Palin Reveals Ignorance In 1st Interview

[BuiltGypsy]

Originally Posted by Teej

Well, I dunno. Asshattium probably just releases a lot of hot air when it goes.

Probably enough to bake a pie.

You've never seen the destructive power of Asshattium. Just look at Sean Penn.

[Mooosman]

Originally Posted by F&D

Palin absolutely aced this interview. If Obama were ever subjected to this kind of biased, hostile interview he'd be reduced to a stuttering head-scratching basket-case.

Aced??? Hostile interview??? The guy was throwing grapefruits up there, and she was swinging and missing! God help her if she gets an interviewer that's not so nice next time!


The "Russia is right next to Alaska" thing kills me! As if that has ANYTHING to do with anything. This isn't fucking foreign policy by osmosis! You can't learn foreign policy by geographic location alone!



Lord help this country if McCain wins. Do you really think Palin can stare down a single foreign leader if the need were to arise? She would be laughed out of the room.



I can't wait until the VP debate! Biden is going to have to fall all over himself to be gracious and not come off like he's stealing her lunch money!



Nick

[SXSMITH]

Originally Posted by Mooosman

The "Russia is right next to Alaska" thing kills me!

Actually it used to be Russia and then we bought it for the oil n' shit.

[shah269]

Using Palin logic here. My office is over a super computer and well due to the proximaty of my ass to the CPU....I think I'm now an expert on computer issues!

[User Name]

Originally Posted by Mooosman

Do you really think Palin can stare down a single foreign leader if the need were to arise?

Yes, she most certainly can. Not because she has the intelligence or insight for meaningful dialogue, but because she, like Bush, truly believes she's on a mission ordained by God to lead the country. Belief in divine purpose gives these people limitless confidence. When their ineptitude leaves people scratching their heads, their confidence is only bolstered by the belief that, since they've been chosen by God himself, any lack of understanding must be a reflection of the limited capacity of the common people to see the true path, it can't possibly be a failing on the part of God's chosen few.

We're living in very scary times.

[shah269]

Ah fuck! What this nation needs another fucking bible thumper who thinks they speak to god!
Every day that goes by is another day that we step further from what it means to be American and toward nut job ultra conservative regimes like Iran.

[User Name]

Originally Posted by shah269

Every day that goes by is another day that we step further from what it means to be American and toward nut job ultra conservative regimes like Iran.

And as our neighbors on the right always say "if you don't like it, get the fuck out!"

The founding fathers called, they want their name back. They said we're no longer the United States of America that they created, and unless we stop calling ourselves that, they're prepared to sue for copyright infringement.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by User Name

You can watch the interview here

Thanks. Better that people see it for themselves than to rely on my "extreme leftist spin".

Originally Posted by User Name

Sadly, it doesn't matter if she hasn't a fucking clue, she's attractive and she likes guns, so Republicans will vote for her. As dumb as she is, most of the American public is even dumber, so as long as she can answer questions without blinking (as she can) it makes no difference that the words coming out of her mouth make no logical sense whatsoever. Voters will instead see Obama and Biden's well reasoned answers to complicated questions as examples of their pompous elitism. Such is the state of our country.

Exactly correct. Take F&D's ridiculous statement:

Originally Posted by F&D

If you ask 10 different people what "the Bush Doctine" is, you'll get 10 different answers.

What a load of crap. The Bush Doctrine is the National Security Strategy clearly described in this official Whitehouse document:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2002/nss.pdf

This phrase (among others) clearly shows the 'pre-emptive strike' policy that Gibson described, taken directly from the document:

And, as a matter of common sense and self-defense, America will act
against such emerging threats before they are fully formed.

Hell, it only took me 30 seconds to find that, and I couldn't even find video of the interview until User Name linked it. Obviously Palin is so dumb she can't even use a computer to find information the rest of us can get in seconds. WTF kind of "ready to be president" is that?

These righty Palin apologists can try all they like to spin this, but it only shows their desperation and reveals them as the morons they are:

Originally Posted by F&D

Palin absolutely aced this interview.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[shah269]

If I were coaching her I would tell her to go commando, cross and uncross her legs and giggle at every question and say "Oh you!"

The gopers are going to vote for her no matter what! The middle is too busy picking it's ass and the far left....to busy picking some one else's ass..

In effect we are fucked! Unless Obama has on hell of a good comeback.

[Gaolee]

Sure, Palin aced it. She didn't start drooling or wet her pants. That's about all anybody could expect. Otherwise, she was exactly what she is. An ignorant, not very curious, not very bright dumb'ya for the next generation.

[baldheadeddork]

Originally Posted by MontereyDave

The reality is that Washington insiders including politicians and media correspondents never use the term Bush Doctrine but instead used Pre-emptive Doctrine

You're wrong on both counts. It's been referred to as the Bush Doctrine from the time he declared it in the 2002 SOTU address, and that's how its known by everyone who pays even casual attention to foreign policy matters. Go to Foreign Policy or Foreign Affairs and do a search for Bush Doctrine. You'll get hundreds of responses from articles published in the magazine alone.

And the Bush Doctrine isn't about making a preemptive strike when there is evidence of an imminent intent to attack. That's been around forever. The Bush Doctrine states that the US has the right to declare preventive war, to attack before an actual threat is present. (Example: "We can't wait for the answer to come in the form of a mushroom cloud," as justification for war against Iraq because of a suspected WMD program.)

These are massively important points. The Bush Doctrine is probably the most important declaration of American diplomacy since the Monroe Doctrine. If fifty guys at the local Hooters couldn't state it is irrelevant. If you're running for federal office, or you're being considered for any appointment post at State or Defense, it's something you better know and have a well-reasoned opinion about it. Palin's answer last night was like a prospective mechanic saying, "What do you mean by 'torque wrench'?"

James Fallows explains it better than I could.

It is embarrassing to have to spell this out, but for the record let me explain why Gov. Palin's answer to the "Bush Doctrine" question -- the only part of the recent interview I have yet seen over here in China -- implies a disqualifying lack of preparation for the job.

Not the mundane job of vice president, of course, which many people could handle. Rather the job of potential Commander in Chief and most powerful individual on earth.

Each of us has areas we care about, and areas we don't. If we are interested in a topic, we follow its development over the years. And because we have followed its development, we're able to talk and think about it in a "rounded" way. We can say: Most people think X, but I really think Y. Or: most people used to think P, but now they think Q. Or: the point most people miss is Z. Or: the question I'd really like to hear answered is A.

Here's the most obvious example in daily life: Sports Talk radio.

Mention a name or theme -- Brett Favre, the Patriots under Belichick, Lance Armstrong's comeback, Venus and Serena -- and anyone who cares about sports can have a very sophisticated discussion about the ins and outs and myth and realities and arguments and rebuttals.

People who don't like sports can't do that. It's not so much that they can't identify the names -- they've heard of Armstrong -- but they've never bothered to follow the flow of debate. I like sports -- and politics and tech and other topics -- so I like joining these debates. On a wide range of other topics -- fashion, antique furniture, the world of restaurants and fine dining, or (blush) opera -- I have not been interested enough to learn anything I can add to the discussion. So I embarrass myself if I have to express a view.

What Sarah Palin revealed is that she has not been interested enough in world affairs to become minimally conversant with the issues. Many people in our great land might have difficulty defining the "Bush Doctrine" exactly. But not to recognize the name, as obviously was the case for Palin, indicates not a failure of last-minute cramming but a lack of attention to any foreign-policy discussion whatsoever in the last seven years.

Two details in Charles Gibson's posing of the question were particularly telling. One was the potentially confusing way in which he first asked it. On the page, "the Bush Doctrine" looks different from "the Bush doctrine." But when hearing the question Palin might not have known whether Gibson was referring to the general sweep of Administration policy -- doctrine with small d -- or the rationale that connected 9/11 with the need to invade Iraq, the capital-D Doctrine. So initial confusion would be understandable -- as if a sports host asked about Favre's chances and you weren't sure if he meant previously with the Packers or with the Jets. Once Gibson clarified the question, a person familiar with the issue would have said, "Oh, if we're talking about the strategy that the President and Condoleezza Rice began laying out in 2002...." There was no such flash of recognition.

The other was Gibson's own minor mis-statement. American foreign policy has long recognized the concept of preemptive action: if you know somebody is just about to attack you, there's no debate about the legitimacy of acting first. (This is like "shooting in self-defense.") The more controversial part of The Bush Doctrine was the idea of preventive war: acting before a threat had fully emerged, on the theory that waiting until it was fully evident would mean acting too late.

Gibson used the word "preemptively" -- but if a knowledgeable person had pushed back on that point ("Well, preemption was what John F. Kennedy had in mind in acting against the imminent threat of Soviet missiles in Cuba"), Gibson would certainly have come back to explain the novelty of the "preventive war" point. Because he knows the issue, a minor mis-choice of words wouldn't get in the way of his real intent.

Sarah Palin did not know this issue, or any part of it. The view she actually expressed -- an endorsement of "preemptive" action -- was fine on its own merits. But it is not the stated doctrine of the Bush Administration, it is not the policy her running mate has endorsed, and it is not the concept under which her own son is going off to Iraq.

How could she not know this? For the same reason I don't know anything about European football/soccer standings, player trades, or intrigue. I am not interested enough. And she evidently has not been interested enough even to follow the news of foreign affairs during the Bush era.

[User Name]

Originally Posted by Gaolee

Sure, Palin aced it. She didn't start drooling or wet her pants. That's about all anybody could expect. Otherwise, she was exactly what she is. An ignorant, not very curious, not very bright dumb'ya for the next generation.

You have to laugh at the very real, if sad, truth that the only requirement we have for leading the country is that you don't drool or wet your pants... in public at least.

[F&D]

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

What a load of crap. The Bush Doctrine is the National Security Strategy clearly described in this official Whitehouse document:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2002/nss.pdf

This phrase (among others) clearly shows the 'pre-emptive strike' policy that Gibson described, taken directly from the document:

Hey genius, that NSS document isn't "the Bush Doctine". The "Bush Doctrine" is a media construct whose definition has changed with time and has come to mean many different things.

Besides the bit from the NSS that you pasted, "the Bush Doctrine" has also been used to describe the notion that nations that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. It has also been used to describe the objective of effecting regime change in hostile nations.

Bottom line is, you can't ask a specious vague question about "The Bush Doctine", because it means alot of different things. Palin did the right thing not answering it directly. How was she supposed to know he was talking about the preemptive strike part of it, since that's not all there is to it?

Besides, if you guys are right and she truly doesn't have a clue what the Bush Doctrine is, isn't that a good thing? You guys are trying to paint her as just Bush in skirt, but how can that be if she doesn't even know what his foreign policy is?

You guys are so pathetically lame in your attempts to destroy this woman that you can't even be coherent and consistent.

These righty Palin apologists can try all they like to spin this, but it only shows their desperation and makes them look kijethe morons they are:

And your attempts to spin it shows the absolute desperation and dishonesty of your side.

Not that I blame you though. It's got be tough seeing your empty suit drop like a rock in the polls. Now he's going to be stuck desperately defending some blue states and fighting for life in the swing states. Even the Democrat hold on the House is weakening as the McCain/Palin ticket gains strength and causes people to take a second look at the deplorable Democrat-controlled Congress.

[baldheadeddork]

No F&D, we think McCain is Bush in a skirt. Get it right.

[F&D]

Originally Posted by baldheadeddork

No F&D, we think McCain is Bush in a skirt. Get it right.

Ooh now there is an unpleasant visual.

Thanks for the clarification BHD.