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 ... 5 6 7 8 Next »
I would hope as a female, she doesnt have balls, but I guess that is more of a concern for her husband.
I know some people are gonna think I am dogging her, but that interview looked very poor, and I am just calling it as I saw it.
paulsur on September 11, 2008 at 11:51 PM
Thanks for the info, it makes sense too. I’d like to see the unedited version as well.
darwin on September 11, 2008 at 11:51 PM
She is doing really well..in these Nightline segments. This is much much better…infact, she doing awesome. Wow…ABC distorted the original 6pm segments.
Chudi on September 11, 2008 at 11:53 PM
YIPPEE !!!
You got nine words in your whole blog-post right….Congratulations.
I’m one of the 99%, and you can go suck an egg.
franksalterego on September 11, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Darn. I think a huge number of people would have seen the edited sound bites, and less of the nightline broadcast. Hopefully she can keep her message in further intervires and try to not let them manage her presentation. i.e. live interviews, or other venues.
Such as town halls. It’s worked so well for McCain.
And town halls don’t work so well for Obama. We’ve seen Obama away from his prompter.
wise_man on September 11, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Ok, sir, if you want me to draw you a picture, here it is:
She has strength, and nerve, and is willing to respond to a call from her party right now. She is furthermore ready to engage Obama directly, to call him out on his lack of experience, and (as shown by the interview) on his lack of balls for failing to answer any direct questions himself.
I call that balls, and the term, as I use it, is gender neutral.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 11:55 PM
Charlie is being a total jackass. Hasn’t smiled once.
CanadianGuy on September 11, 2008 at 11:55 PM
You gotta be kindding me right? She looked terrible. She looked tense, uncomfortable with the line of questioning. Gave bizarre answers like that one about being able to see Russia from an Alaskan island (yeah and?). In short shelooked in this interview like Obama looks in a debate,”bewilderd”.
paulsur on September 11, 2008 at 11:56 PM
Paulsur, I intend to arise at the break of day to review your answers to my comments and review your answers to the question what is the Bush Doctrine. Sleep tight.
pomerpants on September 11, 2008 at 11:58 PM
paulsur,
you must be a troll. if she looked terrible, then Obama looks downright useless them.
She is doing well.
Chudi on September 11, 2008 at 11:58 PM
No President or Vice President regardless of party is, nor should be, expected to know everything and make national security or national policy decisions alone. They have access to many advisors, The United States Cabinet, The Executive Office of the President, The White House National Security Council and the National Security Advisor, just to name a few. We should expect the President and the Vice President to listen to and learn from these advisors and then to use the knowledge gained to make the choices and decisions that best serve the USA. I don’t know whether, during this interview, Governor Palin understood the “Bush Doctrine” or not. But I am certain that if she didn’t understand it then she knows more about it now than any of us commenting here.
coldshot on September 11, 2008 at 11:59 PM
Calling all bloggers:
Listen again to Mrs. Palin and read her words. She is very thoughtful and articulate and crafts her answers so as not to boxed into a yes or no as adherence to “Bush Doctrine” would do to her. She will only get better as she gains experience in these interviews. What a great American and nice lady. Hers will be the next and best looking face on Mount Rushmore…
gracie on September 11, 2008 at 11:59 PM
Her lack of exposure to the MSM is apparent in this clip. However… I actually see this as a strength for her in that she is NOT a career politician and is coming into the VP position from a “normal” American point of view. We all know the answer to whether or not we can “invade” a country without their approval to stop an attack – we’ve done it well before Iraq and we’ll do it again. However, she is struggling in her answers to not give a soundbite that can hurt her, and by doing so comes across less direct and more obtuse than we all know (and her track record proves) she is.
Again, I see it as a strength in her that she isn’t part of the political machine the rest of the bums are. Hope and Change indeed.
KMC1 on September 12, 2008 at 12:00 AM
She did AWESOME. Even the environment questions, she hit out of the park.
Chudi on September 12, 2008 at 12:00 AM
LOL!
Indeed.
SuperCool on September 12, 2008 at 12:00 AM
All right then smarty, you tell me, what does being able to see Russia from an Alaskan island have to do with Russia and Georgia? What is the relevance? what did she mean by that answer?
I dont like any of the two parties candidates, I have stayed true to that since the beginning. My right to express my opinion on this board has nothing to do with trolling.
paulsur on September 12, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Wise-Man, There is nothing you said in your last post that wasn’t absolutely spot on. But…
If “the one” is elected, I’m going to have a hard time thinking of him as my president. Ever since Dennis John Kucinich said the war was cooked up in Texas 4 years ago, the disloyal democratic party has been one by one trying to outdo themselves putting their desire for power before their own troops by bashing my country, commander in cheif and me and every other military person I’ve served with. Iraq had a period of stability when I was there the first time and I really thought we were winning. Then the democratic primary debates. Then John Kerry saying we were beating ndown doors for apparently no reason in the middle of the night and “scaring children”. To the whole freaking democratic party, our kids are every day we’re deployed. Do you think they give a flip about that? The “the one” votes no on armor for hummers and present to just about everything else. He was against the surge befroe he was for it but didn’t think it worked after he was for it till Bill ORielly cornered the coward. He has played games and politics with the war and this military and he’s got as much blood on his hands as the guy who pulls the trigger on us. They all do.
hawkdriver on September 12, 2008 at 12:04 AM
“scared” every day.
hawkdriver on September 12, 2008 at 12:05 AM
6 of 1, half dozen of the other. She looks better on Nightline, but Gibson looks worse on the Nightly News. Both are okay.
Spirit of 1776 on September 12, 2008 at 12:07 AM
PS: Charlie’s just an average horse’s patoot. Mrs. Palin’s got to get used to the whole stable of media geldings. She’s doing great. This a good warm-up for the Biden debate. I really believe they will be very respectful to one another and we’ll all get something out of their discussion. Remember they will be working together after the McCain-Palin victory.
gracie on September 12, 2008 at 12:07 AM
Charlie comes off like a real pr*ck in this interview.
Nice job Sarah Smile.
Mojave Mark on September 12, 2008 at 12:10 AM
just watched the nightline version of the interview. Much better… Hell they even included the entire video of Palin talking in church and Charlie didn’t use the words “exact words”
Only thing that you can tell from both interviews that one was trying to be fair and one was a attack piece. considering that the attack piece would probalby be seen by more people any wonder what ABC is trying to do here
unseen on September 12, 2008 at 12:11 AM
She never answered anything by saying, “that is above my pay grade” and while at times things looked off or odd or forceful; I think it has way more to do with the editing. I have never seen an interview of someone so clipped or obviously edited or broken. The Nightline clips showed her response about global warming and I was not exactly thrilled with it, but this is really hard to judge based on how this stuff is being released. But I think she does know Russia has the veto vote or power in the UN Security Council. She knows the U.S. does not have 57 states, she knows more than “a bomb” was dropped on Pearl Harbor and I seriously doubt she was have ever said as Obama did in 2007 on the campaign trail that our troops were raiding villages, killing innocent people and all sorts of other atrocities. And for the cherry on top she has not offered her campaigns as experience or qualifications for POTUS.
Something was up. Something sort of like the audio tonight for the ridiculous get together with Time and NPR at Columbia with McCain and THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZER MANCHILD. Only McCain’s audio was messed up. Strange.
At this Columbia Univ. thing Obama said mayors, “trim trees, fill in pot holes, and make sure the garbage gets picked up”. I would like to see him try that line with my mayor! LOL! She is a woman too, and she would kick his community ACORN, Alinsky butt!
freeus on September 12, 2008 at 12:13 AM
WHY IN THE HELL IS ALLAH PUNDIT ON THIS SITE? DOES ANYONE WANT TO READ MSM WATER CARRYING TRIPE LIKE HIS “PERSPECTIVE” ON A SITE THAT SUPPOSEDLY GIVES CONSERVATIVES A FAIR SHAKE?
revolution on September 12, 2008 at 12:13 AM
Haven’t seen the interview yet (only 0715 here in Baghdad). The military hates streaming, so hopefully I’ll be able to catch it later today on AFN.
No matter her performance, people (who hate Obama) are not going to stop voting for Obama just because the VP may of had a bad first interview.
Consider this a baseline performance, and look for things to improve from here. Gotta give her some slack, even if it’s only enough to hang herself with.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on September 12, 2008 at 12:16 AM
After reading this on NRO, I am much less certain that Sarah flubbed the Bush Doctrine question.
Dang, it’s nice to have a motivated person check this stuff out
(lazy)
VolMagic on September 12, 2008 at 12:18 AM
It means that because an unfriendly foreign country is on her doorstep, she pays attention, and her comment was meant to ridicule Gibson’s question.
Connie on September 12, 2008 at 12:19 AM
Back off AllahPundit man… he’s been here since before the site opened. He might be “Eeyore-Pundit” on some days, but he is a good dose of reality.
I for one don’t want an echo-chamber, unlike the liberals we are allowed to have divergent opinions; and we should respect our fellow conservatives even when we don’t agree.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on September 12, 2008 at 12:19 AM
Get your diapers now. You’ll need them in November.
Schadenfreude on September 12, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Knock off the crap.
Connie on September 12, 2008 at 12:20 AM
I read a lot and try to stay informed and I had never heard of the Bush doctrine… The only people who will make a big issue of this non issue are those who want to …THE LEFT
CCRWM on September 12, 2008 at 12:21 AM
Jawa has the youtube clips.
Spirit of 1776 on September 12, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Have you ever heard of netiquette? Get rid of the all caps.
Then, you’re a guest here, like all of us. If you don’t like being in this parlor, go somewhere else.
I think you’re still free.
Entelechy on September 12, 2008 at 12:24 AM
Thank you for your service, Sniper One. I completely agree: a baseline performance. She seemed pretty “nerved up,” but she’ll get better, which is a lot more than can be said for Biden (snort).
labwriter on September 12, 2008 at 12:24 AM
MDS, I didn’t watch the interview. Please sum it up, if it’s not asking too much. I trust your judgment. It’s too late to read so many comments. Thanks ahead.
Entelechy on September 12, 2008 at 12:26 AM
I just watched it and she rocks IMO. Sarah Palin is amazingly amazing. Alas, I’m in Canada and can’t vote for her but I can still root for her. I HEART SARAH PALIN. With lots of love from Canada. Stay strong Sarah, we love you!!!!
kellyjane on September 12, 2008 at 12:27 AM
The Bush Doctrine is not a dissertation that Bush composed and stamped with that title.
In popular context, the so-called Bush Doctrine means whatever the Liberal says that Bush said, true or not. Projections.
Even the Wikipedia “definition” is a composite evolution of factional premises.
Like Ace said, the right to defend America from eminent attack is The American Way and every other country’s way of surviving. That Bush never digressed from tradition hardly makes national defense a GWB invention aka The Bush Doctrine.
If Gibson wants a specific answer, as he insists that he does, then Gibson must ask a specific question; and Palin must tell him, not ask him, to be more specific. DROP “COULD YOU” and pierce the matter with “BE MORE SPECIFIC, your question is too broad for our time together.”
He may as well have begun the interview by asking Palin if there is a God. Even if she answered that she most certainly believes in God, Gibson would argue that Palin did not prove God’s existence. Charles wants to assume himself “Herr Professor, Doktor Gibson” rank and pay scale; yet all he does is read the company cue cards, teleprompter, and muck it up around the coffee machine and drinking fountain–he has produced no dissertations or treatises of his own, and he quotes no one else’s, either. Accurately or not.
I dare anyone to dig up any prior references by Gibson or anyone from ABC NEWS regarding “The Bush Doctrine”–NADA.
As per Pakistan or any international policy the VP candidate deferd all answers to what the POTUS candidate already has positioned on record.
Furthermore, I don’t believe that any good comes from spilling beans as to what we absolutely would or would not do under a hypothetical circumstance, particularly involving a contrary culture (not just different, but contrarian towards America). Certainly no good comes from loose lips prior to negotiations with nations experiencing upheavals that may routinely feel antagonistic towards the USA, sometimes more than others, dealing with their own domestic instabilities.
There must be a neutralizing response that sets aside questions about military plans to catch al Qaeda and Taliban, terrorist leaders and enablers. “I support McCain’s policy. But it would not be appropriate to discuss on television any military plans prior to operations. Of course, as with other Americans, I hold [whoever] in high regards.” AND THEN STOP ADDRESSING ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT TOPIC. And hold your ground as you lead Charlie away from his bone.
maverick muse on September 12, 2008 at 12:28 AM
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
Hey guy, I was enlisted, too. Somehow 80% or so of my officers understood command and how to get the absolute best from me, willingly. The rest I tried to educate with no success. By then, my hitch was up.
Caststeel on September 12, 2008 at 12:28 AM
GIBSON: Do we have the right to make cross-border attacks in Afghanistan from Pakistan with or without the support of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: Gee, Charlie… do we have the right to operate across international borders in Pakistan? Hmmm!!???
Do you mean the Pakistani government whose intelligence service routinely leaks operational data to the Taliban? The Pakistani government that could not provide security to its opposition leader during its last election? The Pakistani government that won’t remove the lawless tribal warlords that aid and abet terrorists that cross the Pakistan / Afghanistan border? Are you asking me if we have the right to hunt and kill terrorists who plot murder against Americans from such unstable, lawless, third-world countries, littered with Islamic extremists, supported by primitive tribal clans, who shelter the very enemies we seek? Are you asking me if we have the right to skip getting a permission slip from them? Hmmm, Charlie…is THAT what you’re asking me?? Well if so, then yeah, Charlie we do. We f*@cking go in and kill every last motherf*#cking one of them, Charlie! What part of “do whatever it takes” and “keep all options on the table” didn’t you get? Why don’t you ask me a f*@cking question like you got a pair, Charlie? Pompous liberal moron!
jcmorris on September 12, 2008 at 12:31 AM
if she could just get mccain to keep his damn mouth shut.
chasdal on September 12, 2008 at 12:32 AM
It’s hard to avoid getting caught up in a singular moment of a multiday interview. I would agree with Allah that she could have handled the question better, but I don’t think it’s going to be a deciding factor for independents and undecideds who will be watching these interviews closely. They are looking for someone who shows competence not expertise (no one expects or should expect her to be an expert at all matters of politics). She showed competence and needs to continue to do so, which I think she will.
As for the MSM, I don’t think we need to worry a whole lot about them piling on. Unlike the liberal blogosphere, they seem to have learned their lesson. I suspect the story at the end of these interviews will be that, as the Politico put it, she held her own but has not silenced her critics (like she will ever).
johnt on September 12, 2008 at 12:32 AM
Just from this section of the video, she looks frumpier than usual, and tired, and maybe she is.
However, Charlie comes across really condescending, almost god-like talking to a mere mortal.
Entelechy on September 12, 2008 at 12:32 AM
There is no Obama Doctrine. It’s above his pay grade.
xblade on September 12, 2008 at 12:34 AM
Even Chris Matthews said he didn’t understand what Gibson meant exactly by the Bush doctrine. And oddly he said she was more liberal than Bush.
I agree about the editing. It’s like they didn’t want her personality to shine through. They almost cut her off mid word sometimes. They certainly didn’t do that to help her, so whatever is missing is probably helpful.
It would have been irresponsible for her to be too strong on issues like “would we support Isreal if they bombed Iran…” She is going to be VP after all. (I say optimistically) The US is not the only one watching.
Oh and is she suposed to say “Oh yeah, of course we can go into Pakistan and kill anyone we want…” I think for someone who is not used to being asked questions that could change US policies… Even cost American lives,she did really well.
I hope she gets better. And I am often bothered by people who say your name all the time when they are speaking to you… But the was probably more noticable because of editing too.
petunia on September 12, 2008 at 12:37 AM
Holy shit! The front page of Washington Post is claiming that Palin said Iraq was responsible for 9/11 and the quote they provide doesn’t say that at all! What the fuck is wrong with these people?
blue13326 on September 12, 2008 at 12:38 AM
This whole “Bush Doctrine” discussion cracks me up. It is nothing but a leftist/MSM buzzword used to denote idiotic foreign policy in their eyes. That is all it is, end of story. That is why there is at this point in time no real definition. Maybe there will be a legitimate one in the history books 20 years from now, but right now it is just a DKos talking point.
ClassicCon on September 12, 2008 at 12:39 AM
MDE, first I’m flattered.
My honest opinion. Solid base hit, no RBI. She looked very prepared, slightly nervous, but Charlie looked bad in spots (honest, not spin). He treated the interview like a mid-term exam, was very chopped in the studio and I think that will hurt him with women that watched it because came off condenscending. Even if he didn’t mean it. I also think he got screwed by his producers because he asked a question and then affirmed the accuracy of his quote, even though it was taken out of context. That I think is what a lot of people will remember from this night.
The critical buzz is about a question he asked about the Bush doctrine. She avoided the question and asked for clarification on what he meant by the question. This was the big trap obviously set to paint her as another Bush clone (esp considering her advisers right now).
She also answered a national security issue by tying it to energy and I think in the chopped version it looked like avoidance, but I think she is going to come back and hammer that home over and over and over. In fact, that’ll be her foreign policy theme I expect to augment McCain’s position. Mac will hit the boots part, and she’ll hit the energy/oil part.
In the long version (Nightline), she looks like she is avoiding the question, in the short version (Nightly News) he looked bad because they edited all the way down to where q/a,q/a and then “I got lost in the blizzard of your words.” Tacky line, more fuel for the outrage at media.
The section on God was the part where they misquoted her. She did fine answering by shoutout to Lincoln. Well played by her, will help in the heartland.
Section on energy was probably the best so far. He pushed to point out that she changed positions on global warming, she challenged him to point out where she had ever said there could be no human involvement and said essentially fighting pollution is always good. She said she and Mac disagree on ANWR and said she hopes/intends to change his mind.
So all in all, I think it just reinforces opinions that are. Evidenced by me and AP I think:) AP is still worried she is a lightweight, I’m as convinced as ever she is a fighter.
As a side note, some of the production values were entertaining. Coming back from one break they had a color picture and the narrator goes, “Who is the real Sarah Palin?” and then color goes to black and white. Comical. So ABC didn’t help itself or the media image much and Sarah didn’t hurt hers. The editing was so choppy on the news that it left the impression of “what are they cutting out”.
She can and will do better though. But she didn’t do bad at all. I was pleased with it.
Spirit of 1776 on September 12, 2008 at 12:40 AM
Hey, Allahpundit – There are many aspects to the Bush doctrine. Her ‘In what respect, Charlie” was a prefect question to ask. She wanted specifics.
Could you be any more cynical?
scotth on September 12, 2008 at 12:44 AM
a couple of other blogs I visit already getting their share of ’she-moby’s..
they sound right out of an infomercial testimonial..
‘I am a woman who was thrilled when John McCain pick Sarah Palin. But now I’m embarrassed to be part of this party because of her… blah blah blah.. hide my head in shame blah. blah blah..
DaveC on September 12, 2008 at 12:44 AM
Overall, I thought she did very well avoiding the traps questions Gibson fielded.
Gibson’s body language tells the larger story of his disapproval of her answers.
Condescending? Give me a break. With that how-dare-you line of questioning.
I remember SNL doing a parody on how Obama “meat-the-press” softball questions while the Hill got the hardball questions.
Art imitating life or MSM being jackasses.
Kini on September 12, 2008 at 12:46 AM
Regarding the Bush doctrine:
By who’s interpretation? I thought her answer was concise.
Yes, Hell Yes, if we feel threatened, swat em.
What’s wrong with that?
Kini on September 12, 2008 at 12:49 AM
Well, blue (somehow the name seems appropriate, after reading your post ; ) – I’ve read on a couple of lefty sites that they consider flat-out lying well within bounds when it comes to defeating McCain/Palin. I have no doubt some in the media are reaching for the same ethical standard.
capitalist piglet on September 12, 2008 at 12:50 AM
Lots of posters I’ve never seen before.
Looks like they’ve been lying in wait.
Domino on September 12, 2008 at 12:53 AM
Just watched the “interview”. I thought she did a fine job.
Charlie tried to shake her and it didn’t happen.
At least she has the cajones to sit down and answer the questions. I wonder when Nobama is going to grow a set and follow in her lead…..and will Charlie be as tough with the questions.
I’m not holding my breath.
crazy texas on September 12, 2008 at 12:54 AM
I only saw this short segment that Allah posted, but wow! Ol’ Charlie was a haughty jerk.
Skidd on September 12, 2008 at 12:56 AM
All I know is the whole time I was watching that, I was thinking about how Mitt Romney would have knocked all those question out of the park and made Gibson look like the tool he is.
Borislav on September 12, 2008 at 12:56 AM
People. Please also keep in mind that she said goodbye to her first born today who is in the military. She has been on a roller coaster these past two weeks and I am sure she is exhausted. Sarah Palin is the real deal.
Chas. Gibson: amateur interviewer.
Editor: worst thing I have ever seen on TV.
ABC: you suck like the rest of the MSM.
God bless our troops, President Bush, John McCain and Sarah Palin.
carbon_footprint on September 12, 2008 at 1:03 AM
Lemme fix that for ya:
…..like how many countries he’d visited before
becoming a senatorgetting well ahead of Hillary while on the Presidential campaign trail.LegendHasIt on September 12, 2008 at 1:03 AM
If Gibson was interviewing any other Republican VEEP nominee, the line of attack would have been different, so it’s hard to say how successful such a candidate would be. And, I cannot imagine any VEEP candidate other than Palin generating as much enthusiasm in the Republican base and such interest from independent voters and centrists. I think Governor Palin did a good job in this interview and I think she is the best possible nominee of the avaialable supply.
Loxodonta on September 12, 2008 at 1:04 AM
Whoever think she did badly, just think about this..
Her opponent on the other ticket:
That is who she will up debating..
DaveC on September 12, 2008 at 1:04 AM
Even if Biden does flawlessly in the debates, he’s been a Washington insider for nearly 40 years. Who wants more of that?
Loxodonta on September 12, 2008 at 1:06 AM
The left and the press acts as if Sarah Palin is completely unqualified.
The last Democratic nominee that the left was head-over-heels in love with (other than Obama) was Howard Dean. Dean was the gov. of Vermont. The gov. of Vermont has the least power of any governer in the nation. It’s because of the way the stucture of the state government of Vermont is set up.
Alaska’s governmental structure makes the governer of that state one of the most powerful in America.
But before Dean blew-up his own chances in 2004, the left nor the press EVER questioned his qualifications.
Skidd on September 12, 2008 at 1:07 AM
Without a doubt, the Bush doctrine part was the weakest part of her interview. She did not appear comfortable doing the interview, and it came off as if she was just BSing.
However, once Charlie clarified what he meant, I think she performed somewhat better. Her problem is that she tries to BS too much. She is a bit like Obama, in that she drags out her answers. She should be more concise and honest. Had she given her final answer, to not take any options off the table, right off the bat, this would have been a home run interview.
El_Terrible on September 12, 2008 at 1:10 AM
Thank you very much for such a detailed reply. With gratitude,
Entelechy on September 12, 2008 at 1:10 AM
LegendHasIt, good to see you – what is your take on the Palin pick?
Entelechy on September 12, 2008 at 1:11 AM
I don’t expect a President or Vice President to know everything and make national security or national policy decisions alone. They have access to many advisors, The United States Cabinet, The Executive Office of the President, The White House National Security Council and the National Security Advisor, just to name a few. I want a President and Vice President to listen to and learn from these advisors and then to use the knowledge gained to make the choices and decisions that best serve the USA. I don’t know whether, during this interview, Governor Palin understood the “Bush Doctrine” or not. But I am certain that if she didn’t understand it then she knows more about it now than any of us commenting on it. I am also certain that Senator McCain and Governor Palin care more about this country than Hussein Obama and Robinette Biden.
coldshot on September 12, 2008 at 1:12 AM
I think Sarah just totally blew that All Important Al Qaeda Endorsement.
What’s that you say?
“Obama already got the Al Qaeda endorsement last year”?
Oh. …. Never mind.
/emilylitella
LegendHasIt on September 12, 2008 at 1:13 AM
CCRWM on September 12, 2008 at 12:21 AM
the Bush doctrine started after 9/11 and his attack on afganistian for harboring the terroists, it evolved further in his 2002 SoTU address where he called out the axis of evil and said those that harbor terrorists are just as reponsible for their actions has the terrorist’s themselves. He added more to the doctrine before the Iraq war saying that AMerica had a right to preempitive defense (which pissed the left off even though the dem JFK used the same arguement with Cuba). He further added during the occupation of Iraq and the USA dealing with countries around the globe that democray should be the end game. He clarified his remarks in his 2005 inargueation speech where he firmly put the US diplomatic corps on target to promote demcrocy around the world. So the Bush doctrine is not so much a Monroe doctrine it is more a living breathing collection of Bush’s forgeign policy over the last 8 years. gov Palin was totally correct to ask Gibson to clarify his remarks. She was also correct to state that some of it was good ideas, some mistakes had been made and some where bad ideas without mentioning which is good and which is bad. when Gibson pinned her on the preemptive strike (which liberals hate, moderates are lukewarm about and conservatives love) she defended the FACT that it is the President’s #1 responsibility to protect this country from ALL enemies.
Understanding what voting blocks feel about the preemptive strike in the Bush Doctrine lets you know why Gibson asked it. He was trying to drive a wedge between Palin and moderates. It was a clumsy attempt at painting Palin with Bush’s brush, driving moderates away from McCain, and painting Palin as an extreme rightwinger. And Gibson should be ashamed of it.
unseen on September 12, 2008 at 1:14 AM
To be fair Joe Biden he probably knows what the Bush doctrine is. He would have probably answered Mr. Gibson, “No, I think the Bush doctrine is a failure.”
terryannonline on September 12, 2008 at 1:16 AM
Charlie’s comment to Palin on her hubris was quite uncalled for.
Especially since the One fills that void very well.
Kini on September 12, 2008 at 1:16 AM
I’m serious, everyone needs to stop analyzing this clip and the earlier broadcast of the interview. Its painfully obvious to anyone with editing skills what was done to Palin’s answers in that segment. From the little bit I’ve seen from the Nightline re-airing, that segment was put together in a far better way than this abomination. Editing is everything when you’re putting together a story like this, and if you’re rushed, need to satisfy the wishes of the anchor or really are just trying to make news instead of presenting a balanced account of the conversation then you end up with something like this. I can tell you all with complete certainty ABC’s editors cut up this interview in such an amateurish way that they’ll soon start taking heat once the full transcripts are released.
So, stop with the sky is falling, she did a great job with her first major interview.
smfoushee on September 12, 2008 at 1:16 AM
Bottom line she did great…she was forceful and honest.
And she called him “Charlie”…it completely seemed to
make him get off his game. :lol
The woman knows her stuff, she has her core values and
it showed brilliantly. And looked beautiful tonight.
She looked soooo fine.
dec5 on September 12, 2008 at 1:18 AM
Tough questions are fine, and she did struggle at times, but the average viewer will come away thinking she was cross-examined rather than interviewed.
One thing I really liked was that she never appeared angry or frustrated. She just plowed through it. There have been lots of experienced politicians, including Presidents, who haven’t managed that feat.
Mr. Wednesday Night on September 12, 2008 at 1:25 AM
She hardly smiled at all in the clips I saw. So now we know she doesn’t smile all the time. She can have a serious expression on her face.
Paul-Cincy on September 12, 2008 at 1:25 AM
I just watched the first 10 minutes of the interview posted on youtube and it seems hyper edited. Made me dizzy.
Skidd on September 12, 2008 at 1:26 AM
http://www.mikefrancesa.com/wordpress/?p=1110
In a Democratic Primary Debate, the One, the Messiah, Barack Obama had a chance to define the Bush doctrine and then give his vision for the Obama doctrine. Here is what he said, see if any of it reminds you of a certain politician:
SIEGEL: Senator Obama, the short version of the Obama Doctrine.
SEN. OBAMA: Well, I think one of the things about the Obama Doctrine is it’s not going to be as doctrinaire as the Bush Doctrine because the world is complicated. And I think part of the problem we’ve had is that ideology has overridden facts and reality.
But I think that the basic concept — and I’ve heard it from some of the other folks — is that, increasingly, we have to view our security in terms of a common security and a common prosperity with other peoples and other countries. And that means that if there are children in the Middle East who cannot read, that is a potential long-term danger to us. If China is polluting, then eventually that is going to reach our shores. We have to — and work with them cooperatively to solve their problems as well as ours.
Sounds like John Kerry, the Obama Doctrine is not going to be as doctrinaire as the Bush Doctrine because the world is complicated. Wow, so nuanced and fresh, I love how he views our national security as a common security with the world.
War69DotCom on September 12, 2008 at 1:30 AM
I know it would be the last thing she likely did as a candidate, but it would have been sooooo satisfying for Palin to respond to some of these questions with the derision they so richly deserved. “Yes, dumbass, I’d nuke Karachi because it’s that frikkin time of the month. That’s the Palin doctrine – Aunt Flo comes to town, someone’s gonna die. Got anything else in the Gotcha bag, Murrow?”
That she didn’t, but managed a bit of tap-dancing around Gibson’s sophomoric Gotchas, says much about her restraint, and “experience” dealing with tools in the media. If she wasn’t perfect, she certainly cleared a low bar with room to spare.
sulla on September 12, 2008 at 1:34 AM
I’m not sure I would of know what the h*!l Gibson was talking about when he asked about the “Bush Doctrine”, and I consider myself a political junkie. Either I’m not up on my liberal-ese, or it must not be a common phrase outside of the Beltway.
Luckily she’s just the VP. She has plenty of time to get all caught up on stuff before she can join Cheney on lawyer hunts.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on September 12, 2008 at 1:40 AM
Very pleased, (and surprised).
Of the picks that were bandied about seriously, she was my favorite, philosophically as well as strategically.
I really didn’t think McCain had it in him to select someone who has both a pretty decent conservative philosophy AND a strong personality. I figured if it was someone that was pretty conservative in general, it would have to be someone he could bully into going along with his agenda.
Is it enough for me to overcome my 33 years of antipathy to him and give him my vote? Maybe, but I don’t think so. He would still have to completely drop that ‘global warming’ nonsense, before I could definitely pull tlever or punch that hole next to his name. (I’m willing to accept ‘McAmnesty” if it will get rid of the sure economy killer of Cap’n Trade) … And since Sarah herself seems to have paid some lip service to it tonight, I don’t expect McCain to have a sudden attack of common sense about it.
And since the bloom is off the Obama rose amongst much of the Washington power elite, (even the liberals), I think he is even more unlikely, now, to get much of his agenda passed if he gets elected, than he was when I first formed my strategy/philosophy of ‘taking the hit’ of Marxists in power for two years and forcing the electorate to make a sharp Right turn in the 2010 midterms……
Rather making that slow leftward slide of the GOP turn into an avalanche by electing McCain as a supposed conservative, and having the GOP ‘brand’ blamed when Mavericky policies really screw things up.
So, I’m still where I was before in terms of agonizing over the best LONG TERM strategy, just not quite as depressed as I was when I expected a really lousy VP pick.
Sarah definitely adds a complication into my calculus. A pleasant one, but one that is going to make my decision harder, not easier.
LegendHasIt on September 12, 2008 at 1:45 AM
LMAO!
I’d pay big money to see that.
LegendHasIt on September 12, 2008 at 1:48 AM
She saw a “gotcha” coming – one the MSM refuses to present to The One – and avoided it. Nothing else she could’ve done.
Halley on September 12, 2008 at 1:50 AM
I totally agree. I was very harsh on Gov. Palin in my comments earlier this evening. However, like you, I watched the Nightline clips and was struck by how much better she sounded. The answers seemed to flow better. So when you compare the two clips you can see what effect the edits on the first set had on exchange b/w Gibson and Palin.
I hope at some point we can view the unedited exchange.
PackerBronco on September 12, 2008 at 1:51 AM
Have to say, I just watched the full interview as opposed to the clip above, and it makes all the difference in the world. Over-editing just destroys the context. In the full interview, it doesn’t look at all like Palin doesn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is. It looks like she’s trying to be very careful just how she answers the vague question.
Overall, she didn’t just do well enough to get by. She did very well indeed. More of a 7 or 8 than a 5.
There will still be those who claim she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine is. But that’s a little hard to avoid, when most of them don’t have a clear idea themselves.
theregoestheneighborhood on September 12, 2008 at 2:12 AM
For those who believe she did well, here is a link to show it. For those who believe she did badly, here is a link to help make up for it. For those who just want to keep Hussein out of the White House, here is a link to help do it.
https://secure.donationreport.com/donation.html?key=NPM2A9KUXS0J
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 2:23 AM
Yikes, AP, are you always this depressed?
Intrepid on September 12, 2008 at 2:36 AM
Intrepid on September 12, 2008 at 2:36 AM
Actually, he’s rather optimistic tonight. Kinda nice for a change.
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 2:38 AM
Anyone know a torrent or site that has this Nightline episode? My #@$*&#@*& DVR screwed up and I missed it.
(Or, here’s to hoping that the 20/20 episode tomorrow night has the whole thing.)
electric-rascal on September 12, 2008 at 2:53 AM
Truthfully, we all know there are ups and downs in campaigns. This is, to one degree or another, a down. It sorta reminds me of the first Reagan-Mondale debate in 1984. Reagan stumbled from bad prepping. BUT, the supporters remained encouraged, and the campaign and the candidate learned from it. Same thing here.
And to those who feel like letting up, here’s something to think about as the alternative: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/anotherlook.aspx#cartoon305924013205219
Tommygun on September 12, 2008 at 2:55 AM
If you asked Bush what the Bush Doctrine is he probably wouldn’t be able to give a coherent answer.
schiehallion on September 12, 2008 at 3:24 AM
Admit it AP.
Ugly on September 12, 2008 at 3:33 AM
Next interview she does needs to be Meet the Press with Tom Brokaw. See how she fares there. Then on to Fox with either Chris Wallace or Brit Hume.
She’s just finding her way with national press – she’s gotten her feet wet with Charlie Gibson now, and she’ll be ready for the next interview. In spades.
She did well with Charlie, and if she did so well with him and his obvious gaffe meter, she’ll do well with others.
Intrepid on September 12, 2008 at 3:50 AM
Alla’s a Libertarian in conservative overalls, trying to seem above it all by criticizing Republican candidates whenever they come across as humans. Not saying he likes the Dems, but he doesn’t want to seem in the tank for anyone.
leftnomore on September 12, 2008 at 3:53 AM
I think we can officially say now, that, she has a better grasp of foreign policy than Biden, by far.
Cr4sh Dummy on September 12, 2008 at 4:04 AM
So I watched the “controversial” Bush Doctrine answering by Sarah, and found nothing disturbing nor ignorant. Charlie’s insistence on making her answer a hypothetical question was to his discredit, and she handled it as any hypothetical question show be, with a position statement, not a yes or no answer.
She does need to relax the fist-shaking, and learn to see what these journalists are really after– attention to themselves.
leftnomore on September 12, 2008 at 4:07 AM
Wow, 900+ comments…I can only make a few points and then let this thread expand exponentially:
1. She did just fine. Folks who like the idea of her on the ticket will look at the interview for what it was: take care of the media’s big knock on her…that she wasn’t doing interviews with the media.
2. Bush Doctrine. Look people, there is no dictionary definition of this, it is whatever peoeple on the left or right interpret it to be. She was right to question the question.
3. No gaffs, she didn’t light up a joint in the middle of the interview, nor did she interrupt Charlie to hold prayer session.
Come on folks, this was a sop to the media….now she’ll carry on with McCain on the trail doing what she was always intended to do…bring excitment and a sense of identity to the ticket.
EVERYTONE CHILL. Unlike 99% of folks on this thread, the average voter does not live and breath this election cycle…you give/do not give the American voter enough credit. They love her, nothing is going to change that…she’s a big boost to the ticket, and if Obama want’s to make this election about her then he might as well kiss his whole run goodby.
Waterboy on September 12, 2008 at 4:09 AM
Nice answer.
Johan Klaus on September 12, 2008 at 4:11 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 Next »