Video: Palin on the Bush Doctrine, 9/11, and Pakistan
posted at 8:27 pm on September 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
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 6 ... 8 Next »
What will be remembered about this interview will not be her answers but Gibson’s sickening condescending attitude. What a PUTZ. He would never presume to treat any other pollitician in such a manner. She should have slapped him!
oldvannes on September 11, 2008 at 9:30 PM
There’s a lot of interviews to go between now and Nov. 4th, and she is trying out for the number two spot.
Cindy Munford on September 11, 2008 at 9:31 PM
Okay okay……
If the majority of you want to rah rah rah right through the rough stuff….then- don’t be surprised when the Libtard media skewer Palin. As a matter of fact- you won’t have long to wait.
….definitely need to buy more scotch…….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:31 PM
I think the Left means that the Bush Doctrine is:
1. Preemptive war (naturally!);
2. Torturing people!
3. Putting unreasonable standards on kids education.
4. Listening to our boring conversations on the phone (awesome!);
5. Singlehandedly ruining the economy (OMG)
6. Hanging out with corrupt people like Abramoff and Karl Rove, damn their hides!
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:31 PM
Fine, Einstein, YOU answer the question for us.
I have an IQ that could drink yours under the table and still have whole digits left over – and I’m telling you there is no intelligent way to do that.
logis on September 11, 2008 at 9:31 PM
Allah:
I am sorry, but you are trying to read her mind. I watched that interview, and I saw suspicion not confusion in her eyes. She was wondering what he was driving at. The Bush Doctrine is like a buzzword. There is no way she does not know the term, there is no way she has not heard of it. That is just not a reasonable assumption. Perhaps she could have said “Do you mean {fill in the blank}, but instead she put it back on him.
However, her other answers sounded enough like what Bush would say that no doubt the lefties will make her out to be a war monger.
She and McCain are trying to do their own thing here.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
Oh dear Lord! Is there no rest for the weary or even the dead? Now I have another patient who thinks he is George S. Patton to treat! Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh! I can’t take it anymore!!! Somebody get me a big bottle of scotch to go with my cigar!
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
You know if I was the left I would worry more about Joe Biden
Joe Biden “Yeah Saddam had WMDs”
Joe Biden “The Surge is irrelvant to Iraq
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
I hope Gibson’s career goes the same route as Connie Chung’s after she tricked Newt’s mom into saying he called Hillary a “bitch”. I always prefered Elizabeth Vargas anyway.
Paul-Cincy on September 11, 2008 at 9:32 PM
1. Preemptive war (naturally!);
If you read the official policy, then you’d probably come to that conclusion.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:33 PM
Ok, I’ve caught most of the Palin interview from either transcripts or video clips.
She handled some of the questions fairly well IMO, like the BS story about the Iraq prayer which has been debunked for a while now and leaves me wondering why it was even included in the questioning. Also, regarding her son, she points out that she’s not “sending him to Iraq” as Gibson implied but that he volunteered to serve. Big difference between the two.
On others, not so well, especially foreign policy. She didn’t seem to know how to respond when asked about the “Bush Doctrine”. Not being too familiar of that may actually be a good thing considering all the “Bush II” rants I hear but it wasn’t handled well regardless.
Not a complete disaster but nothing to brag about. Hopefully future interviews go better for her.
C-
Yakko77 on September 11, 2008 at 9:33 PM
*SMACK* Snap out of it, soldier. The left is going to feast on everything and anything it can. Always has and always will. Stop sniveling.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:33 PM
The cheer leaders in here are giving a huge pass to Palin-
The Leftard Media and the Dems- WILL NOT.
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
HOW ABOUT ASKING OBAMA IF HE’S READY FOR THE PRESIDENCY, OH WAIT I FORGOT HE’S THE CHOSEN ONE. GOD FORBID THEY ASK THE CHOSEN ONE. ASKING ABOUT THE BUSH DOCTRINE WAS A STUPID QUESTION HES NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.
jaboba on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Palin wasn’t on her A-game today, but she did ok, and she’ll do better. Nothing prepares you for the national spotlight like the national spotlight. That kind of seasoning you have to get the hard way. Have faith.
On a lighter note my son, fullback for the Deltona High JV team, busted out a 70-yard run inside the two-minute warning and scored to beat the dreaded Mainland from Daytona 13-12.
That’s life.
Immolate on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Well I read bayam’s very helpful pdf and now I’ve got to add a 4th definition to the three already provided – preemption, export democracy, with us or against us – all of the above. So Charlie got it wrong too I guess.
peterargus on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Right, but that’s not going to hurt. IF Gibson had conducted a different style of interview, it would sting. But he gave it like a quiz, and she fumbled but recovered one answer. That’s not what the first impression of the viewers is/are going to be. It’s going to be the style of the interview, looking down the glasses etc.
Any noise the left makes on Bush Doctrine will be balanced by Gibson’s cherrypicking words for that quote. No harm done tonight.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Old saying goes – ‘Whoever gets the first punch in usually wins the fight.’ It was around long before the Bush Doctrine…
Karmi on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Wow, can you imagine if the actual Presidential candidates had to put up with this must scrutiny?
gator70 on September 11,
Totally agree.
Look, she could have done a lot worse. I really think she will only get better from hear on out. She got her feet wet, I do not really think this is all that bad. A lot of the answers were great and she came off really, really well. Gibson just sat there sounding like a disgusting old school teacher looking down on this woman he hated and wanted to destroy!
If she can handle Gibson or anyone else in the American Pravda press, she can certainly handle Putin!
JellyToast on September 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Thanks Manly! I needed that.
….and another scotch….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:35 PM
The Bush Doctrine question was vague, and quite possibly intentionally so.
Palin was astute enough to not only pick up on its vagueness (rather than assuming she knew what Gibson meant and answering based on her assumption — a vague question like that is a common way to get a person to unintentionally reveal more about themselves while answering the question) but to catch that Gibson wasn’t being straight with her.
His response to her request for clarification was pointedly vague and unhelpful — this indicates what his motivation was in the original asking of the question.
So Palin shows that she’s (A) neither stupid nor slow, (B) not frazzled by a tough question from a tough interviewer (Charlie Gibson’s an accomplished pro), and (C) not weak.
The rest of her interview was neither great nor terrible. I think she was overcompensating on the Islamic extremism stuff a bit — her apparently-affected stridency (tho who knows? maybe she really is that emphatic about it?) gave the appearance that she was trying to appear strong in an area where she feels that she is lacking expertise.
The interview was neither poor nor fantastic (and I question the expectations of those who feel strongly that it was either) and unlikely to do much to harm her or the ticket. Her performance opposite Joe Biden will carry much more weight, and in that forum I think she will perform quite well.
That said, I expect the thrill-legged media to spin this single interview as some epic Greek tragedy — “the meteoric rise and Icarusian fall of Sarah Palin!” — that is expected to completely destroy her impact. It won’t, as the public has already glimpsed the Wizard behind the curtain. Her rock star status will begin to decline, of course, but that was always going to happen as she got more exposure. The better you get know a person, the less apt you are to idolize them.
Harpazo on September 11, 2008 at 9:35 PM
I think Gibson was condescending, too. Just like “sweetie-guns ‘n religion – Obama” — ach, the condescension of these people makes me wild! Perhaps we need a lecture from Obama on the Bush Doctrine, just like the one he gave on race relations! Instruct us, Gibson! Instruct us, Obama!
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:35 PM
She handled herself well. It was a smart move on her part to get Gibson to define just what he thought the Bush Doctrine was. You could see her thinking for a moment, which is a good thing, and what she was thinking is what is the set up here. She didn’t fall for the trap and the fact that ABC didn’t edit out Gibson’s response it good because it set the context for her answer which is basically “Hell ya Charlie, if we got evidence somebody is planning to attack us we are going to beat them to the punch.” I think it was Gen Sherman who is credited with coining the phrase “Get there the furtest with the mostest”
The one advantage the Dems have in these interviews is never having to be on guard for the gotcha question. She clearly had her guard up and wanted to support her running mate and his views while at the same time not undermining current US policy, once again something the Dems don’t have to worry about, in fact they are all about undermining our foreign policy efforts. Ain’t that right Nancy?
Just A Grunt on September 11, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Sarah Palin on God:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.
That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie.
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:36 PM
That was truly the worst editing of an interview I’ve seen. They cut her off mid-sentence every answer. This interview should have been part of a prime time special like 20/20, not the nightly news.
Charlie Gibson’s frog voice was annoying.
Palin sounded too scripted and needs to give more details, i.e. stop smothering her with handlers! Let Palin be Palin.
P.S. I thought the Bush doctrine was that any country who harbors terrorists will be found equally guilty as the terrorists themselves. Not about pre-emptive strikes, but her PE strike answer was good.
ashleymatt on September 11, 2008 at 9:36 PM
She could have given a perfect answer and the left and media were still going to bash her. That was a given.
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Your argument would have a real basis if you could point to a prior interview, either written or recorded, where she talks about our the nation’s foreign policy direction or even mentions the national security policy of the US at a high level.
Why do you have to give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she must know anything? Many people on this blog didn’t know that the Bush Dotrine referes to US foreign policy, and asking for ‘clarification’ is the type of answer you learn from a debate coach when stumped.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:37 PM
Terrye…are you a mind reader?
mwdiver on September 11, 2008 at 9:37 PM
There is a very big difference between being dumb and being dumbfounded.
It’s like the 2000 debate where Al Gore went off telling about all the great things he did in helping George Bush deal with a natural disaster in Texas. Of course George Bush looked like an idiot standing there staring at Gore with absolutely no recollection whatsoever – of an event which never occurred.
It was only AFTER THAT, when we conservatives stood up and corrected the record, that people started to figure out who the real idiot was.
logis on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Well at least I know which of the patients who thinks he is George S. Patton is the most in need of my help anyway. I guess that is something. Are there any other doctors in the house who could take over some of my other patients or do you want me to keep the others and you take this one? Pretty close call I suppose.
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
It’s not a single issue policy. She specifically asked him which aspect of it he was referring to, and he declined to tell her (what interviewer does that, asks the guest to read their mind and guess?). So she went for a broad route to answer a broad question. And then he smacked her, incorrectly, with a single issue as if that is all it is. And it’s not.
Like I said, he came off as very condescending. She answered it fine when he stated what he was wanting to ask.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Gibson was a complete erudite elitist ass-bag
in other words- a Liberal.
I’m starting to sound more pessimistic than Allah- for God sake!
Maybe Palin will do better as the interview goes on…..sigh*….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
You know, this may bring added pressure on Obama to give a real interview. Do you think that’s possible?
Meme: Palin showed more balls going on that interview than Obama has shown in the past 19 months.
Whatdyathink
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Yes, but she could have asked if he meant his policy of preemption like Allahpundit said.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
She sucked! Really, pathetic hick loser.
Geez, I would have rather had Joe Lieberman. At least he would know to answer the Bush Doctrine question.
And her beauty queen looks aren’t going to win her any votes.
McSame is regretting this choice.
Loser.
Oh, did you notice her posture. She was intimidated.
Why? I mean she has only had the MSM trying to dig up dirt on her and her family and has been averaging an hour of sleep a night since becoming the nominee. No excuses. Look at Obama; he is brilliant. Brilliant I tell you.
Sorry Rethugs, you lose this time.
Obama and Biden!!!
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
The Bush doctrine was clearly a trap door… Charlie wanted to either have her A. diss Bush and get a headline that way or B. say she was for Bush and get a headline that way. I believe that she knew it was a trap, but Steve Schmidt and co. didn’t prepare her for how to answer that well. (Bad Steve!!) She seemed a bit nervous and like she didn’t want to screw up and make a “potatoe” gaffe.
Illinidiva on September 11, 2008 at 9:38 PM
This is one craptasticly edited interview. There’s no way to get a proper gauge of anything with this interview the way it’s presented.
That being said she certainly isn’t wowing me but not exactly letting me down.
And man…what’s with the sound?
CTDeLude on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
mwdiver on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
Agree with most of the observations about CG demeanor. And as odd as this may seem, the ‘what-is-wrong-with-this-picture’ factor for me was that he was not wearing a suit.
A blazer is always a sign of informality. And I don’t recall a single interview that he has conducted with the other candidates – the men – when he was not wearing a suit. It is just a basic sign of respect.
luckyz on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
Fer cry’n out loud. The Bush doctrine is however the left wants to define President Bush. If she answered it the way Chuckie defined it, she would be diss’n the President. If she answered it the way the President would define it, then we would hear cries of “4 more years of Bush”!
It is a trap question and when you go on their turf, if you come out with just a few scratches, you did good!
Vince on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
I don’t think anyone is giving her a pass. Some of us are saying we don’t understand the pessimism displayed. The expectations are the opposite of what the convention was. They were very high. Did she strike out? No. Did she hit another homerun like many wanted? No. She held her own, and she WAS answering the Pakistan question. Gibson was trying to pigeon hole her and she was having none of it. Funny he never gets lost in the the wordiness of Obama’s answers. The ‘tards on The Left will go after her no matter what she says. Most sane people know she’s running for VP, and I’m sure they expect these same sort of questions aimed at McCain, Obama, and Biden when it’s their turn. Believe me, they’ll be paying attention. Most Americans are convinced the media is in the tank for Obama, and the reasons are very clear.
SouthernGent on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
So your attacking her for being smart enough to ask a question that wanted clarification ? Im sorry the press gives barry o such a pass on this all he has to do is answer “WE NEED CHANGE” and that is good enough.
I havent seen Obama do ONE SERIOUS INDEPTH foreign policy speech. Can you direct me to one ?
William Amos on September 11, 2008 at 9:39 PM
bayam,Could you explain Obamas’domestic terrorist policy to me please.
E.Tex on September 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Well at least you are showing substantial signs of improvement since are last meeting. That is encouraging anyway.
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
…this will be especially devastating considering Obama’s such an ace in interviews and extemporaneous speech…oh wait.
Alden Pyle on September 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
You may be right… McCain has been 5 moves ahead the last couple of months so they may already be ready….
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Careful there.
Moose in headlights=totaled car+mildly annoyed moose
Count to 10 on September 11, 2008 at 9:41 PM
That was /sarc/- right?
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:41 PM
Glenn Reynolds over at Instapundit has a link to a politico article saying: “”Sarah Palin confronted a major obstacle in her interview with Charlie Gibson – her first one-on-one as a vice presidential candidate – and appears to have held her own.”
Folks, that’s all she had to do–hold her own. She didn’t have to knock it out of the park. Relax, smoke ‘em if you’ve got ‘em if you smoke, and remember–15 round fight and we’ve just completed round one.
Matt Helm on September 11, 2008 at 9:41 PM
Grr I really hate Gibson after tonight.
Right out of the gate:
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:41 PM
No argument. That wasn’t the best answer. But it could have been 100x times worse. I think she should have said that she supports the McCain doctrine then said what she said.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:41 PM
This lady has spirit, courage and brains. She took her cue from the Arctic Fox. You simpering cowards are taking yours from NPR.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Who did you say you were voting for again?…….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Gibson declined because he didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine was.
Frankly, I have never taken anything such as the “Bush Doctrine” seriously, since the only thing we ever did was invade Iraq – and that would have happened anyway.
The Bush Doctrine falls into the same category as the Powell Doctrine – self-important, intellectual masturbation without any actual policy effects.
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 9:42 PM
One thing I’m noticing with some people on this sight is the nervousness and uncertainty after seeing the interview.
Palin did OK, and I would say a little better than expected. She avoided the traps, came off as strong, but as knowledgable as you would find at this early stage on foreign policy, which is her perceived weakest area.
This will now generate more MSM/leftist hate and continue to thwart Obama’s efforts to get the campaign focusing on him vs. McCain which is where the real fight.
Now, stand up, stretch, sit back down by the keyboard and let’s continue to carry the blog fight to the enemy.
Sarah has incredible grace under all this media pressure. We need to continue campaigning without blinking and have the same grace and poise.
Sapwolf on September 11, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Well I can tell you this:
Intrade either thought she did okay or they thought Obama sucked on the other event tonight…
He dropped like a stone.
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:42 PM
: )
Of course.
I am just really amazed by it all.
We should be so happy that we have Palin as a pick other than Tom Ridge.
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
From the LATimes story on her appearance:
Guess this whole “hostile media” thing is just in the eyes of the beholder, right?
glendower on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
I don’t think most of you realize that the definition of the bush doctrine is completely different depending on if you ask people who are left or right. I’ve worked overseas and have a lot of international experience, but I can honestly say I would have been suspicious of what he was saying, and also, that he was trying to say I was just another bushie.
I would have answered it in a very similar way and I can define what BUSH thinks the bush doctrine is, but that’s not what he was likely asking.
TTheoLogan on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
That’s also well known:
1) Give domestic terroists free passes to flight training school, one of their favorite areas of education
2) Place spies in said flight training classes
3) Wait for terrorists to board planes
4) Watch terrorist fly planes into large buildings
5) Go to crime scene and read terrorists their rights before permornig any arrests and ensure that every terrorist is given due process under the law
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
She seems to know Islam as much as most Americans and most American officials do.
Sadly.
BL@KBIRD on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
Sarcastic troll is mildly amusing.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
This is the one we really need to hammer home.
This question should have been asked decades ago, but now is as good a time as any. Gibson had a week to prepare for this – and probably had a whole staff working on a small handful of questions. So why is THIS GUY qualified to help me decide what’s going on in the world?
Sarah Palin can take care of herself. Politicians come and go every two-four years. But whenever we take out one of the left’s top-three propagandists, we wake up another million people.
logis on September 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM
(pomerpants heads to the porch, lights up and cracks a beer, staring at the stars)
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:44 PM
Ironic troll is ironic.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:45 PM
Allah, it’s not that I think she was brillant..who could be with trapdoor questions like she was given? What I saw her do tonight is stare down and stand her ground against an extremely hostile interview by an interviewer who at times looked bored by what she had to say. I swear, at times I thought (hoped) she was about to lean forward to Gibson and say “Charlie, you keep this attitude up and I’m gonna gut you like the rotting piece of fish you are”…one can dream!
Wileygrl3 on September 11, 2008 at 9:45 PM
Crap! I live about 20 miles from Galveston. I’m afraid the storm coverage will preempt the interview.
Bummer!
TheSitRep on September 11, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Final score: McCain wins the day
Today was a pretty low-key day, politically, so neither candidate gained or lost too much ground. But Sarah Palin confronted a major obstacle in her interview with Charlie Gibson – her first one-on-one as a vice presidential candidate – and appears to have held her own. It remains to be seen whether her opponents will find useful fodder in this interview, but at the very least she didn’t deviate from the campaign message. McCain also held a successful event this morning in Pennsylvania – in a largely non-political news cycle, he didn’t need to do much else.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13181.html
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Sorry, I was sarcastic. I just felt the need to pile on since so many are tonight. Including Allahpundit.
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Good man, CC. I’m putting you in charge of Intel. Keep those reports coming regularly.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:47 PM
Stand strong, man. You were right in first place. The cheer squad will hate you for it, but you were right.
Palin had a rough night. Evaluate it, consider it honestly. Then on to the next one.
We have yet to see what will out.
trailboss on September 11, 2008 at 9:47 PM
Palin was 100% correct on the Bush Doctrine.
Simplistic Gibson like the left thinks the Doctrine is about war and war, “preemptive strikes”.
It’s like asking do you agree with the U.S. Constitution and then saying it about letting people have guns. Gibson is a moron.
Palen answered is spot on saying it’s Bush’s “world view”.
The BUSH DOCTRINE!
186k on September 11, 2008 at 9:47 PM
Allah hates you this I know
For the Koran tells me so
Infidels Christians and Jews we bomb
They are weak but we are strong
Yes Allah hates you! Yes, Allah hates you! Yes, Allah hates you,
The Koran tells me so.
Allah hates you, you will die
Blow your ass up to the Alaskan sky
Say the salat, chop off moose head,
Eat moose falafel, go to bed.
Yes, Allah hates you! Yes, Allah hates you! Yes, Allah hates you!
The Koran tells me so.
Aleph on September 11, 2008 at 9:47 PM
Interview is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ALsjhDDdaA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAlxUChYpj4
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:47 PM
bayam:
Oh please, the Bush Doctrine has been so bitched about, talked about, dissected, torn apart, added to, misinterpreted and misunderstood that just about everyone on the planet has heard of it and most of them who have heard of it have a different opinion as to what it means.
I am saying that I think she has heard of it because it has been something that has been so much discussed it would be hard to have avoided hearing about it.
Kind of like not knowing that there are 50 states in the United States or that Kentucky borders Illinois. That sort of thing.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 9:48 PM
Fuck it!
I watched McCain tonight and I thought he hit it outta the park.
Obama came on to a overly-friendly house that cheered when he farted, and he- BORED THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF AMERICA!
Now I think- McCain/Palin will do fine…….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:48 PM
Oh, I know you were. ;) AP will always be skeptical until November 4th, that’s just who AP is.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:48 PM
One good thing that came from Gibby’s trap question: All around the country, people are googling “Bush Doctrine.” That’s a good thing.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:48 PM
The Bush Doctrine specifically calls for pre-emptive strikes. Why don’t you read the document.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM
I guess I’m being a little hard on her. It’s just that one thing Republicans are known for is being foreign policy wonks. People might not agree with Republicans on foreign policy but they usually don’t deny they are at least knowledgeable on that area. So I’m disappointed she not more fluent in that area.
terryannonline on September 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM
From the LATimes story on her appearance:
Guess this whole “hostile media” thing is just in the eye of the beholder, right?
glendower on September 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM
Bush and his doctrine will heading for Texas real soon, so who cares? Years from now ‘bayam’, you and old Charlie will be asking another Republican candidate – do you agree with the Palin doctrine?
She did fine! If she did not, ‘bayam’ and his lib buddies would be yukking it up at the daily kooks and partying with the other democrats hiding underground, not trolling at Hot Air.
RMR on September 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM
mwdiver:
Your question to me makes no sense.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM
Hell, son, they’ll do superbly.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:50 PM
I think the McCain campaign is genius personified. How many people do you think will have an interest in what Sarah Palin thinks? I believe that the more people see this ticket, the more they will be willing to pull the lever for it.
Vince on September 11, 2008 at 9:50 PM
Phew….. c_f – I thought I’d dropped into a rabbit hole and came out in bizarro world.
tru2tx on September 11, 2008 at 9:50 PM
I tuned Uh-bam-uh out, honestly. The ‘uh’ and ‘um’ grated away at my nerves.
That is one difference between Obama and Palin… she doesn’t stammer and stutter.
Enoxo on September 11, 2008 at 9:50 PM
There is no “Bush Doctrine” document
bnelson44 on September 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM
I love Palin, but I have to agree this came off badly. Even I know what the Bush doctrine is.
Correct answer would have been: “There are two interpretations…some say we have the right to preempt any threat with force, I disagree…others say we have the right to preempt grave and imminent threats with force, with which I agree.”
Preserves her as a maverick since it disagrees with some of the Bush Doctrine, positions her as a prudent rather than rash leader, and has the added bonus that it’s ethically correct.
She needs a crash course in political history, focused on the last 8 years. Luckily she’s naturally quick on her feet – you can’t teach that.
Gaunilon on September 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM
The Intrade drop was right around 9:30-9:40…
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM
Exactly. It would be considered a friendly media to anybody who’s currently being strangled with a microphone cord and beaten over the head with a TV camera.
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM
What is it?
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 9:52 PM
More name-calling? I’m not a liberal. Just becuase I don’t get a hard on when a good looking woman gives a speech about hockey moms and lickstick doesn’t mean that I’m a left wing nut.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:52 PM
: )
No, I love me sum Sarah Palin!
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 9:53 PM
If you are up late enough, I’d love to know what their doing after the 11 o’clock news.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:53 PM
NO THEY DON’T! You’re falling for the attacks from the left. Perhaps you’re confused by the term “doctrine” which suggests there is a set of hard and fast rules out there which politicians should know. That isn’t the case.
The Bush doctrine is nothing more than an approach to foreign policy/ national security that may or may not be continued by the next administration. In it’s simplest form all it means is that (unlike Clinton’s eight years of inaction) the Bush policy is to deal with terrorists before they blow up the WTC a couple of times, bomb a warship or embassy, etc. Gibson was demanding an answer to a vague question about a “doctrine” that doesn’t even really exist as a formulated part of American foreign/security policy.
Put another way since you clearly don’t understand….. Gibson was demanding that Palin respond with chapter and verse from a doctrine that is nothing more than a broad governing principle that has essentially laid dormant for five years as the GWOT is focused on Iraq and Afghanistan. Hope that clears it up for you.
highhopes on September 11, 2008 at 9:53 PM
And you are staying there to ride it out??? Seriously? Looks like a really bad one there, cowboy. Be safe.
tru2tx on September 11, 2008 at 9:53 PM
What, is she running for Secretary of State? I haven’t had a chance to watch this, and after reading a bunch of these comments, I’m not sure I want to. I’m sure she didn’t do what I was hoping she would do, which would have been to take pokes at the whole premise of this interview. I imagined her smiling huge at Gibson and saying, “Gosh, that’s a tough question Charlie. I’m sure this will be a breeze, when you ask Senator Obama this question. Make sure to let me know when that will be happening because I wouldn’t want to miss it!” She’s great at that kind of thing. “Great question, Charlie. Our presidential candidates could probably give you an oral dissertation on that. I’m going to approach it more from the VP perspective.” Or, “Now I know how Governor X felt when he was elected president.” This whole thing was a big joke. Luckily, anybody with a brain knows that VP’s aren’t expected to know this kind of stuff cold–especially VP’s who have been governors. What you need is someone who has the leadership skills, the intangibles that can’t be taught. As long as they have a decent kopf, then if they have to step up to the next level, they’ll ramp up, speed up the learning curve, and do what’s necessary. Everyone knows that’s how it happens. Now all of sudden we have to pretend that the VP has to a turnkey president-in-waiting. What a crock of sh*t.
smellthecoffee on September 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next »