That was the story, but it’s in your nature to give the Left every benefit of the doubt and the Right, little.

TheBigOldDog on September 13, 2008 at 12:37 PM

I have noticed this trend in Allah for quite some time. His pessimism wears us out here at the HA website. He always gives the benefit of the doubt to the Left, but when the Right makes a mistake is all over it like an attack dog, like white on rice, like stink on crap.

Personally, I think he and KP have been secretly seeing each other for some time now, and she is beginning to rub off on him, wear him down, etc….. Even the omnipotent and beneficent Lord of the Web has to have his woman to discuss things with. Women. They are what makes us Men.

Of course, I could be wrong, and it could be that his iPhone just ain’t working out.

Despite it all, I admire his posts and his insight. He is clearly one smart guy and perceives so much more than most of us would do in these stories. And he analyzes dozens of angles on every subject under the sun.

Allah, we do love you. We wish you wouldn’t always give the other side so much slack. They don’t give it to us. And we wish you had a brighter disposition occasionally. It is hard to listen to pessimism every day, day in and day out. Moses and Abraham would have had their faith tested hard under such pressure. But we understand just how patient you have to be to put up with that, and how hard it is to listen to so many people claim you are screwed up every day. Why it is positively George W Bushian of you to act that way, dude. How ironic that you give him so little slack, and yet, exhibit so many of the same characteristics.

Pot….kettle…..black.

Keep up the good work, son. I know you ain’t gonna read this, but it is an interesting observation, ain’t it?

Subsunk

We invaded Grenada and Panama without being attacked, for instance, and in both cases forms of anticipatory self-defense were used as justification.

Grenada wasn’t exactly a case of anticipatory self-defense. The country was invaded because there was so many American students there at the time who had to be rescued from the new Communist government.

1. Charlie Gibson
2. George W. Bush
3. Allahpundit
4. Maxx
5. Anyone who claims they know what the Bush Doctrine is.

This will go down in history as the year that the mask has been lifted off the media’s face of objectivity that it is obvious to everyone, not just news junkies.

Thank you, Governor Palin.

CanadianGuy on September 13, 2008 at 8:32 AM

Thank you, Governor Palin *and* [unwittingly, perhaps] Hillary Clinton! Hillary & Palin are the 1-2 punch here IMHO – the former softening up the ground for the latter…

If you do, then you are as out-of-touch with the American people as the MSM we so criticize.

The feedback I’m starting to receive from NON-bloggers is that Sarah seems honest and like them, especially the women. They can’t get enough of her. And, many are realizing the MSM’s attempt to viciously hurt her and her family.

I agree that she needs to be on TV MORE because she is one of the most likeable in politics to come around in a long time. Fresh, maternal, pleasant. Leave the skullduggery to Ann Coulter, but let Sarah be herself as she campaigns for McCain.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3209

Mind boggling, they really are just talking heads. They don’t digest anything they read. They are so out of touch with the American Public.

The real Bush Doctrine
During his interview/college boards with Sarah Palin, Charles Gibson
demanded that Sarah Palin explain the Bush Doctrine. However,
according to the man who coined the phrase, Gibson doesn’t know what it
means, and……

*I left this comment on Imus Truth my response the criticism of her Interview- performance with Charles Gibson.

It is pretty OBVIOUS that they think- it is Palin not McCain running for President. If they are going to hold her up to “Presidential Nominee Standards” lets compare her Interview with Gibson, to some of Barack Obama’s greats hits “GAFFTASTIC” and his foreign policy experience. As I recall Sarah Palin, has something to do with the National Guard up in Alaska. What involvement has Obama the PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE ever had with the National Guard? The Media including Imus, are trying to diminish or lower expectation, per her popularity. *Thinking people, are not going to be so easily swayed*. So the next time she shows up for one of these interviews. RE The Bush Doctrine. They should prepare her for Democrat Talking Points. Meaning she isn’t going to be questioned on her own focus for the next Administration. They will be questioning her on George W Bush’s Administration, and their CONTEMPT for George W Bush. I might add this, this is what they (ABC) are doing, belittling George W Bush’s foreign policy, on 9/11 – Sarah Palin, has to answer for Bush’s Foreign Policy? It appears unlike Obama and McCain, the MSM can’t take a day off even to remember the tragedy that happened to us 7 years ago.

If I was her, it does her well, not to recite Bush’s Doctrine. The ACCUSATION is that McCain/Palin is 4 more years of Bush. How is that possible if she won’t even relate the Doctrine to Charles Gibson? That means McCain and not Bush would be President. Although I don’t expect a McCain Doctrine, so Palin can’t answer any questions for a foreign policy, that has not been formed yet. That’s where they want to trip her up, the VP nominee!! OKAY, lets hear, what the Community Organizer, has to say about our Foreign Policy, should we go over all those gaffes? And he is running for President not Vice President. Yes he can tell you, what the Bush Doctrine is because it is in the PAST, and that is what the Democrats, are trying to run on the PAST.

Trying to make McCain/Palin run on Bush’s record that is what Charles Gibson was trying to get her to do, in that interview. I might behave like I didn’t understand his question either.

Imus is responding to Style. Perhaps Palin didn’t want to snap back at Charles Gibson, this is her first Interview. I would have responded to him with another question. What does Bush’s Doctrine, have to do with a President McCain’s Administration? That is the Past, we are the Future.

It is obvious this is a Democrat talking point, trying to make McCain/Palin, run on Bush’s record. I think she is paying closer attention, then the people watching give her credit. But then again the Media gets into group think, and they respond with a lot of the same reviews.

September 12, 2008 5:11 AM

See where I stated, THINKING PEOPLE WILL NOT BE SO EASILY SWAYED. Insert Charles Krauthammer, I too enjoy Mr Krauthammer’s opinions.

Thanks to their rabid pursuit of non-stories about Sarah Barracuda, she’s pretty much bullet proof at this point. As long as she stays relatively gaffe free for the next couple of months, she’s home free
Much as I would like to agree, I can’t. 6 weeks is a long time, and if the McCain folks think that wrapping up Palin in a protective bubble will work for that long a period, they are wrong. Even the most ardent Palin supporters will want to see more of her, hear her thought.

Sigh… oh if only I could edit….

Hence the relatively gaffe free portion of my comment. I honestly don’t think that McCain ever wanted to keep her in a protective bubble or ‘cone of silence’ if you will. That would make no sense. She is a most potent weapon by being out there. By limiting initial access it only drives ‘the need to know factor, hence continued domination of the news cycle anytime she speaks or is interviewed. Don’t want to oversaturate, just keep the press begging for access. The Charlie Gibson interviews were strictly pass/fail and she passed. It would have had less impact if it had been on friendly turf for the first big interview. Prep her, brief her, and then toss her into the deep end of the pool – sink or swim. And much to the consternation of the MSM she did not drown. The more they look like they are trying to slap her down, the more immune to it she becomes as long as she doesn’t crack or gaffe. I think that either is fairly unlikely at this point.

Or I can verbally abuse the numbnut who wrote that post. Your call, Allah.

ManlyRash on September 13, 2008 at 10:32 AM

AP doesn’t need your help. He’s completely capable of defending himself and you don’t get any points or special recognition for acting like a suck up. If you have an issue with something I write then by all means challenge me but don’t try to kiss AP’s ass in the process. It’s unbecoming especially coming from somebody I agree with (you) much of the time. It makes me question if I’m on the right side and if what you write is meant simply to ingratiate yourself with AP.

Fact is, nobody really knows what the Bush Doctrine is starting with Charlie Gibson and ending with Allah Pundit. Yet, that didn’t stop people here from acting as if they did and that it’s so obvious she should have. That’s just pure bullshit. She at least had the balls to admit she wasn’t clear on what he was asking unlike people here starting with AP. The question was designed to be a gotcha. If he wanted to know what she though about preemption, he wouls have asked that. If he wanted to know here thoughts on treating states that harbor terrorist like terrorist, he would have asked that. Instead, he asked about a “doctrine” he himself didn’t understand and precious few do. That was the story, not “Palin’s a moron for not knowing something we all know” which was AP’s approach to the story.

Further, AP was ready to dump all over until what? Until Politico said she did well. Once the Left said that he backed off. Am I right? You know I am.

Allahpundit on September 13, 2008 at 10:22 AM

The embarrassment was the gotcha nature of the question and the arrogant assertion by some that they understood what Gibson was talking about even though he himself did not. The embarrassment is making the case that the Bush doctrine is well know and well understood even though that’s far from the truth. As I noted in that thread, Hume and Williams weren’t even sure what it was and had to hash it out on the air to come to any sort of general agreement. That was the story, but it’s in your nature to give the Left every benefit of the doubt and the Right, little.

I do a lot of reading about things political and of current events and I consider myself relatively informed. I don’t think I could have answered that question – because Bush himself never said “Here is MY doctrine and here are the bullet point statements which explain it.”

HawaiiLwyr on September 13, 2008 at 11:55 AM

Exactly, Bush himself would have had to ask what part Gibson was talking about. It was intended as a gotcha, it was kind of like asking the question:

Do you agree with the Encyclopedia Britannica?

Drunken Angry Clown on September 13, 2008 at 8:14 AM

Well, this looks like yet another gift from the MSM. Thanks to their rabid pursuit of non-stories about Sarah Barracuda, she’s pretty much bullet proof at this point. As long as she stays relatively gaffe free for the next couple of months, she’s home free.

They’re not listening to Biden because he’s “already vetted”. The side effect is the focus on Palin is sucking all the oxygen out of the room. What is forgotten is Palin and Biden are running for the same job and so should be given equal treatment. Poor Biden. Now I don’t think he’ll ever be considered on an equal footing with Palin. The MSM has set the table nicely for the Repubs.

My guess is she doesn’t spend all her spare time (?!) trolling around on political message boards in order to keep up with the vernacular. That’s a plus in my book.