine is ?
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
well *gasp* she’d be one heartbeat away from the office….
as opposed to the “adult” in Barryland being one heartbeat away….
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
She’s like a slightly more attractive Dick Cheney.
an_abstraction on September 11, 2008 at 8:57 PM
Tom Tancredo came close, and look where it got him.
Disturb the Universe on September 11, 2008 at 8:57 PM
NOPE. Doesn’t say “Bush Doctrine.”
You FAIL.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 8:57 PM
well buy’em I still don’t have that .gov link you need to show me
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
Okay, so AP added a sarcastic update. Way to go there bud.
MobileVideoEngineer on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
More shocking is a VP candidate that doesn’t know that a man in a wheelchair that the IDIOT candidate is for Cripes Sakes fricken staring at cannot STAND UP!!!!
Patrick S on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
that’s a magazine.
published by the state department.
next attempt?
battleoflepanto1571 on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
Damn, even when she has a pleasant look on her face, Gibson looks deadly serious and kind of hostile, actually.
Those who said it came off more like a quiz than an interview are absolutely right. I’ll have to see more of it, but I’m not sure it was the disaster some people are saying it was…it’s hard to come away with the impression that he wasn’t gunning for her, and expose her as some kind of moron.
capitalist piglet on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
You, sir, are a retard, a liar and a troll.
Kudos on being the regular type of troll instead of the now prevalent “concern trolls”.
Aristotle on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
Has the You tube vid been removed? It does not play here and the url is undefined? I do not think I have seen undefined at the end of a youtube link before.
kahall on September 11, 2008 at 8:58 PM
oh! God love ya, what am i talking about!?!??!?!? you can tell I’m NEW
battleoflepanto1571 on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM
spit or swallow?
elduende on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Wow……Palin has already answered more tough questions in one day than Barry has in two years.
Go Sarah and eff the MSM and Charlie Gibson.
ex-Democrat on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
This only makes it worse. Do not feed.
kahall on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Amen, brotha.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Isn’t it a little ironic how the MSM and the left has made such a big deal about how Bush is so uh, black and white about world issues and situations lecturing him on the nuances and complexities and then when they want to play a game of gotcha, they lecture their conservative targets on why they can’t give a black and white answer?
CP on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
So many non-believers.
IE8 submits the page when you press enter. Sorry for the duplicate posts.
Yes, it’s broadly known as the Bush Doctrine within the foreign policy community.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Lok the Charlie question trying to paint Sarah and McCainas Bush term 3. I agree Sarah should have said “Why is this relevant McCain will do things differently ?”
It was a generic question. If I was the McCain campaign Id have sarah out tomorrow talking about NATO policy and “The league of Democracies” That will sell better.
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Did anyone consider the possibility that it was not a case of Palin not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was?
Did anyone consider that just perhaps, she heard “Bush Doctrine”, and immediately realized it was a political landmine that they were trying to shove her onto? Any Bush-inspired initiatives or policies that she supports immediately starts feeding the “third Bush term” idea that they are desperate to avoid. Any way you slice it, it’s a hard question to answer.
Although I must agree that her average answers were just as dodgy as some of Obama’s answers. She needs to stop trying to play the political game right now, and give straight, confident answers to her opinions on things. One way or another, the libs will twist it. The best thing she can do is give very clear answers to questions in as few words as possible, so that it is difficult to cast them any other way.
MadisonConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Stern, school marm Charlie Gibson and his crappy amateur editing job really will pull even more people into the McCain/Palin fold. It was so painfully obvious that Ms. Charlie’s intent was to snag a “gotcha” moment with Governor Palin. Governor Palin was tough and Charlie is an a**hole.
bloggless on September 11, 2008 at 9:00 PM
I don’t see “Bush Doctrine” in there anywhere. There was no “Reagan Doctrine” there was no “Bush the elder doctrine” you are engaging in moonbat shorthand for Chimpy hate….
as I summarized it, “the United States will unilaterally and pre-emptively act in defense of her security and interests in the face of a threat.”
She did not express anything against or for that notion.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:00 PM
She did fine. If anything, her less than polished approach may actually make her more attractive to average blue collar Americans.
Browncoatone on September 11, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Fixed that for ya. Care to show me otherwise?
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:01 PM
I think she did well for her first big interview! I am certain she will learn a lot from this and, as time passes, get even better.
A good answer the the “Why do yuo think we were attacked on 9/11″ would have been, “I don’t really care why! They did it and they need to die!”
JellyToast on September 11, 2008 at 9:01 PM
That’s not what Gibson “clarified” it to be. He said do you subscribe to Bush’s doctrine of preemptive war. Not at all what you said in paragraph above. She asked him “what do you mean”, and he just repeated his question about “Bush Doctrine”. She did her best to hold a sensible conversation. All Gibson wanted to do there was a “gotcha” on the “Bush Doctrine”, if there is such a thing.
Paul-Cincy on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
On Bush doctrine, I was having trouble with that myself, as it was being asked. I agree with those above who say it has evolved over time. It was supposed to endure in the way the Truman doctrine did but infact, it hasn’t and since the summer of 06, when Omert bungled the war with Hezbolah, quite frankly the Bush administration has abandoned its own policy. So in fact, near as I can tell, with out being formally announced the Bush Doctrine if not altogether dead, is certainly in moth-balls. What we have been left with is the ill-defined and O so poorly named, War on Terror. I do blame Condee for this. In the end, she has revealed herself to be little better than the daughter of her mentor at C.U.
So the question was a trap and a no-win situation for Sarah and so all things considered, she did fine. While she certainly didn’t sparkle, she by no means fizzled. She held her ground and was disappointing only in the sense that she showed herself to be merely human after all.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
That is like saying Janet Reno is slightly more attractive than Joe Biden
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Dude. Now Obama is saying Bush should have used 9/11 to mobilize communities in a larger way to get civilians organized for volunteer firefighters, etc. Talk about using crises in an opportunist fascist manner. Let’s let responses by organic and not use them as opportunities to make unrelated changes.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Just like the Georgia stuff, the Pakistan question was a trick because it’s a very sensitive issue even for Bush himself to answer straight. There was just a change in leadership there and leaked classified info. Gibson was specifically trying to trigger a dangerous national security controversy out of his interview.
It was a total setup. Every question was spring-loaded to trip her up.
econavenger on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
MadisonConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:00 PM
I was thinking the same thing. I bet Charlie stayed up all night with the other ABC slugs trying to think of questions to trap the little lady. They are fools aren’t they?
bloggless on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
We know more about Palin’s 17 year old than we know about Obama.
Mojave Mark on September 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
“Bush doctrine?”
Gibson is a leftist tool.
Borislav on September 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
The “Bush Doctrine” is not a policy defined by the Bush Administration that can be answered with a broad, generalized “Do you agree with it?” answer. It’s a set of various, complicated foreign policy decisions that have been lumped together by the media and the left kooks who have slammed Bush over them for the past 8 years. Gibson is incorrect in that it is only about preemptive striking.
She knew it was a trap (in that they would have said More of the Same! She’s Bush in a dress!) if she had said that she agreed with it. She tried to get Gibson to give a specific policy in that lump sum as to what he was asking about, but he didn’t because he didn’t want to play his hand.
She did fine for a first interview. Stop the hand wringing, really.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
See prior link to the White House website. This is common knowledge guys.
It’s good that you can disagree without the name-calling that others seem to think is appropriate. Perhaps your mommy didn’t raise you correctly, but it’s really pathetic. If you don’t have a valid point to make, the best you can do is resort to personal attacks? Sad…
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Re: Now someone tell me what the Obama doctrine is ?
Uh, uh, er, uh, eh, I don’t know about you, but, how’s this helping our children, er uh.
Question answered.
Dingbat63 on September 11, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Still dodging?
FAIL.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:04 PM
“Bush doctrine?”
Gibson is a leftist tool
NOT TRUE
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
The so-called “Bush Doctrine” is multifaceted and includes preemptive attacks (preventive war) and the right to treat countries that harbor terrorists as terrorists themselves. It also includes the road map to peace in the Middle East and other geopolitical initiatives of the Bush administration. She was perfectly correct in asking for a clarification of precisely what he wanted. I suspect it is quite possible that she was more informed about the issue than Gibson.
rplat on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
Let’s not attack Charlie Gibson here. He did his job. She’s going to be in a debate in a few weeks and she will probably receive much more hard questions so it’s good that she getting some practice.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
OK educate us what is the Obama doctrine ?
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
This is the Bush Doctrine. You can read it:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
Give that man a community organizer job.
eucher on September 11, 2008 at 9:06 PM
“lost in a blizzard of words” Charlie was more than a bit condescending, and clearly treating her like an uppity little girl.
I know that my first response when someone is insultingly hostile is befuddlement. For a minute, I cannot conceive of someone being that rude and offensive. Then, when I have time to gather myself I turn to anger.
I have not seen the whole interview, just a few clips, but I wonder if we will see her get angry, or just how she will respond to his condescension.
telmah on September 11, 2008 at 9:06 PM
You have to realize that Palin is stepping into the national spotlight for the first time over the last two weeks. She’s doing pretty good, because she’s a serious person who just tries to do her best at everything.
I can live with that, someone who wasn’t groomed from birth for this national political stage, they would hardly do any worse, or better. She’s putting on bigger shoes, and shouldering a bigger load. I think she’ll do fine, but we have to be reasonable too. We have to admit she’s new at this national stage, and give her the benefit of the doubt.
Obama has 300 advisers on foreign policy in his campaign. Palin hasn’t had any until recently. The real question is, can she learn? When the State Department briefs her on situations and conditions in a foreign country, do we think she’ll understand and make wise judgments? I think she will do just fine in that instance. I bet she’ll ask good questions, and learn fast. I bet she’ll have insights that the rest of us might miss, and I think she’ll appeal to the Foreign Leaders she meets with, because her aura is one of genuine honesty and integrity.
I think most people understand that she was dumped into this, and will give her some time, perhaps another month, to learn the intricate interplay of foreign relations.
I don’t think it hurt her, and I think she’ll do fine. Not a bad first one on one interview effort.
Snake307 on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
Ahem. Borack had 19 months to come up with an adult solution, and all he had was “what can I say[, but that I’m a nimrod?” In 19 months, don’t you think Palin would clean his clock?
In the meantime, I deem it right and proper at this time to roll out
THE POMERPANTS DOCTRINE
1. Don’t be a wuss. Take all interviews and learn from them. It’s okay if you get hammered, you will emerge stronger.
2. Don’t try to touch my knee while I’m talking, Obama! And don’t say “No, no, no, no, no.” You sound like my idiot nephew who says, “I, I, I, I”
3. Be prepared to defend to the hilt the people of this country because ultimately that is your sole obligation.
4. Go Sarah!
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
I guess Obama will get his questions before hand. Let’s see, maybe we can come up with some questions for Obama.
Charlie Gibson: Senator Obama, many say you are a gifted orator and citizen of the world, what would you say to the people of Pakistan to create peace, harmony and mutual understanding?
bloggless on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
A minute ago you didn’t even know that ‘Bush Doctrine’ referred to codified US policy- and now you want to start a debate over who refers to it as the Bush Doctrine?
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Nonsense. Charlie’s “job” is to attack and destroy. He failed tonight but Palin needs to steel up a little more for the next round.
rplat on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Doesn’t say Bush Doctrine.
The fact that you can’t come up with a link for “Bush Doctrine” demonstrates my position that this phrase is a creation of the media and as such isn’t within the realm of Palin’s responsibility.
Go back and watch the video, even Gibby was looking at his notes as he lectured her.
On second thought, don’t bother. I don’t give a rip about an obtuse little troll.
Buh-bye.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
From Wikipedia (yeah, yeah, I know):
That doesn’t sound very official or specific. There is some mention of codifying parts of it, but “Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine” is what actually sounds uninformed here.
Count to 10 on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Gibson was being tough, but that’s what he’s supposed to do. Palin is in the big leagues now and it’s sink or swim.
Charlie was zeroing in on her seeming ignorance of the Bush Doctrine by that label. If he asked her whether she thought the US had the right to attack a country like Iran to prevent their use of nuclear weapons against Israel, or against NATO countries, or against the USA itself, she would have known how to answer without hesitation. Did Palin understand that course of action as implementation of the Bush Doctrine? Didn’t seem like it. Gibson didn’t cut her any slack, sure enough. Would he have cut Obama slack? Maybe. Maybe not. We’ll never know, but I suspect he would have.
I suspect Palin will rise to the occasion next time and turn the pedantic tone of Gibson or whoever else appears in his stead against him. It’ll be barracuda against shark and I’m going to bet on the barracuda. She’s a quick study. She’ll look at the tapes of this match and make the necessary adjustments before the next one.
Tom McLaughlin on September 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM
I’m just impressed that you can post here, on KOs, and DU simultaneously..
How do you keep your talking points straight?? You must have about 35 well prepared Word Pad docs open to cut and paste from…
I would ask Allah how he let Matt Damon in here but he’s to brain dead to pull off the furious hate posting…
BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:07 PM
well said. Ditto.
elduende on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Lokk if the dems rush out and go “AHA Palin didnt know what the Bush Doctrine is !” They will accomplish two things.
One is they will undermine the argument that Palin wants to create a third term for Bush
and two it will make them seem as petty as they always are. If any dem asks this question I want them to ask what is the Obama doctrine ?
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Yeah, and I am doing my job, too. Putz.
bloggless on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
She is the real deal she did just fine.
thmcbb on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
I’m thinking she did better here than GWB did when he got “gotcha’ed” on foreign policy back in 2000.
Patrick S on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 ... 8 Next »