- 2,027
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
what channel is this b_ on?
ELECTION DAY 2008:........... Barack Obama, the next President of the United States of America
- Thread in 'Lounge Archive' Thread starter Started by tbone95860,
- Start date
- 465
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
what channel was/is this interview on?
- 465
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
sorry for the triple post. hopefully a link will be up soon.
- 465
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
what channel was/is this interview on?
- 36,620
- 11,306
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
it was on abc itll be on again or youtube within the hour
- 465
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
what channel was/is this interview on?
- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
The following excerpts are from the ABC News exclusive interview with Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in Fairbanks,Alaska, conducted by "World News" anchor Charlie Gibson on September 11, 2008
Sarah Palin on Experience:
GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you, and it is really the central question. Can you look the countryin the eye and say "I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just vice president, but perhaps president of the United States ofAmerica?"
PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, will be ready.I'm ready.
GIBSON: And you didn't say to yourself, "Am I experienced enough? Am I ready? Do I know enough about international affairs? Do I -- will I feelcomfortable enough on the national stage to do this?"
PALIN: I didn't hesitate, no.
GIBSON: Didn't that take some hubris?
PALIN: I -- I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of beingso committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink.
So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.
GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage in a very dangerous world. When Iasked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact that you have commanded the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close toRussia. Are those sufficient credentials?
PALIN: But it is about reform of government and it's about putting government back on the side of the people, and that has much to do with foreignpolicy and national security issues Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energyindependence that I've been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy,that I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas development in our state to produce more for theUnited States.
GIBSON: I know. I'm just saying that national security is a whole lot more than energy.
PALIN: It is, but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It's that important. It's thatsignificant.
GIBSON: Did you ever travel outside the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?
PALIN: Canada, Mexico, and then, yes, that trip, that was the trip of a lifetime to visit our troops in Kuwait and stop and visit our injured soldiers inGermany. That was the trip of a lifetime and it changed my life.
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gaveyou. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big,fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state.
Sarah Palin on God:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holywar?
PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is,and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but letus pray that we are on God's side.
That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.
IBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential forevery country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights tolife and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.
GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?
PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strongdecision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy pathwhere he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.
Sarah Palin on National Security:
GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.
PALIN: Sure.
GIBSON: Let's start, because we are near Russia, let's start with Russia and Georgia.
The administration has said we've got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgiansovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
PALIN: First off, we're going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him mycommitment, as John McCain's running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exertedsuch pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep...
GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.
PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.
Sarah Palin on Russia:
We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We've learned lessons from that inour relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.
We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it's in their benefit,also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.
GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia.
GIBSON: Because Putin has said he would not tolerate NATO incursion into the Caucasus.
PALIN: Well, you know, the Rose Revolution, the Orange Revolution, those actions have showed us that those democratic nations, I believe, deserve to be inNATO.
Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but...
GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be calledupon and help.
But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to -- especially with new leadership coming in on January 20,being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.
We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.
GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.
PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to becognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.
And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhapsagainst Russia, if this is what it leads to.
It doesn't have to lead to war and it doesn't have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, countingon our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smallerdemocratic countries.
His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that's a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we wereto allow that to happen.
Sarah Palin on Iran and Israel:
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe,yes.
GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he woulduse them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them.So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselvesand for their security.
GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agreewith that.
PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
Sarah Palin on 'the Bush Doctrine':
GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?
PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme and they are violent and they do not believe in American ideals, andthey attacked us and now we are at a point here seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post-9/11 world, where we're able to commit to never again.They see that the only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that allAmericans have instilled in us, because we're a democratic, we are a free, and we are a free-thinking society.
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, ofcourse, 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 againstany other country that 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 todefend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forgingnew, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, alast option.
GIBSON: But, Governor, I'm asking you: We have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistanigovernment.
PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must notblink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.
GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes? That you think we have the right to go across the border withor without the approval of the Pakistani government, to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?
PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. We havegot to have all options out there on the table.
Sarah Palin on Experience:
GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you, and it is really the central question. Can you look the countryin the eye and say "I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just vice president, but perhaps president of the United States ofAmerica?"
PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, will be ready.I'm ready.
GIBSON: And you didn't say to yourself, "Am I experienced enough? Am I ready? Do I know enough about international affairs? Do I -- will I feelcomfortable enough on the national stage to do this?"
PALIN: I didn't hesitate, no.
GIBSON: Didn't that take some hubris?
PALIN: I -- I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of beingso committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink.
So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.
GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage in a very dangerous world. When Iasked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact that you have commanded the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close toRussia. Are those sufficient credentials?
PALIN: But it is about reform of government and it's about putting government back on the side of the people, and that has much to do with foreignpolicy and national security issues Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energyindependence that I've been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy,that I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas development in our state to produce more for theUnited States.
GIBSON: I know. I'm just saying that national security is a whole lot more than energy.
PALIN: It is, but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It's that important. It's thatsignificant.
GIBSON: Did you ever travel outside the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?
PALIN: Canada, Mexico, and then, yes, that trip, that was the trip of a lifetime to visit our troops in Kuwait and stop and visit our injured soldiers inGermany. That was the trip of a lifetime and it changed my life.
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gaveyou. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big,fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state.
Sarah Palin on God:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holywar?
PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is,and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but letus pray that we are on God's side.
That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.
IBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential forevery country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights tolife and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.
GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?
PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strongdecision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy pathwhere he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.
Sarah Palin on National Security:
GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.
PALIN: Sure.
GIBSON: Let's start, because we are near Russia, let's start with Russia and Georgia.
The administration has said we've got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgiansovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
PALIN: First off, we're going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him mycommitment, as John McCain's running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exertedsuch pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep...
GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.
PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.
Sarah Palin on Russia:
We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We've learned lessons from that inour relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.
We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it's in their benefit,also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.
GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia.
GIBSON: Because Putin has said he would not tolerate NATO incursion into the Caucasus.
PALIN: Well, you know, the Rose Revolution, the Orange Revolution, those actions have showed us that those democratic nations, I believe, deserve to be inNATO.
Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but...
GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be calledupon and help.
But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to -- especially with new leadership coming in on January 20,being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.
We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.
GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.
PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to becognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.
And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhapsagainst Russia, if this is what it leads to.
It doesn't have to lead to war and it doesn't have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, countingon our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smallerdemocratic countries.
His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that's a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we wereto allow that to happen.
Sarah Palin on Iran and Israel:
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe,yes.
GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he woulduse them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them.So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don't think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselvesand for their security.
GIBSON: So if we wouldn't second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agreewith that.
PALIN: I don't think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
Sarah Palin on 'the Bush Doctrine':
GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?
PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme and they are violent and they do not believe in American ideals, andthey attacked us and now we are at a point here seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post-9/11 world, where we're able to commit to never again.They see that the only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that allAmericans have instilled in us, because we're a democratic, we are a free, and we are a free-thinking society.
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, ofcourse, 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 againstany other country that 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 todefend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forgingnew, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, alast option.
GIBSON: But, Governor, I'm asking you: We have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistanigovernment.
PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must notblink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.
GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes? That you think we have the right to go across the border withor without the approval of the Pakistani government, to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?
PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. We havegot to have all options out there on the table.
chris boshs neck
Banned
- 2,653
- 26
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
It should be enough to not vote for McCain just because he is a liar, but americans are to dumb to realize he has lied so many times already, at least obama istruthful and gives answers that he thinks about and says stuff that means stuff to him, mccain just says anything to get any sort of advantage...
- 2,027
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
omg, im looking at clips of the interview on abc....and sarah looks contispated....shes done
- 5,712
- 1,019
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2005
- 3,908
- 59
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
wow LOL what a mess.
- 36,620
- 11,306
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
TBone how you think she did?
- 4,974
- 83
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2002
- 465
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
:::grabs popcorn:::
- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
Just a reminder this is coming on CNN & Fox News in 15 minutesOriginally Posted by impalaballa187
Man %+*#! Why the hell does Columbia always keep getting all the damn speakers? Shoulda had it at Cornell
Haven't gotten the chance to see it on TV/video of it but just read that transcript up above....
Didn't seem too bad. No huge mistakes or anything that I noticed/could see.
And Charlie Gibson asked some relatively tough/interesting questions, but I expected that from him considering it's ABC. Just like Bill did the same withObama in the Fox News interview.
Fail.Originally Posted by Raginl3ull
TBONE response: "Oh she did very well...of course she did well shes a republican running next to my man mccain. What did you expect me to say?"
Now you know how conservatives feel when Biden & Obama speak.
Welcome to the party.
- 148
- 25
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
man Im an Obama supporter and I tivoed the Palin interview. I had to turn it off after ten minutes it was so hard to watch. She didnt know what she was talkingabout. If the American public can watch this and feel comfortable with her at VP and McCain, who would pick her, I am truly scared for the future.
- 616
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2005
TBONE response: "Oh she did very well...of course she did well shes a republican running next to my man mccain. What did you expect me tosay?"
- 3,147
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2005
my first comment regarding her interview was based solely on her answers and even then it wasn't a good debut. now i saw the vid, she seems very roboticbasically giving off scripted answers. charlie tried to repeat the question and she just says the same things or just basically ignores it.
- 616
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2005
chris boshs neck
Banned
- 2,653
- 26
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
LOL at her not knowing what the bush doctrine is..... read this to funny
Palin asked about the Bush Doctrine... She doesn't know:
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 isrid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have beenmistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity todo 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 preemptivestrike against any other country that 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 defendour country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.
Palin asked about the Bush Doctrine... She doesn't know:
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 isrid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have beenmistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity todo 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 preemptivestrike against any other country that 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 defendour country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.
- 3,147
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2005
in that clip, charlie gibson's reactions to her answers are like: "this woman is crazy"
- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
The 9/11 Presidential Forum is now on CNN & Fox News.
- 30
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
I spy Leonardo Dicaprio
- 36,620
- 11,306
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
also MSNBC
- 3,170
- 11
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2006
Did This Lady say she wants war with Russia?
Whoa! are we going to borrow money from Russia to fight Russia? The commies? Or are we going to borrow from China?
Whoa! are we going to borrow money from Russia to fight Russia? The commies? Or are we going to borrow from China?