Sarah Palin has no idea what the "Bush Doctrine" is!

[JK2000]

 

Doesn't the herky-jerky way she speaks remind you of Miss Teen South Carolina?

[Wacka]

The only people who call it the Bush Doctrine are lefty wonks and lefty media. I couldn't tell you what it was called either. But I remember Bush stating that in his speech to Congress.

It is also common sense. We need to kill those sub human vermin wherever they are.

 

Doesn't they way Clinton speaks remind you of the Beverly Hillbillies? (they're from the same area).

Doesn't the way Hillary speaks remind you of a Martian from "Mars Attacks!" ? She sure sounds like one to me.

 

Don't you sound like someone from Buffalo?

[JK2000]

The only people who call it the Bush Doctrine are lefty wonks and lefty media. I couldn't tell you what it was called either. But I remember Bush stating that in his speech to Congress.

It is also common sense. We need to kill those sub human vermin wherever they are.

 

Doesn't they way Clinton speaks remind you of the Beverly Hillbillies? (they're from the same area).

Doesn't the way Hillary speaks remind you of a Martian from "Mars Attacks!" ? She sure sounds like one to me.

 

Don't you sound like someone from Buffalo?

 

You mean like those liberals at the American Enterprise Institute? Or that damn dirty hippie Pat Buchanan? What about Bill Kristol? Or Rush Limbaugh's younger less successfull brother David? What about America's favorite snatched-faced battle axe Anne Coulter!? They're all "lefty wonks and lefty media" right?

[SDS]

You mean like those liberals at the American Enterprise Institute? Or that damn dirty hippie Pat Buchanan? What about Bill Kristol? Or Rush Limbaugh's younger less successfull brother David? What about America's favorite snatched-faced battle axe Anne Coulter!? They're all "lefty wonks and lefty media" right?

 

 

The Bush Doctrine means many things to many people. If you think you could define it - you give yourself far too much credit.

 

However, was it the best she could have done? Certainly not. Does it really mean anything? Not really.

[JK2000]

The Bush Doctrine means many things to many people. If you think you could define it - you give yourself far too much credit.

 

However, was it the best she could have done? Certainly not. Does it really mean anything? Not really.

 

No, not at all. "Bush Doctrine" is a very specific reference to Bush's policies of preemptive war and not differentiating between terrorists and the nations that harbor them. I'd agree if Gibson had said the "Bush philosophy" or the "Bush worldview" but he specifically asked about the "Bush Doctrine".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine

[SDS]

No, not at all. "Bush Doctrine" is a very specific reference to Bush's policies of preemptive war and not differentiating between terrorists and the nations that harbor them. I'd agree if Gibson had said the "Bush philosophy" or the "Bush worldview" but he specifically asked about the "Bush Doctrine".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine

 

I'm killing myself for even engaging you in any type of dialog, but why don't you just read the 1st friggin' paragraph of your own link making note of some of the multi-syllable words and phrases like "various", "initially", "later it came to include additional elements", and "some of these policies were codified"...

 

and then tell me you could define exactly what it is off the top of your head. Please.

[JK2000]

I'm killing myself for even engaging you in any type of dialog, but why don't you just read the 1st friggin' paragraph of your own link making note of some of the multi-syllable words and phrases like "various", "initially", "later it came to include additional elements", and "some of these policies were codified"...

 

and then tell me you could define exactly what it is off the top of your head. Please.

 

I didn't expect here to define it exactly, I just expect a VP candidate to be aware of any of its core principles. Judging by her reaction that was probably the first time she even heard anyone say "Bush Doctrine". You're acting like she was focusing on just the minutiae of the "Bush Doctrine".

[SDS]

I didn't expect here to define it exactly, I just expect a VP candidate to be aware of any of its core principles. Judging by her reaction that was probably the first time she even heard anyone say "Bush Doctrine". You're acting like she was focusing on just the minutiae of the "Bush Doctrine".

 

Actually, you have already shown that nothing she has done or said in the past or what she will do or say in the future is good enough for you. Whatever her answer, your "expectations" would have certainly changed to match your politics.

 

Regardless, I said she could have done better and she might have frozen for a moment. Big deal. Afterall, she hasn't been doing this for 2 years and she is drinking from a firehose right now. The question wasn't - "Define the Bush Doctorine". It had to do with serious issues that can NEVER be answered in an interview. Those who can answer that question in a couple of sentences are just feeding well crafted lines that have no bearing on the actual decisions that would be made if events forced them to react.

[Kelly the Dog]

Sarah Palin, for all her other qualities, is also a comedienne.

 

GIBSON: Let me talk a little bit about environmental policy, because this interfaces with energy policy and you have some significant differences with John McCain. Do you still believe that global warming is not man-made?

 

PALIN: I believe that man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming, climate change. Here in Alaska, the only arctic state in our union, of course, we see the effects of climate change more so than any other area with ice pack melting. Regardless, though, of the reason for climate change, whether it's entirely, wholly caused by man's activities or is part of the cyclical nature of our planet -- the warming and the cooling trends -- regardless of that, John McCain and I agree that we gotta do something about it and we have to make sure that we're doing all we can to cut down on pollution.

 

GIBSON: But it's a critical point as to whether or not this is man-made. He says it is. You have said in the past it's not.

 

PALIN: The debate on that even, really has evolved into, OK, here's where we are now: scientists do show us that there are changes in climate. Things are getting warmer. Now what do we do about it. And John McCain and I are gonna be working on what we do about it.

 

GIBSON: Yes, but isn't it critical as to whether or not it's man-made, because what you do about it depends on whether its man-made.

 

PALIN: That is why I'm attributing some of man's activities to potentially causing some of the changes in the climate right now.

 

GIBSON: But I, color me a cynic, but I hear a little bit of change in your policy there. When you say, yes, now you're beginning to say it is man-made. It sounds to me like you're adapting your position to Sen. McCain's.

 

PALIN: I think you are a cynic because show me where I have ever said that there's absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any affect, or no affect, on climate change.

:thumbsup:

[SDS]

Sarah Palin, for all her other qualities, is also a comedienne.

 

 

:thumbsup:

 

I'm not really sure how this should be played out. McCain's policies are the ones that are important and his VP pick is there to support HIS campaign. She is not there to contradict him.

 

When they may differ on such issues, I'm not really sure how that should be handled by either the VP or the interviewer.

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm not really sure how this should be played out. McCain's policies are the ones that are important and his VP pick is there to support HIS campaign. She is not there to contradict him.

 

When they may differ on such issues, I'm not really sure how that should be handled by either the VP or the interviewer.

I like her as a person, but don't want her anywhere near the White House. But I have no problem with her having different views on some things than McCain, and saying what they are. I respect that. If she believes in ANWAR and he doesn't, I don't think that says anything bad on her or him or them or the ticket. A lot of people have different perspectives on that. I actually changed my mind on the issue about a year ago after I learned a little more about it.

 

I also think believing that climate change is not really man-made is scary.

 

I just thought what she said there, in bold, was such a ridiculous thing to say. Just outright laughable.

[SDS]

I like her as a person, but don't want her anywhere near the White House. But I have no problem with her having different views on some things than McCain, and saying what they are. I respect that. If she believes in ANWAR and he doesn't, I don't think that says anything bad on her or him or them or the ticket. A lot of people have different perspectives on that. I actually changed my mind on the issue about a year ago after I learned a little more about it.

 

I also think believing that climate change is not really man-made is scary.

 

I just thought what she said there, in bold, was such a ridiculous thing to say. Just outright laughable.

 

 

but you know how the game is played. Reporters and bloggers are not interested in respecting their different views. It would be made into something much broader and used in campaign commercials, etc...

[Kelly the Dog]

but you know how the game is played. Reporters and bloggers are not interested in respecting their different views. It would be made into something much broader and used in campaign commercials, etc...

I don't think that stuff lasts. The media and bloggers go apeschit when they perceive someone just flat lying, not disagreeing. Even if they played some gotcha game of Palin and McCain disagree on climate change, that lasts for a day and disappears. Who cares. But if someone is perceived as being a liar or flipflopper or says I was for it before I was against it, that is what has resonance. I am starting to not believe a word she says.

[GG]

I like her as a person, but don't want her anywhere near the White House. But I have no problem with her having different views on some things than McCain, and saying what they are. I respect that. If she believes in ANWAR and he doesn't, I don't think that says anything bad on her or him or them or the ticket. A lot of people have different perspectives on that. I actually changed my mind on the issue about a year ago after I learned a little more about it.

 

I also think believing that climate change is not really man-made is scary.

 

I just thought what she said there, in bold, was such a ridiculous thing to say. Just outright laughable.

 

I guess you haven't been following these pages recently. Do you then believe the flip side that the global warming is 100% man made?

[molson_golden2002]

I thought she did "OK" in the interview. Nothing really damaging from what I have seen of it, but not like her speech which was a home run. She looked canned and reminded me again of a right wing talking head.

 

If they lose the election I'm betting she becomes a right wing radio personality

[yall]

Actually, you have already shown that nothing she has done or said in the past or what she will do or say in the future is good enough for you. Whatever her answer, your "expectations" would have certainly changed to match your politics.

 

Regardless, I said she could have done better and she might have frozen for a moment. Big deal. Afterall, she hasn't been doing this for 2 years and she is drinking from a firehose right now. The question wasn't - "Define the Bush Doctorine". It had to do with serious issues that can NEVER be answered in an interview. Those who can answer that question in a couple of sentences are just feeding well crafted lines that have no bearing on the actual decisions that would be made if events forced them to react.

 

"You get to drink from the firehose!"

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbbNCWZ2lvA

[pBills]

Let's just say it... she is GRRRRRREAT at memorizing the talking points and what McCain/Lieberman feed her.

[JK2000]

The question wasn't - "Define the Bush Doctorine". It had to do with serious issues that can NEVER be answered in an interview. Those who can answer that question in a couple of sentences are just feeding well crafted lines that have no bearing on the actual decisions that would be made if events forced them to react.

 

You really don't expect a VP candidate to associate the Bush Doctrine with preemptive war, one of the greatest shifts of U.S. foreign policy of the last century? How can it "NEVER" be answered in an interview? "I'm sorry Charlie but you know me once I get started talking about the Bush Doctrine I just can't stop myself and it'll ruin the rest of the interview." I'm sure she'd have an answer about abortion or stem cell research. Aren't those complicated issues filled with gray areas and nuance?

 

Charlie: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?

 

Palin: In what respect, Charlie?

 

Charlie: What do you interpret it to be?

 

Palin: His worldview?

 

Charlie: No, No, the Bush Doctrine. He enunciated it in September 2002, before the Iraq War

 

Palin: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is to rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hellbent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership--and that's the beauty of American elections and democracy--with new leadership comes the opportunity to do things better.

 

Charlie: The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory defense. We have the right to preemptively strike any other country that we believe is going to attack us.

[BillsNYC]

I don't think she did well, and the Bush Doctrine questions casted some doubts for me. She looked over rehearsed and like a college kid BS-ing her professor.

 

BUT, I am willing to give her more opportunities. This was her first big national interview which was tougher than any candidate has had to go through (other than Obama/O'Reilly this week) the entire season as Gibson was clearly going for the sound bite. She sent her son off to war that morning and most questions were geared towards foreign policy, obviously her weak point. However, her strengths are energy and domestic policy and on those she looked strong.

 

Americans will give her a pass on this one, she prob has 2-3 more opportunities to win them over.

 

If Obama had this interview 19 months ago under the same pressure, he may not be where he is today, which is why she will have more chances.

[olivier in france]

"Charlie: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?

 

Palin: In what respect, Charlie?

 

Charlie: What do you interpret it to be?

 

Palin: His worldview?

 

Charlie: No, No, the Bush Doctrine. He enunciated it in September 2002, before the Iraq War

 

Palin: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is to rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hellbent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership--and that's the beauty of American elections and democracy--with new leadership comes the opportunity to do things better.

 

Charlie: The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory defense. We have the right to preemptively strike any other country that we believe is going to attack us"

 

(the first link of this thread does not work here...) Is that really how the interview went?!! A VP candidate being educated by a journalist on the preemptive strike policy?!! I can not believe it!!