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 5 ... 8 Next »
No that is the National Security Strategy of the United States…..there have been several of those over the years.
No “Carter Doctrine”….etc etc etc.
I challenge you to show me George Bush saying, “well according to the Bush Doctrine”….
it will not happen.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
I didn’t like her answer on the 9/11 hijackers (it did sound a little too, er, quaint), and the Bush doctrine thing was iffy…but, she answered it strongly towards the end.
Gibson came across like a jerk, but I don’t mind those questions. He could’ve asked them with a different tone, pretended he was asking Obama or something though.
I think everyone knows that foreign policy is not her strength, so I’m not sure what expectations there should have been. All in all, I doubt this does much of anything…people like me will look at the positives and expect her to get better, people that didn’t like her will get that reinforced, and people in the middle will remain there. And honestly, how much play will this get beyond tonight and tomorrow, with a hurricane bearing down on Texas? Of course the MSM will focus on the negatives and try to destroy her with them, but I’m not sure that’ll work. People genuinely like her, and I don’t think she said anything in that interview, or neglected to say anything, that would scare people off.
I think I’d recommend an interview on FNC, though…Brit Hume might be good.
changer1701 on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
Ok, I guess I am having browser issues. I was finally able to get this to play in Safari, firefox is a no go. Anyway, I thought she did just fine and did not find any faults with this particular clip.
kahall on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
I just watched part 1.
I don’t know what type of training or if any of you all here have any training in this field…but if you look into her eyes….there is a fire, commitment and truth you will not see in any other person running.
Say what you will, but this LADY will someday be the President Of The United States Of America.
Old Hippie Vet on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
Allah:
I disagree on the point about the Bush Doctrine. I mentioned this in the first thread. I think she knew what the Bush Doctrine was, but I also think that was suspicious of Charlie’s reasons for asking. She wanted some context.
As for Pakistan, that was not platitudes, that was all she could say. I think Obama even said something of the kind. If she had said yes, the lefties would have accused her of supporting an illegal invasion and if she had said they would have accused her of being afraid to go after Osama.
The only thing to say was what she said.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
BUSH DOCTRINE AINT NEW.
WHAT DID JFK DO ABOUT NIKITRA’S NUKES IN CUBA…
wait for him to use them!?!?
NOPE.
AND HE THREATENED A PREEMPTIVE STRIKE IF THEY WEREN’T MOVED.
THE LEFT/DEMS/MSM MADE UP THE TERM “BUSH DOCTRINE”
TO MAKE IT SEEM NEW AND SCARY.
ALL NATOINS CAN PREEMPT AN ENEMY WHEN NECESSARY.
ISRAEL DID IT IN 1967.
FORSWEARING IT – AS THE COMMIE OBAMA WOULD – OS IDIOTIC AND MAKES US WEAKER.
reliapundit on September 11, 2008 at 9:10 PM
I didn’t think about that, but you are absolutely right. Those are Corg goggles.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Ixnay on the all apscay.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Watching uh-bam-uh speak at this presidential forum is annoying me. His ‘uh’ is grating on me.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Condescending Charlie is the one who bombed. He was so hurt by the flack that the Obamanuts gave him–after he dared to ask a tough question of BO–that he felt obligated to lay it on thick with the Palin chick. Gibson never grilled any VP candidate before like that.
jgapinoy on September 11, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Right on! For all of you that have ever been in a street fight you know that taking a few hits doesn’t mean you’ve lost the fight.
Give them hell Sarah.
rplat on September 11, 2008 at 9:13 PM
I hope you aren’t calling me a putz.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:13 PM
Not a debate worth having guys. It’s what the National Review calls it, it’s common shorthand to describe the policy enacted by Bush’s team in 2002. There’s nothing negative in this name, nothing worth fighting over.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:13 PM
But the above would be an obvious misstatement!
mwdiver on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Wyo, I think you’re being a little to hard on Matthew. I think you should remember the difficult lifestyle he leads as a amnesiatic assassin and mathematical genius and cut him some slack.
I think all of us on the Hot Air blog should say a little prayer for him.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
I can’t remember the name of the columnist but isn’t it interesting that the Left was all upset over this format and couldn’t believe that Mr. Gibson would agree to it? It seems like the power, i.e. editing is totally in ABC’s.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Yeah, people are e-mailing about that. Not for a second do I buy it. If she was simply trying to pin him down to a specific definition, she could have offered one herself or at least said something slightly smarter than “His worldview”? Look at it this way: Did she sound comfortable answering after he did define it, as preemption? She’s clearly reciting off of mental note cards and her handlers probably neglected to prepare one about BD on the assumption that she surely knew all about it by now. She didn’t.
Allahpundit on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
THe Obama Doctrine
Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.
Renewing American Diplomacy
The Problem: The United States is trapped by the Bush-Cheney approach to diplomacy that refuses to talk to leaders we don’t like. Not talking doesn’t make us look tough – it makes us look arrogant, it denies us opportunities to make progress, and it makes it harder for America to rally international support for our leadership. On challenges ranging from terrorism to disease, nuclear weapons to climate change, we cannot make progress unless we can draw on strong international support.
Talk to our Foes and Friends: Obama is willing to meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe. He will do the careful preparation necessary, but will signal that America is ready to come to the table, and that he is willing to lead. And if America is willing to come to the table, the world will be more willing to rally behind American leadership to deal with challenges like terrorism, and Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs.
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Obama will make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a key diplomatic priority. He will make a sustained push – working with Israelis and Palestinians – to achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state in Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security.
Expand our Diplomatic Presence: To make diplomacy a priority, Obama will stop shuttering consulates and start opening them in the tough and hopeless corners of the world – particularly in Africa. He will expand our foreign service, and develop the capacity of our civilian aid workers to work alongside the military.
Fight Global Poverty: Obama will embrace the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty around the world in half by 2015, and he will double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to achieve that goal. He will help the world’s weakest states to build healthy and educated communities, reduce poverty, develop markets, and generate wealth.
Strengthen NATO: Obama will rally NATO members to contribute troops to collective security operations, urging them to invest more in reconstruction and stabilization operations, streamlining the decision-making processes, and giving NATO commanders in the field more flexibility.
Seek New Partnerships in Asia: Obama will forge a more effective framework in Asia that goes beyond bilateral agreements, occasional summits, and ad hoc arrangements, such as the six-party talks on North Korea.
He will maintain strong ties with allies like Japan, South Korea and Australia; work to build an infrastructure with countries in East Asia that can promote stability and prosperity; and work to ensure that China plays by international rules.
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
I’ve been a big fan of Palin- but-
I think she did poorly. The Bush Doctrine question was murder. I agree with Allah. She was patching together cue card answers. The Media’s going to have a field day with this. I’m afraid this will cast her in the Dan Quayle mold.
….go ahead….blast me……sigh*…..
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Firefox is having trouble for some reason with YT clips in the last few days. If you install this addon you can toggle to an ie tab within firefox and that will play the stubborn clips.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM
It’s just as clear that Charlie Gibson didn’t know either.
In any event, there is no “Bush Doctrine” in effect. If there was, Iran would have been taken down already. The Bush Doctrine is much like the Powell Doctrine, a bunch of words that mean nothing. We went into Iraq (because we had to) and that was the end of it. Many states support terrorism and we do nothing about them – neither pre nor post emptively.
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 9:15 PM
What’s the Clinton Doctrine? The Kama sutra?
bloggless on September 11, 2008 at 9:15 PM
It’s worse on repeated views. I give you that.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:15 PM
Um, no-one has responded to the Pomerance Doctrine yet. Don’t you know what that is??!!
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:15 PM
She had no idea what the Bush Doctrine was- and it showed.
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:16 PM
Not good! She should know the Bush Doctrine. Winking doesn’t cut it or even talking about the new election. Let’s hope these are just bad edits.
sophiesmom on September 11, 2008 at 9:16 PM
Gibson came off acting like a schmuck but I think you are overly critical of Palin’s performance. Could it be that you are so used to the polished performance of career politicians and pundits you’ve become jaded when real people try to answer the same questions? Think about it, it is an honest question.
highhopes on September 11, 2008 at 9:16 PM
bollocks…you were expecting her to give a straight concise answer on a 35 page document that has been applied in a multitude of ways…..after what 15 days on the job….???
I did notice that she managed to answer without um, er, uh invade them and grab him in the er uh cave because of my muslim faith….
tell y’what Buy’em….you stay in that tank with your newsies and I’ll stay with the candidates who weren’t best buds with domestic terrs…
have a day.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
What a waste of time. For the next week, the left will bash her and pick apart every sentence. The right will defend the answers given. Whoop. The polls will zig and zag. When we get to the debates, people will have a chance to observe the competitors under similar conditions.
After the debates, the left will again pick apart her every sentence and the right will make huge ground on the giant gaffe that Biden makes (he can’t help himself).
BUT – McCain/Obama debates will be the main event. When both are on stage with the same questions where real thought and experience are required and teleprompters are not available, the public will see Senator Obama for what he is.
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
Ok, I’ve watched it three times now and after cringing the first time… I actually feel better and better. I think what’s going on is she’s trying to assert that McCain/Palin is tough and will kick terrorist ass without falling into a “War city, baby! Drop dem bombs! I’m Bush II” soundbite for Barry O… or am I just too biased?
Also, if everyone parsed each and every word of Barry and Biden like we’re doing now to Palin.. they’d be at -14 in the polls.
Pasalubong on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
I wonder if her team has set up any additional inteviews… or if the plan was to throw her at Charlie, see how she performed, and then pull her back in for another 2 or 3 weeks of prep. She clearly needs more coaching.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:17 PM
Well so far I’ve seen three strong candidates for the “Bush Doctrine”:
1) Pre-emptive strike
2) Export democracy
3) You’re either with us or agin us.
Apparently Palin was supposed to be able to read Charlie’s mind and pick 1?
peterargus on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
Not good; not good at all. Please God, let this be a bad editing job!
sophiesmom on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
One could make that argument I suppose, but it is really a stretch. If Russia is a next door neighbor to Alaska, then Russia is a next door neighbor to the United States as Alaska is still part of the United States. Last I heard anyway Alaska had not seceded from the union. I have never heard anyone say that Russia is a next-door neighbor to the United States. I guess it all depends on what the meaning of next-door neighbor is and what the meaning of sex is and what the meaning of is, is.
KentAllard on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
It’s also not a single issue called the “Bush Doctrine.” To say that you agree to it, you would have to agree to everything that has been lumped under that title by the media. If she picked on one part of it, he would have slammed her with another part of it saying she was incorrect.
Gibson is the one who was incorrect, it’s not a single issue (preemptive striking in defense of country) thing. She asked which part specifically he was asking about to give an answer–instead of telling her which aspect he was referring to, he decided to try to lampoon her to make it look like she didn’t know. He came off as very condescending.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
A note to all the trolls who are defending Charlie, (heavy sigh) Gibson: He was transparent as glass. He considered himself to be judge and jury of Sarah Palin tonite! Sarah may fry in the “MSM” for this interview, but McCains numbers are still going to go up- He was ugly to her and America is going to make him pay for it.
anniekc on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
How many members of Congress, either House or Senate, or either side of the aisle, would have done better?
aquaviva on September 11, 2008 at 9:18 PM
you might want to ask Vince Foster I think he knew what it was
Mojack420 on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Poor interview on his part.
gman43 on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
POST OF THE MONTH!
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Hogwash!
That’s not a viable doctrine, that’s a roadmap to capitulation, fiscal bankruptcy, and transitional Marxism.
rplat on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
I want to have her baby!
and I am a dude.
TheSitRep on September 11, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Whatever. That’s exactly what Obama supporters were saying when he bombed in that one debate.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
OT but did anyone see the Obama/Fox news segment?
Obama does not have a problem making the government and the citizens of the US “partners” in his energy reduction plan.
F15Mech on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
I have no idea what the Bush doctrine is.
At this point it doesn’t matter. I knew this interview was a bad idea.
All I keep thinking of is the Bush/Kerry debates-
I thought Bush came off as simplistic and not too bright-
but alas- Bush won!
Here’s praying……
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Bambi is “uh-ing” and stammering on live TV. Good lord…
SouthernGent on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Bush Doctrine? Can I get a definitive URL on it, anyone? Something substantive. The wiki entry says it’s a hodge podge of policies, not what I’d call a “doctrine”. Not like Monroe or Truman. Never heard of “Bush Doctrine” until today. I even heard of the “Carter Doctrine” — blockading the Persian Gulf will be considered an act of war. But a “Bush Doctrine”? Is there really such a thing?
Paul-Cincy on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Look at you. The whole lot of you. Bunch of picky Petes and nattering Nancies, carefully parsing every farcking word either of them said as if it was November 3.
It was a dust-up, you dummies…the opening skirmish of a battle that will continue through to November. And she handled herself well; she acquitted herself admirably, given the circumstances.
If you expected anything more or less, than you deserve to crap your miserable drawers.
Man up, grow a pair. For God’s sake, you’re a bunch women (no offense, ladies).
We have work to do and less than two months to do it. Get busy.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
so Barry’ll be ready for the office without Biden’s help in what 2011?
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Yea she seemed to be rehearsing a bit…not natural. Kept calling him Charlie that got old. I’m nervous…
bagadeez04 on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
The Obama Doctrine:
1) Use Alinsky’s tactics and implement a Marxist cult of personality in America by any means necessary.
2) Go global
econavenger on September 11, 2008 at 9:21 PM
It had to happen at some point- speaking with the press is an old tradition of democracy. If they had held her back any longer, then it would have started to draw too much negative attention. In any case, there are some people in the general electorate who do care about her understanding of foreign policy.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:22 PM
There is no time for coaching. She needs to go out there and do it. Try to get interviews about energy and domestic issues and fore go foreign policy. It’s not her strong suit.
lorien1973 on September 11, 2008 at 9:22 PM
I never knew this site was so full of nervous nellies!
SouthernGent on September 11, 2008 at 9:22 PM
Okay Sophiesmom, finish that thought. Explain precisely why she should know the Bush Doctrine by name and in detail. I’m just curious why so many people are hyperventilating tonight about this when guaranteed the majority of Americans don’t have a clue what the term means either- primarily because it’s mostly a bogus term coined by the left so they can launch into the usual leftist riffs about needing the UN to solve all the world’s problems. The concepts behind the Bush Doctrine are nothing new simply not the way Clinton/Albright or even Bush 41 did them.
highhopes on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
And the Bush Doctrine question was misleading and unfair…that term easily means differnt things to different people. I bet I know what Charlie thinks it means…
bagadeez04 on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Dude- I’m on your side politically here.
But damn! The Bush Doctrine question was a “deer in the headlight” moment. The left is going to feast on that…..
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Would someone please tell me how many heads of state Bill Clinton met before being elected?
How many heads of state did Obama meet before his Berlin tour?
How much experience did Clinton have before running for President of the Untied States???
These are the stupidest questions. I can see asking them once, but he asked her nearly 5 times if she thought she was really ready to be President!
I would have asked Gibson if he thought Bill Clinton was qualified to run!
JellyToast on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Exactly. Here we are sitting around – in our pajamas – with the benefit of wiki at our fingerprints, and knowing what to search for, and we’re getting conflicting definitions of “Bush Doctorine”.
She did fine, well enough, and that’s all that was required on this.
aquaviva on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
People! People! What else did you expect from Disney Studios?
Take your pick as to which cartoon character Gibson represents.
pocomoco on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
I was just about to go on the PA and call out “Bitch slap on Aisle 3.” Thanks for showing up, Manly.
Patrick S on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Look Sarah gave a long interveiw Im not going to judge her based on a one minute segment of tape. Lets look at the whole thing not just a part.
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Troll (Kiddie definition): someone who disagrees with me. (very heavy sigh)
KentAllard on September 11, 2008 at 9:24 PM
I need to get reading glasses this is how I read that statement at first
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:24 PM
Wow, lots of mixed opinions here! The pressure!!!
Look, most if not all of us were hoping for a as successful interview as acceptance speech. OK, so she missed that mark. The two main rough patches was the Bush Doctrine and then Pakistan.
The Bush Doctrine – I have watched it a few times and I think her mind spun a little when she heard “Bush” and smelled “trap”. The back and forth that followed was really not too bad. I really think she knew the answer but wasn’t sure if that was what Charlie was looking for and she didn’t want to screw it up.
Pakistan. This one was a little worse. I don’t think she knew the answer but really, does she need to know it at this point? That may sound crazy but she is running for VP, not the Pakistani Ambassador.
We aren’t just voting for her knowledge on foreign policy. We are voting on her history of service, her history of judgement, proof of or lack of intelligence. I don’t trust any of these things from Barack. Biden has all the knowledge in the world on foreign policy. It’s his judgement and lack of intelligence that I won’t ignore. From the 70’s, 80’s, 90’s and now. Over 30 years of wrong opinions and bad judgement. Where do I sign up!?!
She will get better, and not because it will all be scripted but because in her judgement, when presented with the facts, they will be the things that should be done. She’s real, she is authentic, and in the end she will make us proud.
JeffinOrlando on September 11, 2008 at 9:24 PM
Are we watching the SAME clip here?
Is there some special glasses I need to wear to see the “rosie” side of this?
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
I’m not nervous. I’m just not scared to admit when a conservative didn’t do as well as expected. And if McCain bombs in the upcoming debates, I will say so. We must be honest with ourselves.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
I think she has been “handled” too much. The same thing happens to Bush. Both are better when answering in their own words. I think she’ll do better as she understands McCain’s Doctrine more. Which again is what I would have said to him. She could have said she agreed with the Bush Doctrine as it reflected the McCain Doctrine and then launhed off into McCain talking points. They need to let her be her. If they don’t, they will mess up a good thing.
Sue on September 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
I’m sorry, I missed something. I seem to recall he has already backed away from the “no pre-conditions” statement…. or did he now back away from that now too?
Huh????? Zat kinda like community organizin’ on a global scale?
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
Read the thread- people who know foreign policy know exactly what it refers to- offical policy of the US:
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
It’s not going to matter. Chilax. Most people don’t know, maybe she should have handled it better, but she did fine. One roadbump.
‘Sides they can’t play up the ’she’s not like Bush!11!’ for any particular advantage. All she needs to show is strength. She did.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
Wow, can you imagine if the actual Presidential candidates had to put up with this must scrutiny? Amazing all of this is. She takes it from both sides. None of the other people on the tickets have to endure any of this. Pathetic.
gator70 on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
It would be interesting to know how many people out instinctively went google->wikipedia->”Bush Doctrine”->troll…
ninjapirate on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
Let’s check in with the Kos!
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
It was great…perhaps Allahpundit and I saw different interviews. She looked in control to me, and almost Presidential.
Karmi on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
She avoided falling into any “gotcha questions” and there weren’t any gaffes. It look like a solid base hit but it wasn’t the home run the libs were demanding.
gman43 on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
I’m not ready to go that far; but I saw the same thing tonight – a woman very capable of becoming the President.
dugan on September 11, 2008 at 9:26 PM
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
None taken. Welcome back.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
This is not a sprint, it’s a marathon. Could she have done better? Yeah. Could she have done a whole lot worse? Oh yeah. On the whole, not a bad first outing–she’ll get better. She didn’t make any serious gaffes, didn’t lose her cool and fielded the questions about as well as could be expected.
This is just round one and I’d score it a draw. We’ve got fourteen more rounds to go.
Matt Helm on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
The Left is looking for a one minute segment. and they just got it.
I need more scotch!
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
btw Obama just said ROTC should return to campuses like Columbia. Glad to hear that.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Like I said in another thread: The majority of Americans probably can’t properly define the Bush doctrine but I’m pretty sure they expect their elected officials to know.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
I believe that her turn onto Charlie over the ‘Bush Doctrine’ was PRECISELY the right way to handle the question.
Even if she’s been thoroughly briefed on it, (the BD), Charlie deserved that response… ‘pin down precisely what you what me to answer, you jerk !!’
Surely more astute than mrO umm-ing and umm-ing while he tries to avoid the trap he’s just waltzed into.
She can SMELL a trap, and we need that.
pambi on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Ninja, I did, but only because I doubted it was actually a “doctrine.” Someone should add that flag “The neutrality of this article is disputed”
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Look just admit this was an attempt by the media to paint Palin and McCain as just Bush again. ANd it failed. Yeah the answer was weak but neither was it something that could be used to say “See she is just like Bush”
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Ding! Ding! Winner.
Alden Pyle on September 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Asking for clarification is a technique she’s used in debates.
It’s to make sure she answers the correct question and doesn’t fall into the gotcha trap.
Asking for what Gibson meant was a smart move, not a weak one.
powerpro on September 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
What is all this talk about the Bush Doctrine? Nobody gives a rat’s ass about it.
Announcement: Bush is NOT running!
Let’s hear about the Obama doctrine or the McCain doctrine.
My understanding of the McCain doctrine is being open to the Ukraine or other countries joining NATO, not to mention finding Osama. What other stuff is there?
Sapwolf on September 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Well, he’d have tipped his hand if he’d said “Chimperor Doctrine.”
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
well considering nobody in the press or the blabbogenzia is willing to call uh bam uh on his stammering looking undignified for “the best speaker ever to come from Harvard” we’ll see….but Hammer the Stammer ain’t impressing me on the forum thus far.
sven10077 on September 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
The Pakistan question is no big deal. No one is able to express what we should do with Pakistan, because what we need to do there is so radical.
I have yet to hear one, single politician who has said that Pakistan’s nukes have to be wrested from them (which clearly must occur at some point). They are all dancing on the Pakistan question.
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
“Let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good, or the great”
aquaviva on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Shouldn’t it be: How many heads did Clinton meet before becoming erected?
pocomoco on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Think about this:
If she had said “yes” or “no” then Gibson would have had to explain it for the viewing audience, as you note the “majority…”
It’s a trap question. That’s why he didn’t say, do you agree with the doctrine of preemption etc. I am fully confident that most people will see that and it’s not a problem.
She knew it was a trap and forced him to expand. And Bush’s worldview IS the way he rolls.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Amen +1
RobertCSampson on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Really, there’s no reason to hyperventilate about this interview–either good or bad. She didn’t hit a grand slam, and she didn’t strike out. She did fine, and got a base or two.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Palin did fine tonight and held her own in her first tough interview.
elduende on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
I don’t think the Bush Doctrine isn’t just a blanket preemption pledge. Here’s what VP Dick Cheney said about it on August 7, 2003:
The President annunciated what’s come to be known as the Bush doctrine, and henceforth, we will hold states that sponsor terror or provide bases for terrorists accountable and responsible for any attacks launched by those terrorists.
CP on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Find
Bush Doctrine
No matches were found
With all due sarcasm, thanks a lot, bayam
Paul-Cincy on September 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Women will pick up the manner in which CG was talking down to her… sorta like I frequently talk to my wife after she asks for my help with something when I’m in the mood to get in trouble.
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:30 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8 Next »