First of all, she obviously didn't know what "the Bush Doctrine" meant. She tirelously reverted to the same talking points and showed no ability to intellectually discuss any issue of any import.
Governor Palin, if a light-weight like Charlie Gibson can make you look weak and uninformed, you are unqualified to be a heart-beat away from the Presidency. Your media background may have served you well as someone who can talk the talk, but it is clear to me, after Gibson's interview, that you can't think the think. And it has nothing to do with your gender. It has to do with your education and mindset.
BTW, I may be incommunicado for a while. My laptop is experiencing battery problems and I have decided not to bring it with me to my trip to Hawaii. I will be on the big Island from tomorrow night through Thursday. I don't know if the resort I stay in will have free internet access (though I believe they should), but even so, I plan to golf, scuba, and sightsee a heck of alot more than comment on politics. If I don't respond to your comments on any post, it isn't because I don't care, it is because I am otherwise engaged.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Ah, you are so quick to judge someone. Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer writes:
"The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.
There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different."
This Charles is probably more credible on the subject of the Bush Doctrine than old Charlie...Krauthammer was the first journalist to analyze and then coin the term.
Here is the link to Krauthammer's latest article on how old Charlie got it wrong:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Why is the Left so quick to hate someone, find fault, and destroy? Admittedly, not exclusive to the Left, but this go-round seems to be pathologically so.
The Bush Doctrine, regardless of who coined the term, is widely defined/viewed as an excuse for pre-emptive warfare.
Palin did not, by any definition of the Bush Doctrine, come close to demonstrating an ability to understanding it's importance.
But thank God she has seen Russia, from an Alaskan island.
Paul, I don't hate Sarah Palin, I just think she is out of touch and unqualified to be vice President to a President who has a higher liklihood to die in office than previous presidents. Charles Krauthamer engaged in damage control, just as you are. You want to believe in her because she will further your ideological aims, but her ignorance of the basic nature of pre-medidated attack, and how the Bush doctrine parted from basic American historical practice, shows that she has been out of the loop on the basic international issues of our day.
Paul, if Sarah Palin had been a Democrat saying the same things, I doubt seriously that you would have come to their defense. She said what she said, and you are trying as best you can to spin it in as positive a way as possible. I know you are commited to conservative principles, but fighting this fight just makes you look like a political lackey.
BTW, I thought she did an excellent job of anunciating her words. She also did a great job of not answering questions, which means, to give her credit, she is an excellent Republican politian.
BTW, Big Dog, you nailed it. You have a way of cutting through the rhetoric. Keep it up.
Obi,
I agree that Palin's knowledge and experience is lighter than one would like for a VP. And yes, some of her answers to Gibson's questions showed that she is no rocket scientist. On the other hand, not one of the other 3 candidates (Obama, Biden, McCain) has ever had that sort of interview. Should they all? yes of course, it would be useful to see how all of them fare under that line of questioning. But the point is that only Palin has. I am confident that if the other 3 had the same interview that they would all make their fair share of mistakes.
I hope you have a good time in Hawaii. But I was wondering, as a true lefty shouldn't you scorn such bourgeois and decadent pursuits? I mean, what would Marx think? Oh, and what is the carbon footprint of your flight? Don't you feel at least partially morally conflicted?
Thanks for the feedback. Two sincere comments...first, I am always surprised (and suspect) when political mountains are made out of mole hills. Palin hesitating to respond to a vague question...and then asked to respond to an opinion as if Gibson was stating fact...is understandable. The mole hill?... Using one president's "doctrine" to define another candidate's philosophy is ridiculous. Would anyone really hold one president's policies to that of his predecessor's? Certainly you weren't saying of Bill Clinton, "hey, why don't you just stick with the Reagan Doctrine?"
Second comment...and, of course, there is no reason for you to know this because you don't know me (so, unfortunately, you will have to take my word for it)...I hate bullies. That is my biggest pet peeve...and my commenting as I have here is only because A) I tire of the Daily Kook sort of bullying of Palin, and B) I think Gibson was trying to bully her and comments like yours, on this blog, trying to reinforce the bullying that was attempted, frankly, unnerves me. (In a polite way, in this case.)
While you will, and do, dismiss Krauthammer's comments, you really shouldn't...he is spot on. What the smarter Charles really said was that a softie like Gibson (and I like him) tried to bully a VP candidate as if she were the Presidential candidate. That's unmanly in my book.
I will vote for McCain primarily because he knows all versions of the Bush Doctrine and, better yet, couldn't care less about it. He will scare the hell out of our enemies and that is what we need to keep American soil safe. I don't believe Obama will (or can) do the same thing. This decision, for me, is as easy as choosing between Jimmy Carter's foreign policy and Ronald Reagan's foreign policy.
Paul, I do know who you are and what your represent. As Huntsman's cheif of staff, I can't exactly out myself to a "google search." (JK BTW)
I think the Bush Doctrine needs to be examined and discussed. If Palin doesn't understand what it is, it means she hasn't been paying attention to national international issues.
As for Krauthammer, I base my observations about him based upon his propensity to get things right, which is about on par with the median psychic at a convention of like-minded fools.
Sorry, but I've got to go. Tonight, dinner at Ruth's Chris, and tomorrow, a day of snorkeling and getting a hopelessly painful sunburn.
Best regards. I think I'm out of minutes.
So a meat eater, jet fuel polluting, skin cancer baking, decadent, bourgeois lefty?
Did I miss anything?
kneedeep? That's just mean. Do all of us liberals have to be tofu eating, landlocked, bicyclists? Come now, all the planes I flew in were totally full, so it is the equivalent of mass transit. I suppose I could have taken a cruise to Hawaii.
BTW, where did the "decadent" come from?
Post a Comment