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 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
I appreciate your fairness, that’s why I always read your comments.
I think she should have explained, quickly, that Alaska is home to missile defense, etc. So I give you that.
But her selling point, and she is going to hammer this home over the next 50 days, is that energy is a national security issue. Trust me, she’s going to drill it into the debate. And that, at the end of the day, is going to make her the other hand of McCain’s foreign policy that will make the ticket look like genius.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
I didn’t say but if you must know I am leaning toward Theodore Roosevelt if I can get my naturalized citizenship in time for the election.
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
This is a war room, not a bordello.
*pause*
Who am I kidding…I want me sum Sarah Palin, too.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
terryonline:
Palin showed as much knowledge of foreign affairs tonight as did most of the Republicans running for President in the primary. I honestly do not know what marvelous, wonderful, original and eyepopping thing she was supposed to say about Russia, NATO or special ops in Pakistan.
And the whole Bush Doctrine question was a trap. She should have been smoother in the way she handled it, but it seems to me that a lot of people had completely unrealistic expectations of Palin and now they are somehow disappointed that she did not sit the world on fair.
On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give her a 7. And I would say that she did better than Obama does in an interview. No stuttering and stammering and big fat gaffes.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Hey, Charlie! Here’s the “Bush Doctrine”. It was broadcasted to the American public in September 20, 2001:
“We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html
eanax on September 11, 2008 at 9:55 PM
It wasn’t continued by this administration … which is why it is such a non-issue.
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 9:55 PM
She did marvelous. Better then I hoped. They laid out traps, and she sidestepped them all. Do not fret. Plus all of this is just practice for the main even the debate.
Jdripper on September 11, 2008 at 9:55 PM
I don’t know anyone who watches evening news programs (or at the very least I’ve never attempted to engage one in conversation beyond direct instructions.) But I don’t think they ever notice the anchor man. He simply IS.
What you’re talking about is like expecting a fish to have a “first impression” of water. The concept would be utterly incomprehensible to it.
logis on September 11, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Nice idea. All of it would have been edited out.
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 9:56 PM
God bless you!
TheSitRep on September 11, 2008 at 9:56 PM
http://www.Intrade.com
CC
CapedConservative on September 11, 2008 at 9:56 PM
Physician heal thyself.
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:56 PM
Let me make it a little more plain for you. You chide Allah for reading Palin’s mind, then you turn around and tell us what she meant. Plain enough for you?
mwdiver on September 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Okay- the FoxNews panel is making feel better about this interview….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
That’s simply not the case- it does exist as formulated policy, although you could argue that its applicatoin has been limited. People in the foreign policy loop know that it was very controversial back in 2002, and it remains controversial. If she had given any signal that she generally understood the points of contention, that would have been an adequate answer to demonstrate that she isn’t completely in the dark.
bayam on September 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Bottom line, I think, is that our president and vice president need to be strong.
Palin showed strength tonight by going on an interview that she must have known she was not entirely ready for.
Obama, on the other hand, shows weakness by bis evasive, protracted responses, and by declining any real interview for as long as possible.
Everyone has to take the plunge, at some time: whether into a pool, or kissing a girl whom you’re not sure likes you, or going on an interview. That is life, and that is reality.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Good points, all of them. She’ll do fine, Spirit. This was just the opening battle. There’ll be more to come in the days ahead. The bloodletting has only just started.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:58 PM
: )
carbon_footprint on September 11, 2008 at 9:58 PM
I thought the smack in the head and the scotch chaser took care of that.
ManlyRash on September 11, 2008 at 9:59 PM
If you ask a troll a question and it ducks like a quack, it’s a quack.
Loxodonta on September 11, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Did you watch the convention? Almost the entire buzz since her nomination has been the way the media has treated her. Even Barack has been commenting on it.
I guarandamntee you people were looking to see how she would be handled by Gibson.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 10:01 PM
The whole Bush doctrine bit was a little cringe inducing, because that was basically a worst case scenario answer.
I actually thought she came off really well in every other respect though.
Mattpat11 on September 11, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Limited? How about non-existent?
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Your right it did! …it must of rattled sumptin loose….;)
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Gibson was a total weasel and tried to set her up.
NO ONE HAS EVER ASKED SUCH A BROAD QUESTION BEFORE!
do a search using his words, BUSH DOCTRINE.
It goes on to say they were added to , changed, amended etc in later years.
Gibson is a misogynistic prick for asking it that way and he knows it.
shooter on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Yeah, I’ve no worries. She’s been great all the way to this point, she’s not going to all the sudden become someone else.
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
TheSitRep,
I gotta pile on here and say that’s not really the smartest idea. Speaking as a Gustav evacuee from New Orleans and one back in NOLA and dealing with the winds from the outer bands- Ike is a big storm that shouldn’t be messed with. We’re already getting wind damage from Ike and we aren’t even in the cone!
Stay safe but I’m one of those people who evacuate and have no qualms in doing so after the storms I’ve dealt with starting with Hugo in Charleston in the 1980s.
highhopes on September 11, 2008 at 10:02 PM
I think she did fine. Quite frankly, the Bush Doctrine discussion here is silly. What I saw when Gibson asked the question was immediate suspicion of his intention and meaning, which is certainly understandable considering the BDS on the other side. She asked for clarification, which he didn’t give. The Bush Doctrine, is, in fact, Bush’s “world view.” Work with us against terrorism or we will consider you the enemy. Pre-emptive strikes? Even though that is part of it, even the Bush Administration will avoid that, if possible.
The Pakistan question was slightly disingenuous as there is cooperation at some level with the U.S., even though reports of that cooperation or lack there of are sending deliberate mixed messages.
My only problem with her interview is right at the beginning of this particular video, and when I heard it, I posted “uh oh” on the live thread. When someone says, “there is only a tiny fraction of,” in reference to radical Islam, I get nervous. I want to know how much she understands about Islam and if she understands that stealth jihad is occurring here and in Europe.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:03 PM
I’m gonna come up with a scotch based mixer that is pessimistic proof-
I’ll call it…….The Allah-Chaser….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:04 PM
I can not concern myself with my own well being right now. There are too many troubled souls around who need me. Trust me, my own problems pale into insignificance compared to some of what I am seeing here.
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Ok, I just watched the excerpts easily accessible on the ABC web site.
I think she did just fine. Not great, but good enough, and sometimes downright very good. And, frankly, she needs the practice, and it will make her stronger.
I think it was Gibson’s job to be rigorous with her. But it seems to me he went beyond that. You could read in his body language exasperation when he got an answer he didn’t like.
Truly, we are blest. The American voter already has cemented his or her view of Sarah Palin. There will not be much shifting between now and election day.
And, this interview simply extends the Barack Obama confusion that he is running against Sarah Palin rather than John McCain.
JudetheFossil on September 11, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Okay…
I have been reading some of your posts.
Most of you Armchair politicians/Generals don’t have a clue. Have any of you severed your country? If so raise your hand now and be counted. If not shut up and learn from those who have.
Sahara Palin did what she had to and we will see what part 2 is tomorrow. She had her moments and made her points. She is not going to score 100% and I wouldn’t expect her to. She walked a fine line and left a door open for McCain to walk through and destroy the Libs. But of course you wouldn’t know that because you have never been in anything more than a video game that you can reset.
I have seen battles that could have gone better but in the end they made there point and we took out the enemy.
The best most of you have done is take out the trash when your old lady tells you to.
I’ll stop now before my language takes a turn for the worse.
PS….if some of you would have been with me in Nam you wwouldn’t have made it home. If you didn’t have my back I sure as hell wouldn’t have yours….and I might be standing behind you….think about KIDS. This country has a cchoice…you make the call who’s back you will have.
END OF RANT
Have a nice evening.
Old Hippie Vet on September 11, 2008 at 10:06 PM
So the speck in their eye is greater than the beam in your own….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:07 PM
On the 9/11 question she was on the right track about Islamic extremism but she could go a bit more indepth and bring up womens rights and suppression by Islamic fanatics.
The McCain campaign should let her watch some videos of the Islamic extremists speak about their goals and motivations like in this video:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/bjbevf
gumble on September 11, 2008 at 10:08 PM
mwdiver:
No, that is not true. Allah said that Palin did not what the Bush Doctrine was. My point is that unless he can read her mind he does not know if that is true or not. Not the same thing at all.
Terrye on September 11, 2008 at 10:08 PM
Just what I was thinking…
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 10:08 PM
No, you are wrong. The concepts behind the “Bush Doctrine” may be formulated as a policy but there is no document or rules of engagement that you can point to and say that this is the Bush Doctrine. This isn’t the Monroe Doctrine or the Truman Doctrine where there are hard and fast trigger points for American action. Again, this is somewhat of meaningless hysteria because any mention of the Bush Doctrine ended in 2003 with engagement in Iraq. It is only likely to appear again at some point in the future where America has the choice to go into some rogue state to prevent terrorists from establishing the network they enjoyed under Bill Clinton’s era of bad stewardship.
highhopes on September 11, 2008 at 10:08 PM
Pomerpants wants to share this one with you. Please note it contains what lawyers would call, “an admission”:
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:09 PM
You too. Your rant was right on. Sometimes conservatives are their own worst enemy.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:10 PM
So what if she does not do well on the Bush doctrine. The president’s ratings are in the sewers, so his doctrine can’t be all that good, can it? Too much talk about Bush will drive the democrats crazy with their mantra “4 more years of Bush”.
Birdseye on September 11, 2008 at 10:11 PM
Raising my hand about that serving the nation thing. Agree to all you posted so I guess that makes it a good rant.
highhopes on September 11, 2008 at 10:12 PM
What this really comes down to is that she was good, but not perfect… which is far better than “uhhh uhhh errr ummm let me be clear” NObama
Hunt035 on September 11, 2008 at 10:13 PM
I like the way she kept calling him “Charlie”. It’s tough to remain pompous when you are a “Charlie”.
Charlie needs to learn what the nuance of the original Bush doctrine was before he starts demanding yes or no answers. What is was is not what he claims, and what it developed into is not what it was.
I love the fact that we are entering Pakistan to hunt down killers. That, Charlie, is the Bush doctrine in action as it was originally intended.
Hening on September 11, 2008 at 10:13 PM
C’mon. What will the news be tomorrow? Palin doesn’t know Bush Doctrine? No, because the audience wouldn’t know what they’re talking about.
It’ll be that she faced a tough interview, which is true enough.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:13 PM
He pushed the Bush Doctrine into her face four times and she gave him the same basic answer back four times running. “Blizzard of words” indeed! The Bush Doctrine is obviously and rightly on the table and usable if needed. ‘Nuf said, Charlie!
Her answer on the closeness of Russia is certainly NOT goofy — and certainly cannot be viewed as such if one is an Alaskan. When those Russian bombers come out to challenge our airspace, what state’s airspace are they also challenging? Her apparent parochial Alaskan answer is a US answer too, since Alaska is United States territory.
unclesmrgol on September 11, 2008 at 10:13 PM
Bayam, it’s good that you found a link to the “Bush Doctrine,” but the link undermines your own argument. The link points to a 30 page document with eight subsections. Mathematically, that’s 2^8 or 256 total possible ways to agree with the policy, if you allow for the possibility for agreeing with some subsections but not others. In which case, Sarah was right to ask for clarification.
shazbat on September 11, 2008 at 10:14 PM
There is no indication that she didn’t know the Bush Doctrine. But it was wise of her to insist that he narrow the question. Bush Doctrine covers a lot of ground, its not smart to try and answer such a broad question with a hostile interviewer. She did the right thing by asking for specifics, any good lawyer would have done the same.
Maxx on September 11, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Well, there’s one part of that statement I totally agree with. Of course, I’d be a little less delicate with the description…
Ok…A lot less delicate…
BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 10:14 PM
THe interview was painful to watch as his attitude came across as if he was trying to trap her. Now while that will play well with the nutroots, and give dems lots ot bray about, I think the general population will generally feel sorry for her.
Some things I would have liked though. On the Pakistan question she should have said if Pakistan either gave permission or was unable to police its own territories we may have to do it for them.
On the hi-jacking question she should have said that it happened because there were some truely evil people in the world and this is how they behave when they think they can get away with it.
Buford on September 11, 2008 at 10:15 PM
Here’s hopin’. we’ll see but I am not making any bets against “Palin doesn’t know bush doctrine”
Hunt035 on September 11, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Trolling in the sewer again? Better you than me. And there are plenty of legal-type morons over there.
As for the energy question he wanted Gibson to ask, I think she would have won that one, hands down.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Gibson: What do you think of the Constitution?
Palin: Could you be more specific?
Kos: OMG SHE DOESN’T KNOW WHAT THE CONSTITUTION IS!!!!
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 10:17 PM
The proof that she did poorly is the vitriol that is being hurled at Gibson. If she had done well, you wouldn’t be looking for someone to blame. And I say this as big Sarah Palin fan.
PackerBronco on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Thank you for your service and Welcome Home.
I was in Nam, Quang Tri 1971.
Old Hippie Vet on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
I thought the Bush Doctrine was…’George Bush doesn’t care about Black People’….
She shoulda Aced that one….
BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
OMG — NEWSFLASH — REAL NEWS! — REALLY REALLY NEWSY NEWS!
Nice contrast with the Palin interview, Dude!
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20225274,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines
Michael Phelps isn’t the only person hoping to make waves on the season premiere of Saturday Night Live this weekend.
He will be joined by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, who’ll be jetting in from New Hampshire, PEOPLE has learned, but whose role in the show is like many of the voters he covets: undecided.
“The details of the sketch are still being worked out,” an Obama campaign spokesperson tells PEOPLE.
This is not Obama’s first appearance on SNL. During the primary, he appeared opposite Amy Poehler’s Hillary Clinton in a skit about a Halloween costume party in which Obama came dressed as … Barack Obama.
“I have nothing to hide,” he said in the skit. “I enjoy being myself. I’m not going to change who I am just because it’s Halloween.”
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
What do you mean by “Have any of you
severedserved your country”?Do you mean served in the Armed Forces? I am guessing that you do.
I don’t know about you but when I was in I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic and the U.S. Constitution does not tell Americans to shut up.
END OF “RANT”
Have a nice evening.
MB4 on September 11, 2008 at 10:19 PM
We wouldn’t have to blame him if he weren’t blameworthy. Did you watch the interview?
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Okay- that’s bullshit…
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:20 PM
I agree. Her answer was meant to imply that Charlie must be a moron if he thought she didn’t have any view on that.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Old Hippie Vet
Not raising my hand. The first thing my drill sgt taught me was to never volunteer.
I agree with your points however. She did fine and she can not and should not be everything to everyone like a certain other candidate tries to be. She will get more comfortable with handling the press when she concentrates more on giving the answers she wants rather then worrying about not screwing up. She has McCain and the Republican fortunes in the upcoming election to worry about as much as answering questions from a, er what do you call Charles Gibson?
Just A Grunt on September 11, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Dang Allah, if all I did was read Hot Air tonight I’d think the world just ended. I just looked around the interweb a bit and it seems a lot of folks are pretty positive. Do you have to lapse into Eeyore territory so easily. Quit being such a weak in the knees nambey pambey thumb-sucking little baby. Buck up camper!
t.ferg on September 11, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Temper, temper.
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 10:21 PM
I’ll give Sarah credit for attempting to give precise, quick, and straightforward answers – most politicians would ramble on for 5 minutes and say nothing. As an administrator and a mom of five, I’m not sure she knows any other way, thank God.
So now she knows where her weaknesses are and can deal with them. I really think it is unfair to give Obama a pass on foreign policy and go after her like this, but that is the hand the GOP has been dealt. Let ‘em celebrate and have their fun.
Concerning Gibson’s condescension, if I ever looked over my glasses at my wife like that, she’d slap me upside the head. Maybe he should open the purse strings and pay for some progressives. I’m surprised he wasn’t smoking a pipe as well.
And finally, while anything is possible, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if McCain thrived for four more years and this whole angst about him croaking on the first day of his Presidency is moot. Wouldn’t surprise me at all. Sounds like he is healthy as a horse. That would be the ultimate “in your face” and he’s just the honcho to do it.
Mr_Magoo on September 11, 2008 at 10:21 PM
As to the Pakistan question, I think she handled it like a pro, and Charlie knows it. He knew it after she answered the first time, he was trying to bait her into saying something stupid, which in this case would be an out right “yes”. She played it smoothly and restated the proper, “diplomatic” answer.
The Arctic Fox appears to live up to the name.
Guess the MSM is SOL.
SuperCool on September 11, 2008 at 10:21 PM
…but it garauntee’s their RIGHT to say shut up…
So – shut up-
Sigmund.
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:22 PM
You obviously have your microscope turned the wrong way. You will never make it through medical school that way.
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 10:23 PM
AP should give you a slot just below the posts for Rebuttal:
Spirit of 1776 on September 11, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Sorry-
….too much scotch…..and I’m a former Lib……..old habits die hard…..
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:23 PM
I agree with Terrye on this one- I think she was trying to avoid a trap, and it was a tad too obvious, because she is not a liar.
Priscilla on September 11, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Exactly.
She wanted to see where he was going with the question before answering.
In short, she played the Jedi mother mind trick on him.
The Ugly American on September 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM
you mean as a “specimen”- like you?
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Yes. The point is her responsibility to deal effectively with good interviewers and bad interviewers. That’s part of the job – especially if you’re a Republican. It’s not going to change over the next two months and it certainly won’t change if she’s elected.
You seem to be under the delusion that the press is supposed to fair. Wrong. The press is supposed to be adversarial. Now I agree they usually fall below that standard with Democrat candidates. Okay, fair enough. I want to see Gibson being this hard and perhaps rude to everyone who seeks elected office. Blame him for not acting this way with Obama, but don’t blame him for acting this way with Palin.
PackerBronco on September 11, 2008 at 10:26 PM
The only proper answer to the Pakistan question:
Our governemnt is allied with the Pakistani government against these jihadists. It is not for me at this time as an unelected leader to state how we deal with hypothetical situations, and to cause unnecessary concern with our allies. If I am the President, when and if the situation warrants such consideration, it will be given at that time.
paulsur on September 11, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Well, I took the same oath, and I don’t remember that being part of it…so shut up
Or better yet..STFU!!
Have a nice day…
dickhead…
BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Dude, I am totally not a troll with regards to the above bit:
– I was just giving a snapshot of what I saw on Daily Kos. Information, baby!
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:26 PM
I agree with you on this. I also think Palin did just fine.
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 10:27 PM
“Charlie, the constitution is the founding document of this great country. It is the set of primary laws that our country is governed by. It is not something that can be changed at the whims of activist judges, and when John McCain is president, he will appoint the kind of justices that will interpret what it says, not legislate from the bench with their own personal beliefs.”
mwdiver on September 11, 2008 at 10:28 PM
“I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.” (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
MB4 on September 11, 2008 at 10:28 PM
The correct answer to the Bush Doctrine question:
It has always been the perogative if the United States to act in it’s own interest, including preemption. This has existed since the time of the Monroe doctrine. I am not about to change who and what we are as Americans.
paulsur on September 11, 2008 at 10:28 PM
I thought the analogy was pretty good. The only problem is that in reading this thread, I see a similar reaction here.
Buck up. You’re on the road to true happiness.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:29 PM
Was Gibson looking for something lyrical? He should ask Obama, “What do you think about mathematics?”
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:29 PM
OMG, I just got off work and started to read the comments and by asome of your tenor… thought it went pretty badly.
Did I see a different interview?
She did fine for the first time out. And I don’t think it’s a stretch to say Gibson condescending. But you know what, they’re all going to be, and they’re going to do the same damn thing to the whole freaking conservative world as long as we keep eating our own.
We all, always can do better. And if you don’t think she’s already preparing for the next one then I guess you didn’t catch her spirit in the first two weeks on the campaign trail.
Honest opinion. Some polishing required but she is still my gal.
Do you think the Dems groan when Biden says stand up to a crippled man or can’t get battalions and brigades right? Do you think they at all falter when “the one” says something stupid as “above my pay grade.” They’re no freaking rocket scientists either.
She’ll do fine, unless…
We get squeamish because what…she isn’t perfect in her delivery? Because we once again turn our back on one of our own because of some asinine code of honor that says we can never make a mistake becasue of the press? We will never that break in the press everyone is looking for. We just always need to do the best we can and try to do even better next time.
She did fine and will be even better next time.
hawkdriver on September 11, 2008 at 10:30 PM
YESSIR! FTW!
fossten on September 11, 2008 at 10:30 PM
I wasn’t calling you a troll here, silly. If you go over there, they would call a troll.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:31 PM
….yawn…..and your point is……
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:31 PM
Did she do fine? You can’t put lipstick on that pig.
paulsur on September 11, 2008 at 10:32 PM
correction: they would call you a troll.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:32 PM
The “Bush Doctrine” could have meant any number of things. There’s no way she could have known that Charlie was going to say it meant x y and z. So I don’t fault her for that.
The Pakistan question was not handled well, and she really needs to be on top of that. She sounded like she was giving a campaign speech, not providing a rational answer. Someone needs to tell her that it’s ok to waffle a little bit. She should have turned that around with a little “it depends on the situation.”
WisCon on September 11, 2008 at 10:33 PM
I took those KosKids comments at face value. I was saying bullshit to them.
Sorry about the confusion….
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:34 PM
Wow…I should have assumed by you always well reasoned posts that you were ‘O-Div’ …
And Lord knows I never met any officers that weren’t complete brain dead assholes…
But you know what they say…You gotta respect the Rank, not the pretentious retard wearing it….
BigWyo on September 11, 2008 at 10:35 PM
I overheard part of that on tv on my way out the door this morning. I heard the Fox commentators say something like, “This didn’t go so well.” I knew, just knew!, what the outcome probably was as I lunged for the remote to turn it off. I thought oh my god, that guy in the audience probably a paraplegic. Then I hopped out the door.
Thanks for the confirmation.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Skelator is picking on the “Bush Doctrine” bit…
FiveWays on September 11, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Thanks for clearing it up. I did think your comment was directed at Jim. I’m glad I was wrong.
Connie on September 11, 2008 at 10:35 PM
The thing with Pakistan is that no politician is giving a right answer on it. Palin did as well as the rest of them. Not one, though, has ever mentioned the eventual need to wrest Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and industry from them. But this cannot be said in public – hell, no one is even talking about getting AQ Khan and beating every last piece of info out of him – so … questions about Pakistan all fall into this black hole.
progressoverpeace on September 11, 2008 at 10:36 PM
I do believe I detect a note of hostility from you. Don’t worry about that though as many of my more trouble patients feel that way. It is normal. Well normal for my more troubles patients anyway.
Sigmund on September 11, 2008 at 10:36 PM
Thanks Connie.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 10:36 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »