Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Palin right on Bush Doctrine, ABC NEWS doesn't even know what it means
Weekly Standard ^ | 9-12-08 | Richard Starr

Posted on 09/12/2008 1:11:06 AM PDT by jeltz25

What Exactly Is the 'Bush Doctrine'? It's being taken in some quarters as revelatory of inexperience that Sarah Palin sought clarification when ABC's Charlie Gibson asked her about the Bush Doctrine. To review, here is the passage from the transcript.

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine? PALIN: In what respect, Charlie? GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be? PALIN: His world view. GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war. PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent 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, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better. GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?

Gibson should of course have said in the first place what he understood the Bush Doctrine to be--and specified that he was asking a question about preemption. Palin was well within bounds to have asked him to be more specific. Because, as it happens, the doctrine has no universally acknowledged single meaning. Gibson himself in the past has defined the Bush Doctrine to mean "a promise that all terrorist organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated"--which is remarkably close to Palin's own answer.

Consider what a diversity of views on the meaning of the Bush Doctrine can be found simply within the archives of ABC News itself:

September 20, 2001 PETER JENNINGS: . . . Claire, the president said at one point, 'From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.' Should we be taking that as the Bush doctrine? CLAIRE SHIPMAN reporting: I think so, Peter,

September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON: The president in his speech last night, very forceful. Four out of five Americans watched it. Everybody gathered around the television set last night. The president issued a series of demands to the Taliban, already rejected. We'll get to that in a moment. He also outlined what is being called the Bush Doctrine, a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.

September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON: Senator Daschle, let me start with you. People were looking for a Bush Doctrine. They may have found it when he said the war on terror will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped or defeated. That's pretty broad. Broader than you expected?

December 9, 2001 GEORGE WILL: The Bush doctrine holds that anyone who governs a territory is complicit in any terrorism that issues from that territory. That covers the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Second, the war on terrorism is indivisible, it's part of the Bush doctrine.

December 11, 2001 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Two years ago, September 1999, Bush gave his first speech when he was running about terrorism. And his first--had the first explanation of the Bush doctrine, that if you harbor a terrorist, you're going to be attacked. The Bush White House is putting this out, saying it shows that Bush was very prescient, but that was only one speech given in the campaign.

January 28, 2002 BOB WOODWARD: This is now the Bush Doctrine . . . , namely that if we're attacked by terrorists, we will not just go after those terrorists but the countries or the people who harbor them.

January 29, 2002 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: It was striking and significant that the president really expanded the Bush doctrine. If a nation builds a weapon of mass destruction--Iraq, Iran or North Korea--we will reserve the right to take out those weapons even if we're not attacked or even if there's not a threat.

March 19, 2004 TERRY MORAN: That was the Bush doctrine we just heard. On this one-year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, President Bush offered a very broad justification of American leadership in the world under him since 9/11. Not just since one year in Iraq. For American voters as an argument that the country is safer, but more as you point out, for the world, which has been divided by his leadership, that Iraq is knit, in his mind, very firmly into that war on terrorism. One omission which I believe will be noted around the world, he made no mention of the role of multilateral institutions, the UN and others, in this fight against terrorism. In his mind, it's clear it's American leadership with others following along.

May 7, 2006 GEORGE WILL: Now the argument from the right is the CIA is a rogue agent because it has not subscribed to the Bush doctrine. The Bush doctrine being that American security depends on the spread of democracy and we know how to do that. The trouble is, Negroponte, who is considered by some of these conservatives the villain here and an enemy of the Bush doctrine is the choice of Bush, which makes Bush an insufficient subscriber to the Bush doctrine.

I'll stop there, although anyone with a Nexis account can find far more where that came from. Preemptive war; American unilateralism; the overthrow of regimes that harbor and abet terrorists--all of these things and more have been described as the "Bush Doctrine." It was a bit of a sham on Gibson's part to have pretended that there's such a thing as 'the' Bush Doctrine, much less that it was enunciated in September 2002


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2008veep; abcnews; bushdoctrine; chucklestheclown; election; foreignpolicy; gibson; gibsonpalin; mccain; mccainpalin; palin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last
Great post on how many different explanations of the Bush Doctrine there have been over the years

Even ABC's own people have said it means at least 5 different things. Even Gibson himslef said it means something else than he now says it means.

Here's Gibson in Sept, 2001:

September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON: The president in his speech last night, very forceful. Four out of five Americans watched it. Everybody gathered around the television set last night. The president issued a series of demands to the Taliban, already rejected. We'll get to that in a moment. He also outlined what is being called the Bush Doctrine, a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.

September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON: Senator Daschle, let me start with you. People were looking for a Bush Doctrine. They may have found it when he said the war on terror will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped or defeated. That's pretty broad. Broader than you expected?

But Gibson last night says it was ennunciated in Sept 2002 and means we have the right to anticpatory self defense.

Hmm. In 2001, a yr before it was "ennunciated in Sept, 2002" Gibson was saying it means that "all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated"

Why does that sound familiar?

last night:

PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation

compare Gibson's description of the Bush Doctrine in 2001 to Palin's last night

"all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated"

vs

"rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation"

It's virtually the same thing

Gibson even broadened it by saying all terrorists not just Islamic ones.

So, Palin was right, Gibson was wrong and he's diagreeing with what he himself said. What a joke.

Also, the post shows how just about everyone one ABC news had their own explanation of what the Bush Doctrine is. Jennings, Gibson, George Will, Bob Woodward, Stephanopoplous. They all disagreed on what it meant.

Hopefully the McCain camp gets this out there if the media of left tries any pushback.

1 posted on 09/12/2008 1:11:06 AM PDT by jeltz25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
It wasn't so much an interview as an attempt at an ambush...but a ham handed one.
2 posted on 09/12/2008 1:14:40 AM PDT by highlander_UW (In addition to being able to field dress a moose, Gov. Palin can field dress a donkey too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
So basically, idiot Gibson was saying, “Do you agree with what is in my head as I am thinking right now?” without telling her what is going on in his head.

What a stupid man!

3 posted on 09/12/2008 1:19:52 AM PDT by ConservativeMind (1 conservative = 5 RINOs. You can expect 4 out of 5 RINOs to bolt to the liberal side on any vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

Very nice.


4 posted on 09/12/2008 1:23:17 AM PDT by JLS (Do you really want changec being two guys from the majority of Congress with a 9% approval rating?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
There are three parts to this story. The first part is that Gibson was partisan, nasty, and factually incorrect in his questioning. The second part is that Sarah Palin was unflappable and factually correct in her response. The third and most important part is that ABC fraudulently edited the interview prior to broadcast in order to cover up Gibson's failures and to blunt Gov. Palin's success.
5 posted on 09/12/2008 1:27:54 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine? PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: What?!? I don't know that!!!

ZOT!!!!

Love ya, Sarah....

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

6 posted on 09/12/2008 1:30:51 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: highlander_UW

Yeah, that was obvious. Glad to see others picking up on his juvenile attempt to puff himself up.


7 posted on 09/12/2008 1:32:46 AM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
So, Palin was right, Gibson was wrong and he's diagreeing with what he himself said. What a joke.

Yeah it's a joke.

And as I've said on my raging angry rants today, Republicans and Conservatives need to get off their whining that they should be treated "fairly"

Gee Dee it, get over it. You're NOT going to be treated "fairly" by the Mediots.

Bring your Truth to the table, locked and loaded.

Tell the G*d-Dam*ed TRUTH, stop being pussies, say the truth, then explain why what you said is the TRUTH.

Try that some time, dumba$$es. It might work. DUH.

8 posted on 09/12/2008 1:33:21 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

THIS IS AWESOME!!!


9 posted on 09/12/2008 1:35:41 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet

You’re exactly right, if we don’t know by now that Republicans/conservatives will never get a fair shake from the media, we’ll never learn it. We have to operate from that premise, and be overly-prepared when it comes to the ‘interviews” which are always nothing more than “gotcha’s” lying in wait.


10 posted on 09/12/2008 1:46:03 AM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel
I think Palin got it right tonight. There was no crying, she just DID!

Let the Obama campaign act like a bunch of pussies. Let them.

There is no crying in baseball.

11 posted on 09/12/2008 1:51:16 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

Bush doctrine bookmark.

Good job.

Go Sarah!


12 posted on 09/12/2008 2:00:53 AM PDT by Canedawg (Sarah Palin Rocks. McCain-Palin '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
The National Security Strategy of the United States of America
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nssall.html

III. Strengthen Alliances to Defeat Global Terrorism and Work to Prevent Attacks Against Us and Our Friends

“...defending the United States, the American people, and our interests at home and abroad by identifying and destroying the threat before it reaches our borders.While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country”

Palin could have chosen, with the question asked, to parrot current US policy or a differing opinion.

13 posted on 09/12/2008 2:03:53 AM PDT by endthematrix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet

Sarah Palin should not be treated like a piece of fancy china that is only brought out once a year.


14 posted on 09/12/2008 2:23:21 AM PDT by ari-freedom (We never hide from history. We make history!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet

I have no worries. It’s obvious that she’s the kind of person who learns from every experience, and instead of moaning, it just makes her more determined to do even better. As a mother, that would be one of the first things she’d teach her own kids. I thought she did just fine anyway.


15 posted on 09/12/2008 2:28:35 AM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
Only in the Leftist's dreams is she being treated like a piece of China.

These sexists/racists cannot match her, and they know it.

They're dead meat.

16 posted on 09/12/2008 2:31:03 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel
It is why the Left cannot stand her. Their "reality" is whatever they want to think it is.

Palin lives reality. She proves it.

17 posted on 09/12/2008 2:34:44 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet; All

Right.

She can handle ANY tough question.

Notice she don’t get and softball questions...??????

Geez.


18 posted on 09/12/2008 2:35:39 AM PDT by LiveFreeOrDie2001 (Palin Power !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet

no I’m talking about freepers who are shocked that Charlie tried to trip her up and don’t want to see him ask her anything ever again.


19 posted on 09/12/2008 2:37:42 AM PDT by ari-freedom (We never hide from history. We make history!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet
Only in the Leftist's dreams is she being treated like a piece of China.

True. I can just hear the howls of side-splitting laughter and sarcasm if a Republican candidate had made his convention acceptance speech from between the columns of a styrafoam Parthenon.
20 posted on 09/12/2008 2:40:42 AM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet

And most normal Americans live a near version of that same reality, and respect her for how she handles the pressure with grace, and even with feistiness. That’s the original American spirit, before we became (a percentage of us, anyway) a nation of whiners and victims. Governor Palin’s no victim.


21 posted on 09/12/2008 2:44:08 AM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

Bottom line, the “Bush Doctrine” as a term is a made up media phrase.

If Palin didn’t knos this, it just proves that she’s not some sycophantic follower of the DC elite, one who allows her opinions and template to be defined by these pinheads.


22 posted on 09/12/2008 2:44:14 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (I <3 my PitBull. Sic em girl!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001
I didn't see any softball questions there. I thought she handled it.

I wouldn't expect any softball from the Left.

23 posted on 09/12/2008 2:45:24 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

Amen, sistah.


24 posted on 09/12/2008 2:46:25 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
In context, I don't think Charlie was all that bad. Yeah he was tough on her, but she handled it.

It would have been worse to me if he had thrown her softballs.

Damn, people get over it, I say again.

He threw a few high hard ones, she handled it. S0 WHAT?

Stop expecting the Democrat Media to be "fair".

They're not "fair".

Do like Sarah did. Showed up well-informed, tough, and confident.

Maybe a little nervous, but damn, that was her first national hard-core interview. Tons of pressure.

She did it.

She did good.

25 posted on 09/12/2008 2:57:24 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

I felt her question to Gibson was perfectly reasonable, an attempt to get him to define what part of the Bush doctrine he was speaking about.

It was a trap to get her to say “yes” and in doing so brand her McSame. She was smart to ask for clarification.


26 posted on 09/12/2008 3:09:18 AM PDT by Dawn531
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

Somebody posted an interview of Obama by Gibson. It was ridiculous the difference in caliber of questions being asked. IMHO, if McCain was smart he’d do a video with side by side of Gibson asking Palin a question, then Gibson asking 0 a question., plus make the point he’s running for President, she for VP. It would show her poise in answering versus his ahs and ums and it would show Charlie Gibson’s demeanor change toward her versus him.


27 posted on 09/12/2008 3:14:34 AM PDT by Dawn531
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made.

It almost makes me mad to hear Sarah Palin parroting this MSM mantra, that we made mistakes along the way. Name them. Yes, we needed more troops to occupy Iran after we conquered it in a WEEK (nobody mentions it when things go BETTER than planned, huh?). We corrected that, with the reluctant, howling acquiescence of a Congress acting like a spoiled five year old boy resisting going to bed.

28 posted on 09/12/2008 3:15:57 AM PDT by Hardastarboard (I have Zero Tolerance for Zero Tolerance policies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard
I think you answered your own question. Bottom line: Politics just sucks!

City of Satan.

29 posted on 09/12/2008 3:20:32 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
This is probably a dumb question, but what does President Bush say the Bush Doctrine is?

I'm not a fancy pants journalist, but it seems to me that answering that question would probably make more sense than running up a list of what other people think the Bush Doctrine is.

30 posted on 09/12/2008 3:23:57 AM PDT by Steel Wolf ("We have your test results, Mr Obama. You have ...Sarahnoia. 2 months, tops, and you're a goner....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

you know what was the biggest mistake of the Bush admin? really bad PR and communication.


31 posted on 09/12/2008 3:27:43 AM PDT by ari-freedom (We never hide from history. We make history!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet
And as I've said on my raging angry rants today, Republicans and Conservatives need to get off their whining that they should be treated "fairly" Gee Dee it, get over it. You're NOT going to be treated "fairly" by the Mediots. Bring your Truth to the table, locked and loaded. Tell the G*d-Dam*ed TRUTH, stop being pussies, say the truth, then explain why what you said is the TRUTH. Try that some time, dumba$$es. It might work. DUH.

I don't see it as Republicans and Conservatives "whining" as you put it, over being treated fairly in the sense of them saying "Hey don't give us tough questions." Rather it's "Hey, why haven't you asked Obama these questions?" I don't see it as whining to point out the double standard. Asking tough questions of Palin but not Obama? That's insane!
32 posted on 09/12/2008 3:28:27 AM PDT by Federalist Society
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

Take that, Charlie.


33 posted on 09/12/2008 3:28:32 AM PDT by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dawn531
Somebody posted an interview of Obama by Gibson

Do you remember what thread that was on? I'm dying to see the comparisons..

34 posted on 09/12/2008 3:29:26 AM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet-McCain/Palin 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Federalist Society

that’s Obama’s loss and Sarah’s gain. She wants the tough challenges. It’s what she lives for.


35 posted on 09/12/2008 3:34:52 AM PDT by ari-freedom (We never hide from history. We make history!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Federalist Society; FlyVet

I don’t understand why conservative politicians feel the need to acknowledge the MSM in the first place. Screw them.

Palin should be granting interviews only to unbiased or friendly news outlets. People like Gibson don’t deserve the attention.


36 posted on 09/12/2008 3:35:06 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (I <3 my PitBull. Sic em girl!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dawn531; SE Mom

I posted transcripts. Here they are:

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/story?id=4854865&page=1

TRANSCRIPT: Charlie Gibson Interviews Hillary Clinton

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=5000184&page=1

Charles Gibson Interviews Barack Obama


37 posted on 09/12/2008 3:35:09 AM PDT by maggief (Read my lip-stick!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: maggief

THANK you:)


38 posted on 09/12/2008 3:35:45 AM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet-McCain/Palin 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Federalist Society
I'm just so sick of us as conservatives whining about being treated "unfairly".

It is not going to change. It is what it is.

Let the Leftists wave their magic wands to make all the bad things go away.

Conservatives must deal with reality.

Reality tells me that Media Bias is not going away.

The way to beat them is to show up smarter, more honest, more well-informed than they are.

Well-informed Truth will put them in their place. Embarrass them.

That is how to beat them.

39 posted on 09/12/2008 3:37:40 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: maggief

Thanks I just went to find them, and came across the Obama one. What a change of demeanor by Gibson...it highlights his bias. He’s soft spoken, he asks no follow up to 0’s explanations, and as usual, 0 says “uh” and stutters through the whole thing.


40 posted on 09/12/2008 3:38:42 AM PDT by Dawn531
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dawn531

You’ll notice Hillary’s transcript includes “uhs” and Obama’s doesn’t. IIRC


41 posted on 09/12/2008 3:45:34 AM PDT by maggief (Read my lip-stick!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: maggief

Yep, I did Hillary was a test case for the media if they could decide the election.


42 posted on 09/12/2008 3:48:17 AM PDT by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt; All
Bottom line, the “Bush Doctrine” as a term is a made up media phrase.

Agreed. It is a made up media term. She had every right to ask for a clarification of which part of the media term Gibson was referring too. Second, she should have known it was a media catch phrase. Perhaps that was the reason in her asking for a clarification, but it got lost on the public. Even I would have asked for a clarification as the media catch phrase the "Bush Doctrine" is thrown about to mean just about anything to the public.

43 posted on 09/12/2008 3:53:01 AM PDT by EBH ( ... the riotousness of the crowd is always very close to madness. --Alculin c.735-804)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: scooby321; Dawn531; SE Mom

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAEnu89dxCY

Barack Obama on ABC World News With Charlie Gibson (7/23/08)


44 posted on 09/12/2008 3:55:20 AM PDT by maggief (Read my lip-stick!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
you know what was the biggest mistake of the Bush admin? really bad PR and communication.

And the fact that Bush was more loyal to his staffers than they were to him. I'll always be disappointed that Dubya didn't use the bully pulpit of the Presidency.

I knew Sarah would hold her own with Gibson. Whatever mistakes she may have made, she'll learn from them and move forward. She does fine without a teleprompter in front of her.

She's no Dan Quayle, thankfully. OTOH, Biden is making Jack Kemp's performance in '96 look positively spectacular.

Biden hasn't had to run an extended campaign for decades, and it's showing. If he's still on the ticket 10/1, he'll be a dead man walking.

45 posted on 09/12/2008 3:57:35 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (McCain is Lucy, McCainiacs are Charlie Brown, & the football was a secure border...before Sarah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Whenever the Mediots are dishonest, the real conservative politicians should have facts and figures at the ready, put them in their place, call them out on their lies, and show open contempt for them. That is how to beat them.

They want to be in the middle of politics, rather than doing their damn job, throw it right back in their face.

Mediots would rather key off the New York Times and the Washington Post than to think for themselves.

Facts will easily beat them. They are completely curious about Palin's past, as they are completely un-curious about Obama's past, for just one easy example; they are easy to beat. And they deserve nothing but open contempt.

And they can't figure out why their readership is plummeting. They're stupid.

46 posted on 09/12/2008 4:18:27 AM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: maggief

WOW- great find- thank you again :) Interesting- the tone is SO different. He asks the experience and age question- in a friendly and non-hostile OR condescending manner- and did NOT press him on the non-substantive answers given.

He DID press him on his flip-flop on Jerusalem.


47 posted on 09/12/2008 4:19:54 AM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet-McCain/Palin 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001

Luk 12:8 Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:

Luk 12:11 And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say:
Luk 12:12 For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say.


48 posted on 09/12/2008 4:20:23 AM PDT by Tucker39
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

when he asked about it I was wondering whatonearth he was on about.

he should have been more specific and now I hear liberals saying she blew it

do liberals actually hear and see what the rest of the country see.

last night on hannity the guy they had on said Palin will go to war Russia, she never said that and had to be corrected
now this morning this henican guy saying about the speech and how she isn;t experienced
er she’s more experienced than obama


49 posted on 09/12/2008 4:24:54 AM PDT by manc (Marriage is between a man and a woman no sick Ma sham marriage - -end racism end affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manc
do liberals actually hear and see what the rest of the country see.

Palin could raise the dead and cure the sick and liberals would say that is proof we need health care reform.

50 posted on 09/12/2008 4:29:47 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson