The Real Sarah Palin

I missed that interview. I'll see if I can find the whole transcript. I just heard another clip from it late last night calling for war with Russia and since Alaska is close to Russia I guess that equips her for the new conflict. This is madness. If they are trying to drum up redneck support, they better be careful even rednecks know someone has to pay for wars. And it seems we are up to our necks in debt at the moment with a failing economy.

I guess the McCain campaign is working on the premise that to incite war on 09/11 worked for Bush it can work for them too.

 

I'm not defending Palin, but how is Obama's national security experience?


One of my favorite parts of the interview was when Charlie Gibson asked Palin about the recent military operation on Pak soil. And to whether or not crossing into Pakistan without Pakistan's approval was acceptable. Reminded me of a speech I heard about a year ago.

"But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."-Barack Obama
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.php

 

This was the only portion of the interview that I saw last night, and you do raise an interesting point. A point I happen to think is unfair. You criticize her for asking to clarify a vague question? The "Bush Doctrine" is not a universally defined term. It has been interpreted as several different foreign policy principals. One of the first uses of the term in February 2001 was in reference to the National Missile Defense.
http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2001/03/05/doctrine.html

In my opinion, it was Gibson that sounded like a bumbling idiot. "The Bush....well.......what do you.......what do you interpret it to be?"

She answered the question, what she interpreted it to be, and Gibson interupted her. "No, the Bush Doctrine. Enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq War."

From what I saw, I did not care for the manner in which he conducted the interview. Again, this is the only portion that I saw, but I thought he came off as condescending.

What Gibson was referring to as the "September 2002 Bush Doctrine" was the National Security Strategy document http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2002/index.html

You say she dodged the question by quoting meaningless talking points. Was her answer not what many refer to as the "Bush Doctrine"?

Why do you feel this was the dumbest exchange of the interview? How do you feel she should have answered the question? Do you think Gibson should have been more clear on what HE thinks the Bush Doctrine is, the first time he answered the question?

 

Hahaha - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7613582.stm

Trouble in paradise it seems.

 

sigh... this country is going to hell in a handbasket.

 

"Hey Earl?"
"Yeah man?"
"Since the election's just a big show anyway, I was wondering if we could try something fun"
"What do you have in mind?"
"Wanna see if we can get the public to choose between a black guy and a women?"
"Wait, how about a Bush clone and a black MUSLIM guy??"

 

Just more NeoFacists WMD's (Weapons of Mass Distraction)

 

I don't think I've ever heard Hillary labeled a Neo-Facist before. Hahaha. I suppose that term gets thrown around pretty loosely around here though.

 

I am left of center but I this pastor's son is by no means Godless you self righteous,judgemental jackass.!

If you had actually bothered to read my posts from the last four years on here you would find that I am a born again Christian but I do NOT believe in the twisted, perverted false form of Christianity as practiced by Sarah Palin and the Religeofacists aka Dominionist movement. The kingdom of God as revealed in the Bible is based on the principle of the freedom of choice. The Founding Fathers understood and believed in these principles of freedom of choice, equality etc and therefore enshrined them in the Constitution. God use to bless this country because our government and the people believed in and practiced these principles. Our government has abandoned these principles and therefore God has withdrawn His blessings from our country. The true followers of God believe in peace,freedom and equality not war,facism,and greed!
Who feels threatened by Sarah Palin? Anyone that believes in freedom no matter what their religeous or political affiliations

"Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God."-Jesus

"By their fruits you shall now them." Jesus

You wanna discuss theology? Come on over the the Christianity forum and I'll do what I can to open your eyes to the truth.

"You will know the truth and the truth will set you free".-Jesus

 

No that's what John Insain's people are saying. If the SchutzStaffel fits wear it. Oh wait you allready do wear it!

 

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you high? You obviously didn't read what I said before you decided to respond. Why don't you take another look at the quote you replied to about Obama being born into radical Islam.

 

She belongs to a religious non-profit suicide prevention group? Whats the scandal?

http://carrythecure.org/bmain.htm

Religious groups trying to help teens?!?!?! how shocking!

 

Hey, now we've lowered the standard so much that a VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE is only required to know "universally defined terms". Really? ARE YOU FUCKING HIGH? Because if not, you need to be.

I'm pretty sure if you don't know what the "bush doctrine" is, you haven't kept up with current events over the past 8 years. as a VP candidate, you should be able to give a rundown of where the debate has been and is right now. that's already an easy standard to meet.

You are further proving my point that semantics is important. In fact, it seems to be your favorite tool.

 

Sarah Palin is a Member of the Dominionist movement aka Christian Reconstruction aka Christian Zionist movement.. The Dominionist Movement's stated goal is to revoke the Constitution and establish a theocratic dictatorship in the US. Look it up!

www.theocracywatch.org

www.talk2action.org

www.informationclearinghouse.info

If you had actually checked out these websites you would learn the truth about Sarah Palin. Its very obvious that you didn't take me up on my challenge to check her out.

What did Sarah Palin call Freedom of the press? Oh yes she called it a priviledge that the media abuses. Priviledge!!!!! Its a Constitutionally guaranteed right!!!!


Bush Doctrine= Do unto others before others do unto you!

 

I have this thing I do, I call it the "million dollar test". It's based on nothing concrete at all, just a gut feeling about someone. It goes like this: You have a million dollars in cash and you hand it to a candidate and ask them to store it safely for one year then ask for it back. Just a basic honesty test.

Results in my mind:
McCain: The money would be there waiting for me, and he'd give me that silly stiff armed hug and say "No problem my friend."

Obama: The money would be there waiting for me, he'd say "glad I could help, ask anytime."

Biden: ditto

Palin: She'd say she was sooooo glad I came back because she missed me and if you just give her a few days she'll get all money back, she promises!

Just a gut feeling.

 

This is my favorite part of your post.

I don't think you understand. Palin was asking for clarification. Why was she asking for clarification? Because the "Bush Doctrine" is NOT a universally defined term. Let me repeat myself.

The "Bush Doctrine" is not a universally defined term.

The "Bush Doctrine" is not a universally defined term.

The "Bush Doctrine" is not a universally defined term.

The "Bush Doctrine" is not a universally defined term.

Say it with me. The "Bush Doctrine" is not a universally defined term. Seriously, look it up. Asking to define the "Bush Doctrine", and not specifying in what context, is not a fair question.

Please, read my post (#23), and explain to me what part of my post do you not understand or agree with.
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=323146&page=3

 

ummm... I saw the interview. Let's say, when i step in shit, I know I stepped in shit.

When I see someone fishing for some kind of hint because they are clueless, and just completely lost, i know what I am looking at. She makes a bad guess in an obvious attempt to bullshit her way out of it.

What the fuck do you take me for, some kind of moron? Seriously. I saw the interview. Everyone SAW THE INTERVIEW.

Further, I try to keep myself informed. I read periodicals. Have you seen one before? Try The Economist, The National Review, Time, American Prospect, or if you are feeling reeeeally wacky The New Yorker. Many can be read online, but don't count out seeing one at the doctor's office, or even your mechanic, ok?

If you have been reading any one of those, or any given serious periodical that discusses politics, you know what the Bush Doctrine is.

 

maybe this is where I should point out:

Semantics is important.

 

I don't think you are a moron, but your liberal bias definitely seems to be affecting your ability to have a rational discussion, or see any alternative point of view, such as moderate.

 

I think anyone who saw the interview can decide if my judgement is clouded.

And as a former Ayn Rand follower turned "liberal", I think I can trust in my capacity to accept any conclusion I come to.

But one doesn't need to be particularly partisan to see Palin is an empty suit. Even Republicans are divided on that one. Take a look at the National Review.