Palin Stumped On “Bush Doctrine”
During the Charlie Gibson interview on ABC, Gov. Sarah Palin seemed unprepared for a question concerning President Bush’s foreign policy doctrine of preemptive war.
Gibson: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?
Palin: In what respect, Charlie?
Gibson: What do you interpret it to be?
Palin: His world view?
Gibson: No, the Bush Doctrine enunciated in 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, is we have the right of anticipatory self-defense. That we have right to preemptive strike on any country we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
Palin: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people we have every right to defend our country.
I can not believe you have jumped on the Bush Doctrine. I wish Bill O’Reilly had asked Obama if he knew the Bush Doctrine. But of course if he answered wrong, he would just say well I meant to say this or that or uh..uh..uh..etc.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Let’s be real! Even though I will not vote for her ticket, who even knew there was a “Bush Doctrine”?
I don’t think Bush knows he has one. It keeps changing–pre-emptive strikes to protect U.S. interests–big deal. What U.S. president has not threatened to do that?
September 11th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Whatever: how do get ahold of the site folks to get help with the chat stream? apparently I’m already registered, but can’t log-in… and i’m not receiving any e-mail: even to my spam folder…
September 11th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
The Igloo Princess did so know what the Bush doctrine was but she sold that book on Ebay.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Palin is a joke..
September 11th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Alan is on soon.he will get this show going.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
How can people not know what the Bush doctrine is? This ignorance is the reason why we’re involved in unnecessary wars.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
So, this is a big deal??????? The most important answer was that if the evidence indicates we have every right to strike.
No Socialism for me…..
McCain / Palin 2008! Country First
September 11th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
I am getting no email updates also Sky.What happened to the chat forum?
September 11th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Socialism is now.Privatize the profits socialize the loss.Fanny mae
September 11th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
McCain will run this country further in the ground.the rich will get richer.A rich man can hold his breath during a slow economy a poor man cant.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
This pick stinks of Rove. He had to be behind her selection. How else could you explain J McC picking a fundamentalist christian. That is not the type of thing he would come up with.
She fits right in with the hypocracy of the past 8 years. WAKE UP AMERICA
September 11th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Alan is live!!!!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
GOT THAT RIGHT BOB! Now we own banks. Thats funny I dont feel like a banker. I feel like a guy who has to bring his credit card to the gas station, and the grocery store. Two places I used to always pay cash.
Where are all the idiots screaming about socialism now??!!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Gullianni is a hack like Newt Ginrich..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Okay, Union, Bob: I found it deep within my Spam folder…
chat: apparently my username and password have nothing to do with my actual username, or the password that I chose… much confusion on my end.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Jersey Jeff whats up my friend.Hows things on the east coast doing?Middle america is a toss up.I dont know if my state Missouri will go Obama or McCain..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
right again BOB…you are on a roll
September 11th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Sky now I am confused lol
September 11th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
has to be McC right? You dont have to worry about us. TRUE BLUE!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
I am getting my union brothers and sisters behind the cause.I hope we bring Missouri for McCain.I have talked to a lot of Bush Republicans who are leaning Obamas way.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Bob, You are really confusing me now: are you pro-McCain?
September 11th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
missouri for Obama I meant.Sorry Lol
September 11th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
I had McCain on the mind.How about that snort tonight.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
Blame that one on the Bud Selects.LOL
September 11th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Sky I am Obama all the way!!!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Dear Alan
I know you are implying that Sarah Palin messed up because she didn’t know what the “Bush Doctrine” is but you and Charles Gibson have failed miserably. Because if you listen closely she asks him in what way, goes on to define what it is. Finally she answers the question without stammering, stuttering, etc. Unlike Barack Obama.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
*shaking head*
maybe you oughta get some sleep, man!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
McCain put politics first not country by putting Palin as VP.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Worked all night last night sorry sky.You will have to forgive me.LOL
September 11th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
:)
September 11th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
I read a good one today in the paper.I am sure they stole it from some show.They said Jesus was a community organizer and pontus pilate was a Governer.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
I hate repeating myself, but again why dont republicans hold themselves to the same high standards they have for democrats… obama didnt have experience, no one knows who he is etc… then they pick whats her name as v.p. honestly i just dont get it.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
… though strange…
September 11th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Nope, she wasn’t stumped. It was very obvious Gibson was trying to set traps hoping she would make a mistake. Why would someone keep repeating the same question over and over and over when it was answered the first time. Man, was he obnoxious.
But I am confused by the fears some of you have over Palin’s qualifications and not Obama’s. If any of you would check his history, he is not at all qualified. He wasn’t really elected, most of the elections he won be default. She has so much more qualifications than he does, and if you can’t see it, I really am scared for this country.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Palin is pure political.They need something to counteract the 84,000 people in Colorado at the Democratic convention.Make it about the people not about the issues.Karl Rove..Attack the opponents strong points..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Qualifications?He and Palin meet the Constitutions requirements.Lets think about this.Someone from Chicago which has a bigger economy then most countrys or Alaska where their is no economy..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
This is the big liberal complaint? You are hung up on the type of technicalities that as already mentioned, Obama has repeatedly stuttered through. This sort of thing may have the leftist cheerleaders going “Rah Rah Rah!”, but the rest of us are not impressed.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Bob,
Obama didn’t RUN Chi town, he simply organized it. And it is such a wonderfully organized place now, isn’t it?
September 11th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
I can tell you this.The Republicans in the heartland are not impressed with Palin..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
But religion plays better then economics here in middle America..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Craig in Jackson,
what I don’t understand why you think Obama is qualified to be president. Even Biden and Hillary admitted during the debates that he isn’t. Palin has much more experience and qualifications that you and the left refuse to admit. She at least, isn’t afraid to make a decision. There is no “present” button in the White House. But here is a news flash for you, Obama is running against McCain, not Palin. McCain out shines your rock star.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
I wont hold my breath on T.Boone Pickens being here.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
The Republicans have made Palin the issue.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
wow good point now let me ask you about the adds the bush campaign ran against your grandpa in 2000.. so now hes good enough?
September 11th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Bob,
Obama did not run Chicago, he was simply a community organizer in one community. No executive decisions to be made. I guess that is the problem with you libs not understanding why he doesn’t have the experience-you don’t understand the definitions.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Whats up Craig? My union brother from another mother..
September 11th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Caamerican you are argueing that someone from the great north which has a population of zero knows about america.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
nadda bob…. couldnt sleep? the right is wrong!!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Democrats have all but forgotten Senator McCain. They have begun running against Governor Palin instead. This is where the train began tottering on the tracks.
Imagine if Republicans began running against Biden instead of Obama.
Maybe we should start smearing Biden and hope THAT will win us the election? Is that smarter politics?
September 11th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
The guy who ran adds against McCain when he ran against Bush is now employeed by McCain.McCain wants to win no matter the cost.I am sure with his seven houses he know how the working man or women feels…
September 11th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
yeah dont u love the religious right…. hmmmm if i told you im gonna pay someone to explain moby dick to me for the rest of my life you would call me crazy.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
Alan how about a shout out brother!!!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
You need to get the podcast Craig.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
yeah bob the right have such short memories… wait u cant blame mccain for not remembering how they bashed him hes 72 freakin years old.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
just text me the good parts bob lol
September 12th, 2008 at 12:00 am
obama didnt have experience, no one knows who he is etc… then they pick whats her name as v.p. honestly i just dont get it.
The difference, of course, is that Obama is running for President and Palin for Vice President.
Someone from Chicago which has a bigger economy then most countrys
He had no economic responsibility in Chicago.
The Republicans in the heartland are not impressed with Palin..
Yes we are.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:01 am
Bob the union man, you said “McCain {political leader’s name} will run this country further in the ground.the rich will get richer.A rich man can hold his breath during a slow economy a poor man cant.”
Bob are you quoting Karl Marx? in the push to promote the need for communism?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:02 am
I bet McCain was in bed by nine thirty.Can you imagine waking up a 72 year old man at three in the morning.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:02 am
I think Palin is full of b.s.
When she was asked of the Bush Doctrine, of course she didn’t know what it was until she had googled it at the last minute before the interview. Oh wait, just like McCain googled Palin for a last minute “reassurance.”
What the hell is going on!!! Have we gone ignorant to vote for these politicans who use the Google searchbar as their best resource?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Bradley ..Karl Marx..Did you know he never saw the communism you Know?Or did he see what Labor unions did for the working poeple?That is A EL FLUSH BOL ARGUMENT…
September 12th, 2008 at 12:04 am
There is a Bush Doctrine? So the liberals have decided there is, they have defined it secretly? was it done on an ibm selectric typewriter?
Why didnt dishonest Charlie just say: Im thinking of a number between one and one thousand. what is it?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:05 am
Well I think that the reason that most people say that Barack stutters is because he goes…”uhhh—mmmmh—-….”
Obviously the man is deeply complex and wants to say the best words to represent himself and his country IN THE BEST WAY.
In other words, Obama is a genius.
Oh yeah, lol, Palin does sound like she has a moose up her ass! I AM READY!
Sure you are Mrs. Palin, you are ready to make yourself and the rich, richer!
September 12th, 2008 at 12:07 am
Bob/union man, I dont know what a flush bowl thing is, what is that?
and you seem to know lots about Karl Marx, are you implying that Marx didnt go far enough to see the wonderful communism we have today?
Bob just what is your view of communism put into place in the USA? are you FOR a communist government and world workers party?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:08 am
the Bush Doctrine
That phrase can mean so many things that she was only trying to get him to isolate what he meant specifically.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:08 am
He stumped her. On a simple questioned.He should have asked her how to kill a moose.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:08 am
Hey Caamerican,
Why are you wasting time rebutting Bob the union man and Craig in Jackson? Anyone who take the time to read their senseless posts (except other brain-dead libs) will see that they can’t debate on issues. They can only regurgitate Dem talking points. They are still blaming Karl Rove for their lack of success. They will never give credit to Pres. Bush for protecting them from another 9-11 attack.
Thank God the adults will continue to run the White House for 12-16 more years.
McCain-Palin in 2008
September 12th, 2008 at 12:11 am
Bush protecting us.HA HA HA HA THAT IS FUNNY…
September 12th, 2008 at 12:14 am
God told you that didnt he walt..
September 12th, 2008 at 12:15 am
Hey democrats. DO McCain a favor. Go out and repeat all this stuff about Governor Palin to EVERYONE you know. Tell everyone! Get out your bull horns and make it very very clear!
Thanks for not being able to help your selves.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:15 am
Hey Someday,
maybe someday you’ll realize you need help yourself.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Marx was dead before russias communism as you know it.They stole the name from him.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Not entirely!
from the Wash Post:
By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 12, 2008; Page A01
FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 — Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”
September 12th, 2008 at 12:17 am
walt i wont thank pres. bush for letting us get attacked on 9-11 no matter how much you guys water board me.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:17 am
all of the repubs hate communinism but dont have a problem selling jobs to China which is Communist.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:19 am
You are right, Walt. I guess I thought there was a ray of hope of some common sense, but I was mistaken. I’m out of here for good.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:20 am
Palin had no problem answering any of the questions.
WTH is wrong with Gibson? Is he on something or just tired?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:20 am
Hey Craig,
You are one sick dude! Your pal Bill Clinton set up the attack by woosing out on all the attacks he overlooked during his sorry 8 years.
Grow up man!
September 12th, 2008 at 12:21 am
now walt go get your bible and gun and sit on your porch and wait fer dem revenuers… sorry i spelled that word right fer ya.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:21 am
maybe someday you’ll realize you need help yourself.
Ironic wouldn’t ya say?
walt i wont thank pres. bush for letting us get attacked on 9-11 no matter how much you guys water board me.
What was the response to aggression against us while President Clinton was in office?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:21 am
Sandy, “Well I think that the reason that most people say that Barack stutters is because he goes…”uhhh—mmmmh—-….”
Obviously the man is deeply complex and wants to say the best words to represent himself and his country IN THE BEST WAY.
In other words, Obama is a genius.”
Sandy if you think Obama is a genius then youre sadly fooled and mistaken. Obama is out for power, he has that fake scorning expression, uh- and uhh tries to talk with a snob accent. not studder, snob accent.
he pauses and thinks about simple answers making him a phoney, a fake. he talked today, he was nervous and rambling making no sense. To blacks/negro’s who are in the victimization mindset they dont care about the blah blah, its about black power, reparations and how much do I git? I wants mo money! So they dont listen to the words only how he sounds, he is black and is on stage like that. if he gets elected he will grease the system and give us free money for liking him… elect him and he will get money for us brotha’s and sista’s for all the sufferin’ that our ancestors had to endure 300 years ago.
Do you see Obama with the patience to read and study whats needed in the white house? Biden will be like okay let me help you understand that… ok I dont know lets call Bill Clinton. ring… hello? oh hi, Hillary? yes, is uhhh… Bill home? why? whats this about? well we have a question about something at the white house we’re supposed to do. And we wondered if Bill could help. Oh, Bill is… not here but I’m happy to help you, read it to me?
Obama will be watching the tv with the remote held out there, short attention span and all…
September 12th, 2008 at 12:21 am
It happened under Bush.Deal with it.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:22 am
When Roosevelt was president they said Henry Ford was so worried that he would give to much to the working people that it would effect his kids inheritance.Sound like what we are going through now.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:24 am
That snort by McCain scared the Russians.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Deal with it.
He did. Ya’ll didn’t.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Bob, It’s a good thing that you’re in a union. Without their protection, you’d have to make it on your own.
I can imagine how you’d do in a job interview without talking points!
September 12th, 2008 at 12:26 am
He did 4,000 dead and did Iran a favor.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:26 am
Henry Ford was so worried
And yet it was Henry Ford, and his continued legacy, that has provided for generations of working Americans.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Oh walt come on.You have something better then that,Are you mad I have health care and a pension and you dont.Good luck with your 401k
September 12th, 2008 at 12:27 am
yeah hes dealing alright… the deck is stacked, how many ppl are making millions off this war that bush started in a country that had nothing to do with 9-11.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:28 am
Read the history books Pino
September 12th, 2008 at 12:29 am
Carol, Bradley and Pino,
Thank you for your thoughtful posts! Good luck with these leftists. I’m going to go now and wash their bs off my boots. Then maybe I’ll go moose hunting. I’m tired of hunting liberals. They are too easy and way too dumb.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:30 am
Alan its a battle on the Blog.I like these new faces.It make it more enjoyable.What do you think.Craig Bradley hates unions.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:31 am
walt is old and feeble…..ooops i meant mccain well if the shoe fits.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Bob, “all of the repubs hate communinism but dont have a problem selling jobs to China which is Communist.”
no the GOP didnt sell jobs to China, try harder to understand what youre talking about Bob.
Do you like communism yes or not? should the USA become communist like Hanoi Jane Fonda said years ago?
For those who dont know, famous or infamous Hanoi Jane Fonda posed with communists and said: “if Americans knew what communism was they would get on their knees and pray the USA becomes communist”
wikipedia lists one of Fonda’s regrets thusly: . I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I’m very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families. [...] I will go to my grave regretting the photograph of me in an anti-aircraft gun, which looks like I was trying to shoot at American planes. It hurt so many soldiers.
So Bob is this early Jane Fonda communism the thing you want to convert the USA into?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Walt as a former Marine.You need work harder…See ya next time I reallly do enjoy the debate bro.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:32 am
Bradley no response out.You love trading with china so you can cut labor cost.Hanoi jane .I havent heard that since I was in Boot Camp in 91.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:33 am
Craig he didnt like that his repubs love china which is COMMUNIST!
September 12th, 2008 at 12:34 am
Hanoi jane.Damn you pulled that out of your butt..
September 12th, 2008 at 12:36 am
they keep borrowing their money…. bradley does it make you feel good that our country has to borrow money from the communist…
September 12th, 2008 at 12:37 am
Walt dont be gone too long, stay safe.
Bob, are you aksing if I dont like unions?
union has lots of meaning, are you talking about labor unions? amgrafa unions? general unions for large factories? national teachers union? come on, lets go, diggy mao!
September 12th, 2008 at 12:37 am
Well Bradley, maybe if Republicans had listened to Dems and regulated their precious free market better & more, we wouldn’t have to nationalize millions of American home mortgages.
Better socialism through conservatism eh?
Oh, and as for Palin, it’s funny how all she has to do is barely plod through in a mediocre humdrum for conservatives to extol her successes.
She is not qualified.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:38 am
Bob, a last thought… You sound very secure with your union protection and benefits and I’m happy that there’s someone else to take care of you. Hmmm… I wonder how the retirees from Pan-Am are doing with their union benefit packages. You guys will suck the companies that produce results and actually benefit society dry. Then wonder what happened.
Thanks for your well wishes; however, I don’t have a 401K. I have a SEP IRA and I pay for my own health care. Guess what, I get a 40% discount because the doctors don’t have to wait for their payment after all the paperwork. I pay cash, it works wonders. Health Savings Accounts allow me to choose any provider I please and negotiate their fees. It’s a win-win. Something that’s probably above your pay grade.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:39 am
bradley your party is in charge, tell me how proud you are of this economy.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Bradley, I can’t seem to exit! Bob is causing me to laugh so hard I can’t help myself.
Hey Bob, now I understand: you were a ‘jarhead’. Sorry, no disrespect meant. Thank you for your service! It’s just that those of us in the 101st Airborne used to just love taunting the Corp. :-)
September 12th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Good luck with your health savings account when your job is shipped to China.Most people cant afford this.But that is very christian of you that most people cant pay for it.I pay a 20 dollar co pay.Have fun paying 60%.With McCain I am going to pay taxes for my healthcare which I didnt pay before.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Bradley no response out.You love trading with china so you can cut labor cost.Hanoi jane .I havent heard that since I was in Boot Camp in 91
Bob what does no response out mean?
No, I dont love trading with China, I prefer to trade with countries in this region like Canada and Mexico and some other central American countries. China no. Its unfortunate the democrats/left have sought to make Americans into lazy uneducated welfare state entitlement mode communist slackers.
If you went to boot camp in 91 that would put you into about the upper age group of modern said slackers. Companies cant find qualified and hard working people and the work has gone to China, it began en masse during democrat Clintons term, why havent your dems done anything? incompetence.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:47 am
I understand Walt being in the army.Couldnt cut it in my beloved Marine Corp.I say that jokingly my brother..I had a brother who served in the army in Iraq.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:47 am
who knows how he got his money…. inheritance baby, savings and loan scandal etc.. that could either be addressed to mccain or walt.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:48 am
Bradley you are putting down your hard working americans.Do you hate america?
September 12th, 2008 at 12:48 am
Craig, I actually earned my ‘money’. No inheritace, no S&L scandal, just hard work as a self-employed broker. No safety net, no un-employment benefits, no health care paid for by someone else. “You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth!” Quote from one of Bob’s fellow Marines (in a movie of course).
September 12th, 2008 at 12:53 am
Bob, pass my thanks along to your smarter brother for his service too! :-)
September 12th, 2008 at 12:54 am
so u made money off of someone elses money… ahhh that sounds so fulfilling.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Craig: “bradley your party is in charge, tell me how proud you are of this economy.”
My party the GOP is in charge of the Executive branch, ie Presidency.
The democrats won majority of the congress in 2006, Nancy Pelosi decides what gets voted on. Since then the US economy has suffered significant loss.
The executive branch oversees the war in Irak, and it has been doing good.
I remember someone aksed me how do we know when we win the war? The day to day operations are controlled by military brass, they complete objectives. the political leaders make resolutions to decide when the war has been won.
The legislative is controlled by democrats, they control spending and economic issues, they have failed miserably.
If the president were some monarchy, ruling on every last thing? then you could blame president Monarchy.
I want to see more enforcement and new precise modern day laws to punish dishonest and unfair financial and corporate activity, since this is the control mechanism that otherwise communism would handle.
Having North America trade with a unified NAU dollar would be a good and correct step
September 12th, 2008 at 12:56 am
Damn Amy booted me off Radio Graffitti..
September 12th, 2008 at 12:58 am
Whats up with that colmes?How come I got disconnected?I guess that why Cheryl doesnt post here no more.No love.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:01 am
Blame it on the dems.Been in charge 2 years.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:02 am
you had to laugh when you wrote that…. a year and half the so called pelosi group has been in charge. again why such the high standard for the democrats.. since 2000 your ppl have been in charge. dont let the facts get in the way of that opinion. the iraq war has been goin well….. i would laugh if it was’nt such a sad remark.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:03 am
nice try!! the bush doctrine means ONE specific thing! Bad interview, looked as nervous as a whore in church,sounded uninformed and unknowledgeable.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:03 am
Bob “Bradley you are putting down your hard working americans.Do you hate america?”
No, Im speaking the truth about those who are slackers. Instead of a generation of educated and motivated folks? they are the mtv jackass crowd who have immorality programmed into their slacker minds. Gutter trash filth is todays modern culture in America.
There was a time when a dude living with his girlfriend in the same house, but unmarried was considered so wrong, it was unthinkable. Today? nobody cares. welfare, entitlements, drugs and anarchy are the style. crime, corruption are directly generated from such lifestyles adding to crime in society, reducing the prosperity of individuals, weakening the economy; the need for more prisons with more highly paid staff to watch men who should be working honestly in society but are encarcerated, costing society twice, the cost of encarceration plus the loss of production and tax revenue.
This is traced back to a liberal democrat hatred of Christianity, and the outlawing of the bible or God from society.
Hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans, a cesspool of corruption and debauchery could have been Gods wrath or it could have been karma or coincidence. Mardi Gras is a direct insult to Christ and Christianity, thats why its popular, before fasting and giving up having enough? eat until youre full, drink until you pass out, engage in adultery and debauchery so you wont mind giving all those things up for a few days, it wont be a bother. it also wont have meaning.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:06 am
Coast to Coast is live!
September 12th, 2008 at 1:06 am
Bradley,
Excellent lesson in civics! Do you think Craig will attempt to understand? Naw, probably not.
BTW: The next time the left brings up the economy, we’ve got to remind them that we warned Congress about increasing the minimum wage and that it would lead to higher unemployment. I guess we were right again.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:07 am
oh wow he went to the bible….
September 12th, 2008 at 1:08 am
Craig,
Say your prayers and go to bed. It’s past your bedtime!
Oh, and sleep sound. Pres. Bush is even keeping you safe. Nite, nite.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:11 am
lol walt
September 12th, 2008 at 1:12 am
Bradley went off the reservation.He think Pastor Haggee is Jesus.Here is a theology lessen for you bradley.God has no revenge on people after the new testament.Old testament stuff to make you scared bradley.Jesus died for you but you want revenge when all sins are equal.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:13 am
It amazes me that neocons would come to this or any liberal site and complain when they are not greeted with a chorus of agreement when the spout there talking points. Walt and others, this is a liberal site, if you want agreement with your talking points go to littlegreenfootballs. They will agree with you.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:14 am
Craig bradley thinks these people interpet Gods word.Their is no Gods wrath after the new testament.DONT BE AFRAID NO MORE MY CHRISTIAN BROTHERS
September 12th, 2008 at 1:15 am
be afraid be very afraid. bradley put your hands together and pray, and i will use my two hands and work. wonder who will get more done.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:19 am
bradley have you ever went to the hospital and said i want a doctor that practices medicine back in the day of jesus? no wait im sure you pray for the illness to go away.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:21 am
Craig he is going to bed thanking himself that he is going to pay 60% FOR HIS INSURANCE WHEN WE PAY A 20 CO PAY.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:23 am
I know this is off subject, but WTH was that presidential forum all about? Compulsory volunteer service?
September 12th, 2008 at 1:23 am
I am a little pissed I got thrown form Radio Grafftti tonight.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:24 am
no doubt hes payin for it now.. thats why hes pissed off
September 12th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Carol usually i do watch but I am was burned out.Craig did you see it tonight.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:25 am
u were kicked thats not right.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Bradley left.I think he thought that we did satans work.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:26 am
carol it was somewhat of a sit down.. a prelim to the debates
September 12th, 2008 at 1:26 am
I mean Craig I was on here all night and then i get get kicked of the line.I thought Colmes was a friend of ours.I know why now the regulars are not on here.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:27 am
Ed schultz has a more working man show.I thought brother Colmes was braking the mold with Hoffa on the other night..
September 12th, 2008 at 1:28 am
lol satans work i knew the bible was gonna come up. thats their weakest link if ya ask me. but somehow they think gods on their side. as if god sitting listening to the republicans and sayin ” u know that ann coulter said some terrible things, but she belives in me so she gets a pass”
September 12th, 2008 at 1:29 am
i told u about colmes along time ago
September 12th, 2008 at 1:30 am
Hi Ligdave,
You don’t understand. We so called ‘neo-cons’ don’t visit this site looking to be welcomed. We drop in for entertainment. You lefties are a hoot! If anything, we spend a little time, attemping to educate. In reading most of the posts, it’s obvious that most of you can’t string two thoughts together without blaming Bush or Cheney for everything that’s wrong with the world or calling Sarah Palin a whore.
We ‘neo-cons’ stop by to get a glimsp of ‘your world’.
At least most of you are smarter than the nut cases over at the Daily Kos. PS: That’s a compliment, I think.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:30 am
Craig walt is still mad we pay a 20 dollar co pay..lol
September 12th, 2008 at 1:32 am
WALT THINKS JESUS IS MAD AT HIM
September 12th, 2008 at 1:33 am
“Do you see Obama with the patience to read and study whats needed in the white house?”
Barack’s resume proves beyond any question that he is uniquely qualified to do exactly that.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:33 am
God is on their side when their are miracles to save lives.Free will when bad things happen to people.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:34 am
The theme of it was about citizen service. It didn’t sound good. Volunteer work is good, but let me decide for myself if I want to do it.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Rc where have you been brother?///
September 12th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Craig RC has arrived…
September 12th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Craol I understand your concern.I wonder what will happen in the next 4 years.I s the draft fourth coming as service?I dont know.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:37 am
Bob – do you believe in God?
September 12th, 2008 at 1:37 am
Just curious
September 12th, 2008 at 1:38 am
republicans will never admit a mistake, its a fundamental flaw cause without acknowlegement of a mistake how are they ever gonna correct it. and about the whore thing i never seen a post that said it, but she does have five kids so she does like sex, wow we have something in common.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:38 am
Jesus was a community organizer and pontus pliate was a governer…
September 12th, 2008 at 1:38 am
Bob, you’re wrong again! I’m not mad about your beloved co pay. I’m really surprised that as an Marine, you are so dang proud that someone else is footing your bills! It’s back to boot camp for you!
And Bob, Jesus is not mad at me. He loves me, the Bible tells me so.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:39 am
So was that a no or a yes?
September 12th, 2008 at 1:40 am
How can any working person vote republican.Wake up they dont care about the normal person.Trickle down Economics has never worked….
September 12th, 2008 at 1:40 am
umm walt ive read the bible and it doesnt mention you.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:40 am
Walt my union has have negotiated low health care beacuase I am worth that much to my employer.I guess you are not.My company makes money because of me that I would say dwarfs what your company makes.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:42 am
carol do you believe in god?
September 12th, 2008 at 1:44 am
RC whats up bro? Hows the mortician life?
September 12th, 2008 at 1:44 am
Craig its just you and me,,no love here..
September 12th, 2008 at 1:45 am
Yes, and in Christ.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:45 am
its cool i gotta work soon i think.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:45 am
I bet the ed schultz show would give us love….Colmes maybe to NYC.No love for the union man
September 12th, 2008 at 1:46 am
0755
September 12th, 2008 at 1:46 am
I was just curious because of previous post he made about Jesus.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:47 am
Geez Bob, wrong again! Republicans do care about the normal person. They want to get the government off their backs and let them achive greatness.
Sorry, I forgot, you’re a union man. You need a safety net to to protect your fellow members whether they do their job or not. Trikle down Economics does work.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:47 am
lol on the 14th
September 12th, 2008 at 1:48 am
Craig, read it again. I’m in there. :-)
September 12th, 2008 at 1:49 am
Walt when did they work?Ask the auto workers.But to you they are scum.The american worker is scum to you walt.I beT you cant change your own oil.LOL
September 12th, 2008 at 1:50 am
“RC whats up bro? Hows the mortician life?”
LoL.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:51 am
Republicans are no friend of the working man.Just out to scare religion man.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:51 am
“They want to get the government off their backs and let them achive greatness.”
They talk a good game, but don’t really practice what they preach. And the problem with the voodoo trickle is this: consumer spending is the engine of the economy. And if people aren’t spending, it doesn’t matter if anyone’s investing.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:55 am
walt u crack me up….
September 12th, 2008 at 1:56 am
I had give you a litle RC…
September 12th, 2008 at 1:56 am
Well you know what that Good Book says: tis better to give than to receive. Heh.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:58 am
i will say this about the union, its an umbrella that protects all good and bad. and bob will agree there are some that dont deserve the protection that is provided. its not prefect but im glad im in a union.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:58 am
Walt here is reality.Craig and I with our retirement will be on the third base line at Busch stadium talikng about the old days while you hope you IRA comes through.I hope that for every working person.As a union man I will fight for everyone to have the same.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:59 am
Rc Craig and I have been battleing hard tonight.we could have used you help…
September 12th, 2008 at 2:00 am
u know it bob……but i wont pay for that 10 dollar beer. lol
September 12th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Mary,Cheryl,epiphany…
September 12th, 2008 at 2:02 am
Bob, Your right for a change! I can’t change my oil and don’t want to. I go to an expert! Why are you taking jobs away from the after market that services our automobiles? Thank goodness for the after market! The US auto workers kept demanding more and more wages and benefits while producing a poorer quality product and the after market blossomed to serve the consumer needs. Meanwhile, foreign automakers kept producing a better quality product and now lead the world. I drove American made autos for many years and paid dearly for the poor quality. Now I drive a Lexus and after five years and 45,000 miles, it just keeps running great!
The US no longer dominates in auto sales. Sadly, just like the railroads, a once great industry was brought to its knees by your unions.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:04 am
I think we often forget that corporations are legal fictions. They’re created by law to protect people who put a lot of beans into one pot to foster the growth of capital-intensive industry. And that’s all well and good. But that’s not a license to exploit the working man like slaves, which is why we need unions.
Sure, there’s always a bum in the shop. But the alternative is exponentially worse. As the early history of Robber-Baron capitalism amply demonstrates.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:07 am
Walt you bought their SUVS like we all did.See ya on the thrd base line.No wait you will be at wal-mart greetin folks.Craig pass me a beer…
September 12th, 2008 at 2:07 am
Rc you are very true.You also keep me in check.My company is the main reason I have done well.My union has dealt me the goods.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:09 am
Craig ask RC where he is from?
September 12th, 2008 at 2:09 am
Lincoln has surpassed lexus…
September 12th, 2008 at 2:10 am
Most people ask what planet I’m from. (Usually when they say that I conclude I must be doing something right.)
September 12th, 2008 at 2:12 am
RC, you are right! Consumer spending drives the economy. Guess what! Consumers don’t waste their hard earned money on poor quality products.
It sounds like all that you and Bob and Craig care about are your union benefits, not about producing a quality product that consumers will buy. Could this be why some companies are ‘outsourcing’ to other countries?
Hey guys, I hope you’re close to retirement age. Suggestion: take all the money in a lump sum because your benefits may disappear if your company goes under. Like I mentioned earlier, remember Pan-Am.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:13 am
I don’t believe in retirement, and I’m not in a union. But I do believe in quality products. That’s why I bought a Toyota and drove it for 17 years.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:16 am
Cant buy anything if you dont make any money.That why nobody is buying anything,
September 12th, 2008 at 2:18 am
Walt,
a once great industry was brought to it’s knees by Wall Street demands for greater profits.
The Germans have some of the strongest unions in the world, and one of the world’s most successful auto industries.
How you do explain that?
September 12th, 2008 at 2:18 am
Walt I agree with you.No higher wages nobody buys anything.Who will buy these 40,000 toyotas…
September 12th, 2008 at 2:19 am
Bob, I’ve supported 5 different Jeeps from 1985-2003. Enough is enough! One day, while waiting to get my 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee, Orvis Edition out of the shop for the last time, I asked the shop owner (who I’d been spending way too much time and money with) what was the best car to own that was the most reliable. He immediately said “Lexus”! I sold the Jeep and I haven’t seen him since. Maybe he really meant Lincoln. Naw!
September 12th, 2008 at 2:19 am
wait im the reason why theres outsourcing… walt ur a genius, poor quality in the auto industry is the workers fault.. wow coming from a republican that spouts country first and drives a lexus.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:20 am
Bob, newsflash! Your buddy RC buys ‘foreign’ cars!
September 12th, 2008 at 2:21 am
I am out bros.RC take care…Egg sandwhich bacon and chilly.A home made slinger is what we call it here in the midwest.Walt hope to see you here again.Be good bro and God bless..
September 12th, 2008 at 2:22 am
I think Detroit’s problems all stem from the cars they designed. The 1908 Model T got 14-18 mpg. So does the 2008 Hummer. The only advancements they’ve made amount to accessories. Today’s cars have 12-way adjustable seats and climate control and GPS. But they still burn as much fuel as cars from a century ago. A century ago! It’s just inconceivable.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Lexus walt…You aint a working man .That why you hate us.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:24 am
JPW: Are you referring to Mercedes? We owned a 300SE that my wife drove. That was another piece of junk and super expensive to service! That was another repair person that knew us by first name. Now she drives a Toyota and our home is much happier!
September 12th, 2008 at 2:24 am
I agree rc.The people who built them has no say in the way they are built.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Later Bob. Be well.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:25 am
be good bros.walt c ya soon..
September 12th, 2008 at 2:26 am
later bob see ya at the meeting
September 12th, 2008 at 2:26 am
dammit i want a slinger
September 12th, 2008 at 2:27 am
Bob, Au contrair! I am a working man! I just don’t have to depend on the union to protect my job. I don’t hate you bro, I just feel that you are misguided. I actually did belong to a union a long time ago. I was only 17 and saw what a scam it was. The union leaders could care less about the rank and file. They used us and they’re using you. You guys whine about what CEOs earn; have you checked lately about how much your leadership is making on the backs of you and your brothers and sisters? You might be surprised!
September 12th, 2008 at 2:29 am
Good night all,
It looks like I took you all on in the arena of ideas and you ran out of steam.
I’ll be back. This is way too much fun.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:44 am
Walt,
I couldn’t care less about what you or your wife drive. I just wanted you to answer the question.
Why does Germany, which has some of the strongest unions in the world, have one of the biggest auto industries in the world?
September 12th, 2008 at 2:47 am
Oh and Walt,
How many Union bosses do you know who get paid this sort of cash?
When you come back to planet earth, let us know. We’ll help you acclimatize to the real world.
The 10 highest-paid CEOs for 2007
1. Larry Ellison, Oracle Corp., $84.6 million
2. John Thain, Merrill Lynch & Co., $83.1 million
3. Leslie Moonves, CBS Corp., $67.6 million
4. Richard Adkerson, Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc., $65.3 million
5. Bob Simpson, XTO Energy Inc., $56.6 million
6. Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., $54.0 million
7. Kenneth Chenault, American Express Co., $51.7 million
8. Eugene Isenberg, Nabors Industries Ltd., $44.6 million
9. John Mack, Morgan Stanley, $41.7 million
10. Glenn Murphy, Gap Inc., $39.1 million
September 12th, 2008 at 2:53 am
Just as Walt, I cruise thru this site for entertainment, certainly not for info or a good debate. No matter what thread you go to here, every other post is about how Sarah Palin in not experienced and not qualified to be the Vice-President. Alan Colmes lead-offs here are as ignorant and misleading as the crap he spews on H&C everynight.
You libs either have a really good sense of humor or you are just dumb as a sack of rocks. SARAH PALIN IN RUNNING FOR VICE-PRESIDENT .. NO 2 ON THE TICKET. OBAMA IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT .. NO 1 ON THE TICKET. Do you really want to get into a peeing contest about qualified or experience when OBAMA IS RUNNING FOR THE NO 1 SPOT?
By constantly saying Sarah Palin is not qualified to be Vice-President you are just high-lighting Obama’s non-experience and non-qualifications to be President. Obama is not even qualified to be Vice-President.
But I hope you keep it up all the way to November, because it is sure working for us.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:13 am
What I love most about being a Liberal is my political philosophy allows me to embrace my deep love for Christ and respect for the Holy Word while whole-heartedly accepting a tolerant perspective to the contradictory faiths and lifestyles around the country and world.
Being a liberal finds strength in providing from the bottom up. It encourages responsibility, as well as charity.
Being a liberal allows me to vote for Barack Obama. A brillant man who has dedicated his life to liberal ideals, but never to the point of non-concession to conservative wisdom.
Being a liberal lets me expemplify my values without ostracization.
Because we may not always be right, but we’ll get there first.
I sure do love being a liberal.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:23 am
Hey Mickey,
Thanks for your contribution and those caps certainly help reinforce your point brilliantly.
Maybe you’ve had your head stuck in the sand for the last three months, but the reason Sarah Palin’s experience is brought up is because Mac the Strife kept harping on at us all about how important experience when choosing your leaders.
And then he chooses someone, who boasts of being a hockey mom, as if that’s a suitable qualification for a VP.
I agree that experience wouldn’t be as important if you were exceptionally talented individual, but Mrs Palin clearly doesn’t fall into that category.
And before you go off on one about liberal bias, I’m an independent.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:27 am
While most people can’t answer what the Bush Doctrine is unless you’re a student of political science, very keen on the issues, a politician with foreign policy experience (like a Senator…) or the media-
MOST PEOPLE AREN’T RUNNING FOR VICE PRESIDENT.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:29 am
I love how Fixated the left is on Governor Sarah Palin, the Vice Presidential Nominee………Running a little scared???? LOLOL
To Bad Joe Biden wasn’t a little bit more exciting, Huh.All he brings to the table is one big Gaffe after another…….. Trust me when I say Nothing he says is worrying the Republicans.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:29 am
After hearing Palin’s replies to Gibson’s questions, I feel strongly that it is Maccain who should think of changing his Sidekick.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:35 am
I think McCain should just change his views since she’s running the show now.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:38 am
Well I know exactly what the Bush Doctrine is, because…we because I post on political websites…Noel for President?
Alan answered it best today (and it’s obvious)
Obama is first black president of harvard legal review.
Obama’s community service at 23-26 is revealing.
Obama has written disertations and published peer-reviewed papers on every subject in American politics.
Obama has been in over 20 national debates with the biggest and brightest. -And won.
Obama has met with almost every major world leader and worked with others.
General Petraeus has acknowledged Obama’s extremely impressive grasp on international affairs.
Obama has run an honorable campaign on the issues.
Obama’s record testifies to his decision making, arguably he has been right on every issue in the last 4 years. (Kind of makes me wish he ran with Kerry.)
Obama will defeat McCain in this month’s debate.
Anyone who even suggests that Obama is in anyway somewhat not qualified has an agenda other than facts and truth.
Agendas like that kill American soldiers, destroy American families, and tear our country apart in a selfish, disconcerned, cynical salvo of Karl Rove politics.
Sarah Palin -who I’m sure is a very nice lady- can not…must not (God help us) become president if McCain dies in office.
In the end…we all get what we deserve.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:43 am
JPW, I don’t think union leadership has to report their income and expenses like the corporate CEOs do. Have you asked? Be careful, you may disappear like Jimmy Hoffa.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:54 am
Hey JPW:
“Thanks for your contribution and those caps certainly help reinforce your point brilliantly.” You are welcome. I used the caps because I thought if I yelled you would hear my point.
“Maybe you’ve had your head stuck in the sand for the last three months, but the reason Sarah Palin’s experience is brought up is because Mac the Strife kept harping on at us all about how important experience when choosing your leaders.” I will try it again softly. Palin is running for Veep and McCain is running for President. Obama is running for President. McCain was refering to Obama’s lack of experience to become President, not Vice-President. That would be Joe Biden.
“And then he chooses someone, who boasts of being a hockey mom, as if that’s a suitable qualification for a VP.” You forgot the part about City Council, 2 term Mayor, Chair of the Oil & Gas Commission, and 2 years as Governor of Alaska. Guess those things slipped by you. She is well qualified to be Vice-President and more qualified than Obama to be President. That’s not rocket science, just common sense.
“I agree that experience wouldn’t be as important if you were exceptionally talented individual, but Mrs Palin clearly doesn’t fall into that category.” Tell me how she clearly doesn’t fall into that category. You don’t know that, it is just your opinion. I don’t think Obama is an exceptionally talented individual, he’s just a good bs’er, and that is my opinion. As for talent, her record speaks for itself. And so does his.
“And before you go off on one about liberal bias, I’m an independent.” As am I. And I don’t recall going off on anything about liberal bias, but since, by poll, the majority of Americans believe the media has a liberal bias and they believe it is on the side of Obama and democrats, I will say that I am part of that majority. That’s not rocket science either.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:54 am
Noel,
You sound like a smart person and a well-meaning liberal. I’m curious: have you really thought this through? Do you really feel that government bureaucrats can decide what’s best for you and how you should run your life? What cars you should drive, what food you should eat, how should you raise your family, what schools should your children attend. What is politically correct free speech?
Good grief, these are the same folks that run the Department of Motor Vehicles!
September 12th, 2008 at 4:01 am
Walt, first thanks, and I’m not worried.
We have lived through a Democratic-run government once or twice and I have no complaints.
You can check out my (long overdue for update) blog at Noelgood.blogspot.com
September 12th, 2008 at 4:12 am
Sheesh, is it 4 already? Goodnight, and if you’re wondering, yes, I did say “Thanks but no thanks” for that bridge to nowhere.
Peace.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:15 am
yes, we are doing a hell of a job deciding everything on our own. Great job driving your hummers, eating fast food, letting tv and video games raise your kids, sending your kids to a private school where they waste time on the bible. Hey, atrocities never happen in the free market. I know as soon as everyone heard about Nike employing kids and such we all quit buying Nike. Have fun sending your kid to Mountain Dew High once everything gets all nice and controlled by the private sector.
Liberal bias eh? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRwsk56lN44
September 12th, 2008 at 4:21 am
“Obama is first black president of harvard legal review.” Which proves what?
“Obama’s community service at 23-26 is revealing.” Reveals what? Do a little research on what he did and who he did it for as a community organizer.
“Obama has written disertations and published peer-reviewed papers on every subject in American politics.” I very seriously doubt that. There are 70 year old professors of political science that haven’t done that.
“Obama has been in over 20 national debates with the biggest and brightest. -And won.” Also doubtful. Got sources on that?
“Obama has met with almost every major world leader and worked with others.” Not even true. The few he met was on his 1 week Hollywood trip. Which ones has he worked with?
“General Petraeus has acknowledged Obama’s extremely impressive grasp on international affairs.” If true, I wouldn’t read too much into that. General Petraeus is a professional and he knows what to and what not to say about someone who might become his boss. With Obama’s outlook on the military, I doubt General Petraeus would be happy with Obama as his boss, but I bet he would be very comfortable with John McCain, because he also knows his outlook on the military.
“Obama has run an honorable campaign on the issues.” Total lie. Obama and his people have slung just as much dirt as McCain and his people, probably more.
“Obama’s record testifies to his decision making, arguably he has been right on every issue in the last 4 years. (Kind of makes me wish he ran with Kerry.)” You and Colmes both are dreaming. You say that because you are all liberals. Was he right about the surge? That was an issue in the last 4 years. Was he right when he voted for FISA, which all you libs hate? There’s more.
“Obama will defeat McCain in this month’s debate.” Maybe, maybe not. He don’t do well without a telepromter. That’s why he won’t go to townhall meetings with McCain.
“Anyone who even suggests that Obama is in anyway somewhat not qualified has an agenda other than facts and truth.” So says you, a devoted liberal adn Obama backer. But not true.
“Agendas like that kill American soldiers, destroy American families, and tear our country apart in a selfish, disconcerned, cynical salvo of Karl Rove politics.” Just crap .. more liberal talking points.
“Sarah Palin -who I’m sure is a very nice lady- can not…must not (God help us) become president if McCain dies in office.” You finally got something right. She is a very nice lady. And a very qualified lady.
“In the end…we all get what we deserve.” Yes, we will and I imagine it will be McCain/Palin. At least, I hope so. But then, I am a devoted independant voting for who I think is best to run this country.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:29 am
Palin right on Bush Doctrine, ABC NEWS doesn’t even know what it means
Weekly Standard ^ | 9-12-08 | Richard Starr
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/09/what_exactly_is_the_bush_doctr.asp#more
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
September 12th, 2008 at 4:58 am
Noel,
Did you live through the one term Democratic administration of Jimmy Carter? Gas lines, 19% interest rates, Americans held hostage in Iran, malaise index? No thanks! Obama is deja vu Carter.
Yes, we managed to survive! I don’t want to go back to those days.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:59 am
Thank you Vince! You are a voice of reason. I sense that most of the posters will ignore your well documented reply and go back to personal attacks and leftist talking points.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:03 am
Laser,
If you need to have someone else run your life and make decisions for you, why don’t you join the military. Oops… they may not accept you. OK, plan B: move to a country like North Korea or Cuba or Russia. They’ll gladly tell you how to behave!
September 12th, 2008 at 5:07 am
Walt: Their dedication to always being against America would be cute if they themselves weren’t Americans.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:31 am
Rudy was funny H&C tonight. Poor Alan “how can you mock community organizers”.. you came off so whiney and small.
Too bad Rudy didn’t raise the fact that Alan distorted her God quote.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:49 am
Everyone making excuses for Sarah Palin not know what the Bush Doctrine is should be ashamed. It’s the Bush Doctrine, for crying out loud! Have you forgotten that the cornerstone of the President’s foreign policy was preventive war? Preemptive strikes? Palin sounded like that kid at the debate who didn’t know the answer but desperately said all the talking points she could remember to try and get a C. That’s *not* the leadership we need, not now, not ever.
I really hope I don’t hear any criticism that this interview “too hard” for her. Being the President *is* hard. She’s not fit to be President, and deep down, I bet you know it. McCain/Palin is a trainwreck of a ticket.
McCain/Palin: Ticket to Nowhere
September 12th, 2008 at 5:58 am
ABC
Defining the Bush Doctrine [Greg Pollowitz]
The left is going bananas over Governor Palin’s answer to Gibson’s “Bush Doctrine” question. Andy McCarthy has a good post on it over in the Corner, but I thought I’d add a little history of the “Bush Doctrine” using the search function at NYTimes.com. The term “Bush Doctrine” looks to have been used for the first time, post 9/11, in mid-November:
A senior administration official said Mr. Bush’s speech would be a fleshing out of what the White House calls the Bush Doctrine — the assertion that nations that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves.
In January 2002, the editors of the Times wrote:
Mr. Bush appears to be developing an assertive new military doctrine that includes the threat of armed intervention against nations that are developing weapons that may put the United States in peril. The evolving Bush Doctrine implies a preemptive use of conventional force to take out missile launchers, industrial enterprises and facilities that appear to be involved in the fabrication of unconventional weapons. This is a radical departure from what went before. Traditionally, the United States has employed its military forces in retaliation for an attack rather than striking first itself. That should not preclude other options when there is a clear and present danger of attack, but firing first is not a step to be taken lightly.
By March, the “Bush Doctrine” had expanded yet again to include regime change:
In the tug of war between the go-get-’em, nuke-brandishing civilians of the Pentagon and the coalition-minded pragmatists of the State Department, conservatives are now convinced Mr. Bush’s sympathies are gung-ho. The Weekly Standard, which has overcome personal strains with Mr. Bush to become something like the president’s conservative superego, has taken to calling this ”The Bush Doctrine.”
”On tactics, he may be listening to Colin Powell,” said Norman Podhoretz, the influential conservative editor and author. ”But he’s very clear as to his strategic objectives — not just to clean up Al Qaeda cells but to effect regime changes in six or seven countries and to create conditions which would lead to internal reform and modernization in the Islamic world.”
In September, the Times had an editorial titled, “Bush Doctrine,” based on the National Security Strategy paper submitted to Congress. An excerpt:
The tension between idealism and realism in foreign policy runs through America history, and the fault lines are evident in Mr. Bush’s policy statement. The paper — a policy summation that every president is required to submit to Congress — seems in some sections to be animated by the most enlightened and constructive impulses of the land of Jefferson, Lincoln and the Marshall Plan. It dedicates the nation to extending the benefits of freedom, democracy, prosperity and the rule of law to struggling countries around the globe. Mr. Bush speaks eloquently in an introductory letter about working with other nations to combat disease and alleviate poverty, and he reaffirms his determination to increase American foreign aid.
At other points, the paper sounds more like a pronouncement that the Roman Empire or Napoleon might have produced. Given Mr. Bush’s lone-wolf record on matters like global warming, and the nature of the issues he now faces, including a looming confrontation with Iraq, it is clear these combative attitudes will be driving Washington policy in the months ahead. The boys in Lubbock may want to pause before signing on for the overly aggressive stance Mr. Bush has outlined.
This, I believe, is the September 2002 that Charlie Gibson refers to in his interview. Gibson only referred to the preemption aspect of it, but the human rights and regime changes aspects are as important. Gibson never mentioned this in his little snarky lecture to Gov. Palin.
By April, 2003, we have President Bush admitting he’s not quite sure what the “Bush Doctrine” actually is:
Mr. Bush’s overt use of diplomatic pressure against Syria and Iran, two countries that Mr. Bush has identified as sponsors of terrorism, is in stark contrast to the use of preemptive force against Iraq.
Yet at one point in his interview, Mr. Bush acknowledged that he had yet to fully form the ”Bush doctrine,” or to think through how the American victory in Iraq would affect his vow to deal with weapons of mass destruction on a global basis.
In December, we have yet another version of the “Bush Doctrine” as described in the book America Unbound:
Buttressed by extensive research, the authors demonstrate convincingly that Mr. Bush is not the puppet of the vice president or the Defense Department hawks. He has fundamental beliefs that have reversed America’s six-decade commitment to internationalism. His foreign policy for the 21st century marks a decided preference for unilateralism.
As the authors describe it, his policy rests on two beliefs: ”The first was that in a dangerous world the best — if not the only — way to ensure America’s security was to shed the constraints imposed by friends, allies, and international institutions.” The second belief was that ”an America unbound should use its strength to change the status quo in the world.”
This does not mean that America need always act alone. When unilateral actions seem impossible or unwise, Mr. Bush will seek allies, but not to make decisions that would require their approval. His preferred approach is to seek ad hoc ”coalitions of the willing,” what Richard Haas, a former adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell, has called ”à la carte multilateralism.”
After John Kerry’s defeat in 2005, the “Bush Doctrine” became defined by the left with the buzzwords “preemptive” and “unilateral.” Paul Krugman for example:
On the foreign policy front, the “Bush doctrine” of pre-emption and unilateralism sounded very impressive at first. But Mr. Bush’s tough-guy attitude wasn’t matched by his willingness to commit resources. His administration sought global dominance on the cheap, with an undermanned, underplanned invasion of Iraq that has, indeed, transformed the balance of power in the Middle East – in favor of Iran.
In December 2006, Gary Hart wrote this in defense of Barack Obama:
His inherent internationalism causes him to ponder why, five years after 9/11 and 15 years after the end of the cold war, the United States “still lacks a coherent national security policy,” rightly finding the Bush doctrine of pre-emption and defeat of evil in the world wanting.
In January 2007, there’s this description:
In a sense, it was an extraordinary retreat by Bush – and not just because Fatah and Hamas killing each other daily makes a plan for new talks surreal. More, it winds the United States deeper into the whorls of process, and goes against the Bush doctrine that democratization of the Middle East starts with the defeat of terrorism.
September 2007:
None of the leading Republican candidates has been willing to articulate anything like a new direction for how to confront terrorism or what to do in Iraq, despite the fact that the Bush doctrine of forcibly spreading democracy has been widely deemed a failure, even by a sizable chunk of Republicans.
From the Times review of Norman Podhoretz’s World War IV:
Mr. Podhoretz, however, remains an ardent supporter of the Bush doctrine of unilateral action, pre-emptive war and the exportation of democracy to the Middle East.
So, it’s easy to see why there might be a little confusion on what exactly Charlie Gibson was getting at when he asked about the “Bush Doctrine.” Except for the Times, of course. It’s crystal clear for them. Here’s how they wrote up the Palin interview:
In the interview Thursday, Palin:
— Appeared unsure of the Bush doctrine — essentially that the United States must help spread democracy to stop terrorism and that the nation will act pre-emptively to stop potential foes.
Asked whether she agreed with that, Palin said: ”In what respect, Charlie?” Gibson pressed her for an interpretation of it. She said: ”His world view.” That prompted Gibson to say ”no, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war” and describe it to her.
Here’s what Gibson actually said, however:
The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self defense. That we have the right to a premptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us.
Not only was Charlie Gibson wrong about what was enunciated in September 2002, Gov. Palin was 100% correct in asking what the heck he was babbling about as well as 100% correct in what she said.
09/11 10:28 PM
September 12th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Hey Mickey
“You are welcome. I used the caps because I thought if I yelled you would hear my point.”
If a point is worth listening to, I’ll listen to it. If it’s something I’ve heard a million times before, you can use font size a billion and it won’t make any difference to the debate.
“I will try it again softly. Palin is running for Veep and McCain is running for President. Obama is running for President. McCain was refering to Obama’s lack of experience to become President, not Vice-President. That would be Joe Biden.”
There is no need to be patronizing, Mickey a well read ten year old gets your point. My point is, and I’ll say it at normal speed because I’m not questioning your intellect, is that either experience is important or it isn’t. Mac’s words say it is and his actions say it isn’t. The reason Palin is being considered as VP and potential President is because Mac the Strife looks like the walking dead and has a history of cancer. Consequently there is a far greater probability that he will die, and the hockey mum will take charge.
If Obama was 72 and had a history of battling terminal diseases, then Biden would given the same once over.
“You forgot the part about City Council, 2 term Mayor, Chair of the Oil & Gas Commission, and 2 years as Governor of Alaska. Guess those things slipped by you. She is well qualified to be Vice-President and more qualified than Obama to be President. That’s not rocket science, just common sense.”
No, I didn’t forget that all. That has been at the forefront of mind ever since it was announced that she was the nominee. I know as do you, that there must be literally dozens if not hundreds of republicans with a more impressive resume than that and they haven’t been chosen.
Call my old fashioned, but the American people deserve the best there is. Tha’s not rocket science. That’s common sense.
Palin spent her first college semester at Hawaii Pacific College, transferring in 1983 to North Idaho College and then to the University of Idaho. She attended Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska for one term, returning to the University of Idaho to complete her Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism, graduating in 1987.[16][17]
In 1988, she worked as a sports reporter for KTUU-TV in Anchorage, Alaska.[18] She also helped in her husband’s commercial fishing family business.
It’s not my opinion. It’s based upon an analysis of the facts. Is her resume that of a clearly exceptional person, Mickey? Is her resume that of the most talented Republican available?
Give me a break, I have a more impressive resume than that.
“I don’t think Obama is an exceptionally talented individual, he’s just a good bs’er, and that is my opinion. As for talent, her record speaks for itself. And so does his.”
I completely agree, Mickey.
As am I. And I don’t recall going off on anything about liberal bias, but since, by poll, the majority of Americans believe the media has a liberal bias and they believe it is on the side of Obama and democrats, I will say that I am part of that majority. That’s not rocket science eithe
Which poll Mickey? Can you be a little more specific?
September 12th, 2008 at 7:01 am
“Do you really feel that government bureaucrats can decide what’s best for you and how you should run your life?”
You’re thinking of the Soviet Union, which no longer exists. The rest of us are about to elect a president for the United States of America.
So, relax, no one’s going to tell your dog what dog food it can eat.
“Good grief, these are the same folks that run the Department of Motor Vehicles!”
And the folks at DMV are looking pretty good compared the last 8 years of corporate failures and malfeasance committed by senior executives who are either thieves or dunderheads.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:26 am
if bush wanted to rid the world of extremism he should hae started with himself!
September 12th, 2008 at 8:18 am
From my vantage point, Palin’s “Bush Doctrine” moment was no more remarkable that Obama’s “Iran is just a small country. Can’t hurt anybody.”
To those of you who simply must publish a book on these message boards, I must tell you that most people only read a few short sentences of any one post. You’d get more bang for your buck if you unloaded your message in one sentence.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:21 am
John McSame did not have a flag lapel pin today. Why does he hate America?
September 12th, 2008 at 9:57 am
This Sarah thing is way overblown. I believe it all boils down to; she’s running on the Republican ticket. Do we/you want four more years of a Republican administration?
September 12th, 2008 at 10:20 am
“A McCain-Palin TV ad accuses Obama of being “disrespectful” of Palin, but it distorts quotes to make the case.”
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/belittling_palin.html
September 12th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Well, at least she can see Russia from an island in Alaska. Now there’s intelligent foreign policy knowledge for you. It’s past funny, this extreme right wing element of the GOP ticket is downright scary! The dumbing down of America may well be complete if these two win. Sad.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Who can quote the Bush doctrine? Gibson spouted off his version. In the west coast version of the interview it was changed.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
It looks like she’s picking a fight with Russia. God help us.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Someone needs to remind Obama that he is running against John McCain. You Dems will lose huge if you don’t get it figured out who you are running against. Of course, the way it looks you are running against McCain but afraid of Palin. Amazing how much hatred you can spew out at a woman who is not YOUR woman.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
My daughters high school class can give more competent answers, sad.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
I think Obama has lost his way…first he was running against Bush. He realized he wasn’t…now he thinks he is running against Palin. Will someone please tell Obama he is running against McCain.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Working Mom…
At least two of us get it.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
TDro,
Don’t be so dramatic she (Palin) Isn’t picking a fight with Russia.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Working Mom and Perry,
While you guys are wrong about Pamela (and I sincerly hope you will see the light and change your unpatriotic, America hating views about her) You are right about this.
It is time to change the focus back to McCain/Obama away from Palin. She has distracted us long enough, almost no one knew who in the world she was, and she is so much more offensive to most of us liberals than McCain that it was easy to get caught up with her.
But it is time to refocus on who is the presidential candidate we are running against, and not the VP, or we are going to lose.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Um Cara…
I don’t think you’re sarcastic any longer. Typical lib…you know nothing about me except who I will vote for and that causes me to be unpatriotic and hate filled towards America. The irony…you have correctly described yourself. Read your threads and answer the question…why are you so angry?
We agree on one thing…Obama will lose because he simply has no ideas, just rhetoric.
September 12th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Perry,
For crying out loud, the whole Pamela Anderson thread was obviously posted by Alan to lighten things up on a Friday. Stop being so serious.
And you almost never see a liberal telling a conservative that they hate their country, it’s always the other way around, and over something as silly as Pamela Anderson? Obviously it was a joke. Mellow out. You don’t hate America, and neither do I.
Happy friday Perry!
September 12th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Wow…ALAN..I have lost all respect for you now. THE BUSH DOCTRINE!!!??? Are you kidding me?? Gibson even got her qoute wrong and said it was an exact qoute! Did you ever listen to Kennedy? Wow, it’s not even worth arguing this one. You guys are pathetic and so desperate.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Yeah lighten up Perry.
You guys take everything so serious. It’s a medically proven fact that people who get all riled up about the littlest thing live shorter, more stress filled lives.
Just take a deep breath, chill out with a beer and imagine Pammy and Sarah getting all fruity for your viewing pleasure.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Why are liberals so angry and dumb? Do they do this on purpose or just have some birth defect? They’re real creepy looking too, does that have something to do with it? Alan looks like a funeral director, a pedaphile and a tri-lamb all in one! The comments on this board are lies and jealousy. Wow…it’s sad.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
http://WWW.IDIOTSFOROBAMA.COM
http://WWW.SARAHVP.COM
IT’S OVER LIBERALS! FINALLY!
September 12th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Hey Johnny,
We all saw the interview with our own eyes. It don’t matter how many exclamation marks or caps you start going crazy with, or how many insults you start throwing around. The evidence is there for all to see. She had no idea what she was talking about.
And how could she? She’s only been cramming this stuff for the last week or so.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Do you have a girlfriend Johnny?
September 12th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
I just listened to Limbaugh go on about how Charlie was being unfair to Sara. This is a no questions asked blunder on the McCain camp’s side. Pull off your blinders if you’re thinking anything but: “And this could be our Vice President!?!”
I could call this Johnny fellow above this post a rather sad example and how jaded and hateful this crap gets.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
JPW and Cara…
Believe me, I’m not stressed. Calm as good be. Obama and Biden are your problem.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
sp not only doesn’t have any ideas, she also doesn’t have any rhetoric! could she repeat gibson’s name another time.no wonder they kept her under raps for two weeks, try two years!
September 12th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Susan March
Get used to it…Madam Vice President. If we can say Madam Speaker…
September 12th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Obama’s negative ads are all backfiring on him. LOL
September 12th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
If anyone who was really interested in the TRUTH they would check for themselves and find out there is no such thing as a “Bush Doctrine”. There are 4 things that the media has labeled that way and the one on the date Charlie Gibson gave was not what he thought it was
so the fact that Sarah Palin didn’t know what he was talking about shouldn’t be a surprise since Mr. Gibson didn’t know either.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Her performance during this interview was so bad it was down right embarrassing – but yet cons are still trying to say it was good! This woman is a complete moron – an embarrassment to the United States of America!
September 12th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
September 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
JPW: This poll
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/69_say_reporters_try_to_help_the_candidate_they_want_to_win
Here’s another poll .. one on experience.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080912/
ap_on_el_pr/campaign_ap_poll
September 13th, 2008 at 3:32 am
As a mere observe to this hugely entertaining election, I have to say that Mrs Palin really didn’t sound very convincing. Presumably she must be good at something, but it quite obviously isn’t foreign policy.
It’s always amazed me how Republicans seem to have a thing against intelligent, knowledgeable politicians.
In my life time, you’ve had Ronald Reagan, who seemed like a lovely bloke, but certainly not the sharpest knife in the box, Bush the first, to my mind the most clued up and then Bush the 2nd, who we all know find it’s difficult to string a coherent sentence together.
It’s very different here in the UK, regardless of party. Three of the four Prime Ministers before Mr Brown went to Oxford, while Brown studied at Edinburgh University and has a PhD in Political Science.
Does anyone know if this is a conscious strategy on the part of the Republican party or is just a consequence of your electoral system?
September 13th, 2008 at 4:41 am
We don’t need Rush Limbauch’s daughter and Sean Hannity’s sister to run the country.They are both water and smears carrier.Palin’s speech was identical to Hannity’s monologes(hate).Enough!
September 13th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
[...] McCain on budgets and the econony. And Charlie Gibson had to school Sarah Palin, not just on the Bush Doctrine, but also on how how entitlements work. She’s already shown that she doesn’t know [...]
September 13th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Alan is a bitter liberal clinging to his irrational thought and gay rights. Even if you liberals actually make a good point (usually about once a year) it isn’t even believable because you guys lie 99% of the time. So your credibility is gone. Not to mention you’re all idiots and creeps.
September 13th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Gibson schooled Palin? are you idiots smokin crack?? More like he tried and got slam dunked you dopes.
September 13th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Perry,
Believe me, I’m not stressed. Calm as good be. Obama and Biden are your problem.
The point is not who may or may not be ahead in the election. This isn’t a football game. At the end of the day this great republic will stand regardless of who is elected. And regardless of who is elected, not that much is going to change all that quickly, and any excesses will eventually work themselves out. I’m pretty upset about the US torture policy right now, but I have faith that the Supreme Court will deal with that in due time, for example.
I am blessed with good health, a loving family, the ability to support myself and give back to others. So, I’m not stressed either. But whenever I am, it has nothing at all to do with who is ahead or behind in a poll, nor who wins or loses an election.
Pay attention to politics, of course, I respect the fact that you do so, regardless of the fact that I disagree with you on many issues. But don’t let yourself get so worked up about politics – I have even heard Rush Limbaugh say almost the exact same thing. If you don’t respect me enough to listen to my advise, listen to him.
September 13th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Britboy: Britian is falling apart. I dont think we’ll be taking your advice.
September 13th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Vince,
When was the last time you visited part of the U.K.? It at least is not visibly falling apart, so I’m not sure what you are referring to.
Sure the cameras monitoring every move in London is fairly creepy, but damn, at least the Pound seems to be in pretty good shape. It’s unbelievable how expensive it is to get around there with the puny dollar. (which is finally making a rally! go dollar!!)
September 13th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
I wasn’t talking about physical falling apart
It’s falling apart in all other ways. If you have no idea what ii’m talking about, then start reading their papers everyday and you’ll soon figure it out
September 13th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Vince,
I actually do read their papers (not every day, but often enough – I fly through Heathrow a couple times a month, and usually grab The Telegraph and The Guardian, sometimes The Sun for kicks). Their papers are similar to ours, filled with a lot of sensationalism, blood, guts, public scandals. But nothing that would lead me to believe they are falling apart.
Seriously, I have no idea what you are talking about (unless, and if I’m wrong please don’t be insulted, I’m just guessing based on some previous posts you have made, you are referring to the increased Muslim population? In which case I disagree that that is evidence they are falling apart)
September 13th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Britboy,
It’s very different here in the UK, regardless of party. Three of the four Prime Ministers before Mr Brown went to Oxford, while Brown studied at Edinburgh University and has a PhD in Political Science.
Not that I really give a damn about which college someone went to (I went to a public Texas University and yet even I can tie my shoelaces OK on most days)
Or even if they went to college (my Dad didn’t finish, and my Mom never even started, but again, they somehow manage to fumble through life)
But…
Bush I went to Yale
Clinton went to Yale and Oxford (though I don’t hold Oxford against him)
Bush II went to Yale and Harvard
And the two guys running to be President:
Obama went to Columbia and Harvard
McCain went to the U.S Naval Academy (a damn fine school, the equal of any Ivy League)
So what is your freaking point?
September 13th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Um Cara:
Britboy has a point. It seems republicans seem to always vote for their party, regardless of whether their candidate is qualified or what their policies are.
September 13th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
TDRO,
There are ‘party’ people who vote for their party, regardless. I would not say it is limited to the Republican side of the ticket. Democrats, Libertarians, etc… all have people who vote for the party, not the person.
But, regardless, that has nothing to do with which colleges the British PMs went to, which was the point I was questioning Britboy about.
September 13th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
“Britboy has a point. It seems republicans seem to always vote for their party, regardless of whether their candidate is qualified or what their policies are.”
Which explains the stunning Republican victory over the Democrats in 2006
dumbass
September 13th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Vince and Um Cara,
Thanks very much for taking the time to respond. Vince, I’m not sure what you mean about falling apart. Of course like any industrialised nation we have our share of economic and social problems, but ours is a thriving multicultural society with much going for it. As I’m sure you are well aware, it is unwise to believe everything you read in the newspapers.
Um Cara, I don’t for one second believe that a university education qualifies you for high political office. It was merely an example. Nor do I want to get into an argument about the merits of your universities over ours, although I doubt Mr Clinton would be ashamed of attending one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious institutions of learning. I’d also argue that the fact Mr Bush Junior attended both Yale and Harvard, underlines the fact that anyone with sufficient cash can get into your top colleges, while a place in ours isn’t quite so easily bought.
My question, which I obviously didn’t make clear enough first time, is does the Republican party purposely choosing candidates who are demonstrably inferior to other options. Is it an actual party policy or the just the vagaries of the electoral system?
I wasn’t making a freaking point. I was simply asking a question.
September 13th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
“My question, which I obviously didn’t make clear enough first time, is does the Republican party purposely choosing candidates who are demonstrably inferior to other options.”
Well I think your premise is without foundation.
This years nominee, John McCain, was the one LEAST favored by the average conservative.
He won because of the way the Republican Party conducts its primary elections.. which is a winner-take-all system where all the votes of a State go to the person who has the majority vote in that State.
Due to a lot of cross-over voting in early states, many non-Republicans were involved iwht McCain early victories.
The hack Mike Huckabee staying in the race despite his zero chance of ever winning , prevented Mitt Romney from being able to win enough votes to seriously challenge McCain.. after a few weeks. the numbers made it impossible for anyone to beat McCain. The Republican primary was over in weeeks.
However to suggest McCain is inferior to Obama on any measure is a case you’ll have to make if you want to be seriously.
September 13th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Thanks Vince,
But regarding the initial candidates, who chooses them or do they choose themselves? What I’m trying to get my head around is how do you become a candidate? What are the criteria? Are they vetted by the party beforehand or can anyone within the party with the necessary resources throw their hat into the ring?
Apologies if this is a stupid question with an obvious answer.
September 13th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Britboy,
If you are merely questioning whether the Republican party is choosing candidates who are demonstrably inferior to other options, and you do not believe that a university education qualifies you for high political office, then why bring it up in the first place?
And yes, obviously Oxford is a fantastic school, had I the opportunity to have attended it I would have never thought twice about it, I would have gone in a heartbeat – I was being pissy, because, well, I was pissed.
Regarding your allegation that the rich in the US are able to buy their way into the good schools, while such a unfair practice does not exist (or at least exists to a much less extent) in Oxford:
I did do a quick search where I found that approx. 50% of the people admitted to Oxford and Cambridge were from private schools, which is odd since only 7% of the population attends private schools. But probably in Britain it is different than in the U.S., usually in the U.S. people attending private schools are more affluent, but since affluence does not help get into the incredibly egalitarian Oxford, I assume there must be a representative ratio of rich|poor in the private schools in the U.K.
September 13th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Britboy: The political parties in the United States are almost nothing more than Branding franchises.
Since our Consitution was written before the advent of parties, the election system and government is based on the premise of individuals running against each other.. not parties running against each other.
To get on a ballot, you simply need to meet residence requirements (if any) and , usually, get enough signatures from the community.
I’m not aware of parties having the right to disallow people from running as a member of that party.. but i will admit that I really don’t know … i just never heard of it happening before
September 13th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Someone post the Bush doctrine please.
September 13th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
All Palin had to do was plagiarize from Wikipedia and say this, “The Bush Doctrine is a term used to describe the foreign policy doctrine of United States president George W. Bush, enunciated in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.”
Duh. We can attack whoever we want to if we think they are dangerous and if they attack us! Take this from an 18 year old who doesn’t get stumpled as much as Palin. Jeez, this makes me think even I can run for V.P. just like any other idiot is.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
correction:
stumped* — I meant.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
In a series of speeches in late 2001 and 2002, President Bush expanded on his view of American foreign policy and global intervention, declaring that the United States should actively support democratic governments around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating the threat of terrorism, and that the United States had the right to act unilaterally in its own security interests, without the approval of international bodies such as the United Nations.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Thanks Vince,
That’s interesting to know. So in practise anyone with enough money and community support can run for either Democrats or Republicans.
Um Cara,
While success in your society is dictated by wealth, success in ours is dictated by wealth and class. A situation I abhor. I completely agree what you say about Oxford. It’s a bastion of privilege perpetuated by a public school (which you more sensibly call private school) system that provides a better education to those of privilege.
While 50% coming from 7% of private schools is clearly unacceptable, the other 50% come from the “normal” education system. The majority who could never afford the 40 000 dollars a year fee for Harvard.
Both systems are in desperate need of reform, but I will still argue that to attend Oxford or Cambridge you need a record of academic excellence more than you need money. And (unless you’re a rower!) you won’t get in regardless of your finances if you don’t have the qualifications.
Thank you both for taking the time to respond again.
September 14th, 2008 at 4:15 am
liberal losers
September 14th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
WOW..WAS THAT A LIBERAL WHO GOT IT RIGHT? IM SHOCKED. THERE IS NO “BUSH DOCTRINE” THAT COULDN’T OF BEEN AN HONEST LIBERAL, AS THERE IS NO SUCH THING. BUT IT’S FUNNY TO WATCH IDIOTS THINK CHARLES GIBSON WAS GREAT AND PALIN WASN’T, ESPECIALLY ON THAT QUESTION. WHAT’S FUNNIER IS THE LIBERAL IDIOTS ON THIS BOARD WHO STILL DON’T REALIZE THAT THERE IS NO “BUSH DOCTRINE” THE PATHETIC MEDIA AGAIN HAS EXPOSED LIBERALS AS TRUE IDIOTS WHO ARE ANGRY, STUPID AND SO FAR OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE REAL WORLD.
September 14th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
There is no Bush doctrine. That was a liberal media invention. Now there for sure is a Monroe doctrine. Sorry lefties. Duh. There is no Bush doctrine.
September 14th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
((( Version(s) of so-called Bush Doctrine)))
CHARLIE GIBSON WITH (D) DASHEL in (2001):
Bush also outlined what is being called,
(The Bush Doctrine), a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.)
Then CHARLIE GIBSON said to 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.)))
CHARLIE GIBSON INTERVIEWING GOV. PALIN (SEPT-2008):
QUESTION: GIBSON: No, what is the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war?
PALIN ANSWER :
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.
GIBSON DEFINITION (SEPT- 2008): 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.
___________________________________________________________
Gibson 2001 Bush Doctrine: A promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.)
Gov. Palin 2008 Bush Doctrine: What President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation.
Sounds like Gov. Palin agreed with Charlie,,,,, at least with the 2001 Gibson media version of so called Bush Doctrine. Hmmmmm. There have been various versions of media created Bush Doctrine(s). Pick one you prefer depending on the situation, like Charlie did.
Hugh
September 15th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Alan, After 911, the opinion-carriers(Rush,Hannity) were the ones jumping up and down, salivating about the new Bush Doctrine.They took credit for it. Now they are saying there was more than one Bush Doctrine.Actually, Charlie Gibson gave her a specific date.There was only one specific Bush Doctrine for that date.Stop the FOXY NEWS MEDIA.THey are one-standard and MONO-AS(not bi-as and double-standard).
September 15th, 2008 at 11:36 am
legitimate stay at home employment…
…
October 15th, 2008 at 9:02 am