Palin Discussion [split]

[apocolypse]

I'm reading about it online. Talking about how you're ready to be president and insinuating that you're prepared to go to war with Russia over Georgia isn't terribly comforting.

[Max]

Or that no matter what, we should back any war decision Israel makes.

0_0

Without hesitation.

[Cairber]

Ok, she doesn't even know what the Bush Doctrine is. Gibson had to ask three times and then define it for her...


video here

[McC]

It amazes me how she never once actually answers a fucking question. Jesus! This woman is unbelievable!

How the fuck are people falling for this? She comes off as a ranting crazy bitch.

[Superman]

How the fuck are people falling for this? She comes off as a ranting crazy bitch.

She said we might have go to war with Russia if they invade Georgia...

The first time I saw this woman speak, I told my wife she's ten kinds of nuts. Then my wife just kind of said, "well, duh" and turned the channel.

[Metatwaddle]

Holy shit. People are saying Obama isn't qualified and then throwing this idiot up as a viable replacement for an old, sick man?

Or that no matter what, we should back any war decision Israel makes.

0_0

Without hesitation.

*boggle*

I'm really not sure what to say to that.

[CaptainChewbacca]

How the fuck are people falling for this? She comes off as a ranting crazy bitch.

She said we might have go to war with Russia if they invade Georgia...

I understood the question to be 'If Georgia was in NATO and was invaded...' To which she responded we'd be obligated to 'help' them. Which isn't exactly an insane notion.

[Darth Wong]

CC, does it honestly not bother you at all that this woman is running for Vice President of the United States and she is so goddamned politically unaware that she needed someone to explain the Bush Doctrine to her? The overriding doctrine that has governed US foreign policy since 2001, and she needs a media talking head to tell her what it is?

What the fuck does this woman have to do, in order to convince you that she is a small-minded provincialist with no interest in learning about the outside world? Does she have to spit chewing tobacco at the TV camera or something?

[Guardsman Bass]

How the fuck are people falling for this? She comes off as a ranting crazy bitch.

She said we might have go to war with Russia if they invade Georgia...

I understood the question to be 'If Georgia was in NATO and was invaded...' To which she responded we'd be obligated to 'help' them. Which isn't exactly an insane notion.

Didn't she say just before that question that she wanted Georgia in NATO? That means that she's willing to risk open war with Russia if Saakashvili pulls another stupid move. That's not crazy, but it is very reckless.

[Metatwaddle]

Forgive my foreign policy ignorance, but if Georgia were really in NATO, wouldn't we basically have to defend them? I thought NATO alliances were strong enough that we'd have to help a NATO member that was invaded by a foreign power.

Which would seem to be a good reason not to have Georgia in NATO.

[Vympel]

Personally I loved it how she claimed that Russia's invasion of Georgia was "completely unprovoked". What a dumbass.

[Vympel]

Which would seem to be a good reason not to have Georgia in NATO.

You'd think so, wouldn't you? McSame and his provincial little terrier however are quite the raging Russophobes, though, so don't expect rational thought in that regard.

[CaptainChewbacca]

CC, does it honestly not bother you at all that this woman is running for Vice President of the United States and she is so goddamned politically unaware that she needed someone to explain the Bush Doctrine to her? The overriding doctrine that has governed US foreign policy since 2001, and she needs a media talking head to tell her what it is?

Thinking about it, I don't know if I can articulate the Bush doctrine easy. Is it 'We'll get terrorists no matter where they are'? Yeah, she should probably know that one.

What the fuck does this woman have to do, in order to convince you that she is a small-minded provincialist with no interest in learning about the outside world? Does she have to spit chewing tobacco at the TV camera or something?

She's have to do something that TO ME demonstrates a level of perceived racism, homophobia, or religious zealotry that is beyond the norm of someone who's not been in national politics. So far she doesn't seem much different from my own mother, except mom doesn't like guns and she's a bit less openly religious.

Now, if she's still the same way she is now 4 years down the line, I won't vote for her, but I'm not willing to write her off just yet. As a heads-up, I probably won't be back on the board until Sunday, so if you post again asking for more clarification and I don't give it right away, please don't think I'm ducking the issue.

Also, I'll thank you all to refrain from making unkind comments about my mother. Flame me if you want, but don't flame my mom.

[CJvR]

...but if Georgia were really in NATO, wouldn't we basically have to defend them...

Which would seem to be a good reason not to have Georgia in NATO.

Yes, and that is sure a good reason not to include them as long as they have issues with Russia.

Which is why Im a bit surprised at Moscows eagerness to formally separate Ossetia and Abkhasia from Georgia. While there are issues between them Georgia is effectively blocked from joining NATO, allowing Russia to push them around without much fear as shown in the recent war. But if Tiblisi cauterise their wounds and let Moscow have those two shitholes provinces then there will be nothing to prevent NATO from accepting Georgia and moving it's position forwards.

[Darth Wong]

She's have to do something that TO ME demonstrates a level of perceived racism, homophobia, or religious zealotry that is beyond the norm of someone who's not been in national politics. So far she doesn't seem much different from my own mother, except mom doesn't like guns and she's a bit less openly religious.

Now, if she's still the same way she is now 4 years down the line, I won't vote for her, but I'm not willing to write her off just yet. As a heads-up, I probably won't be back on the board until Sunday, so if you post again asking for more clarification and I don't give it right away, please don't think I'm ducking the issue.

Also, I'll thank you all to refrain from making unkind comments about my mother. Flame me if you want, but don't flame my mom.

Oh, that's a good one. Say that you like Sarah Palin because she reminds you of your mommy, and then warn that you don't want anyone to say anything bad about your mommy. Why the fuck did you make a point of mentioning her in relation to Palin's suitability, asshole?

The fact is that intelligent people should not pick people for such high office based on idiotic criteria such as "she's like my mom". And you've really lowered the bar here, haven't you? Instead of demanding evidence that she has made an effort to learn about national-level and international issues, you seem to think that the job of Vice President is some kind of entry-level position, where all you need is to be enthusiastic and to not be a sociopath. It's OK if she has no idea what the fuck she's talking about, because she can get on-the-job training, right? Unbelievable.

According to your dumbshit criteria, virtually anyone is qualified to be president. All he has to do is demonstrate that he's not a raving sociopath, and he's in! Oh yeah, and he has to be like your mom.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Yes, and that is sure a good reason not to include them as long as they have issues with Russia.

Which is why Im a bit surprised at Moscows eagerness to formally separate Ossetia and Abkhasia from Georgia. While there are issues between them Georgia is effectively blocked from joining NATO, allowing Russia to push them around without much fear as shown in the recent war. But if Tiblisi cauterise their wounds and let Moscow have those two shitholes provinces then there will be nothing to prevent NATO from accepting Georgia and moving it's position forwards.

Only issue is whether the current and next leader of Georgia decides to make more chaos by attempting to retake the 2 provinces again and force NATO to do something when Russia responds.

[Gerald Tarrant]

CC, does it honestly not bother you at all that this woman is running for Vice President of the United States and she is so goddamned politically unaware that she needed someone to explain the Bush Doctrine to her? The overriding doctrine that has governed US foreign policy since 2001, and she needs a media talking head to tell her what it is?

Given that President Bush has done many things since the preemptive invasion of Iraq that are not preemptive military action, I think it's fair to ask what someone means by "The Bush Doctrine". There are many foreign policy initiatives that have been a large part of President Bush's policy. One of the principle guiding principles of President Bush's presidency has been a move towards freer trade. Also the continued 6 party North Korea talks have been going on since before the start of President Bush's second term. The diplomatic discussion of Iran has been led primarily by EU member nations. There are at least three different foreign policy directions that President Bush has followed, his early pre-9/11 "no nation building, humble foreign policy" from his campaign promises, his Pre-Iraq bluster, and then the more multilateral approach which has come to dominate the North Korean and Iranian dealings.

Defining what exactly the Bush Doctrine is also gives a more complete answer. Saying it's good, or it's bad is simplistic. Instead saying it's a unilateral, pre-emptive military doctrine, with Wilsonian aims about spreading democracy lets someone responds properly to the weaknesses and strengths of the Bush Doctrine. And of course different people lump different things into it depending on their own personal politics. A Union hack might say Bush Doctrine = Iraq and it's run up + Globalization. Properly defining terminology removes those ambiguities and is a normal part of any debate or good interview.

[K. A. Pital]

Which is why Im a bit surprised at Moscows eagerness to formally separate Ossetia and Abkhasia from Georgia.

Abkhazia and Ossetia have people in them, who are basicaly Russian citizens. Prolonging the status quo would be just delaying the inevitable.

Another thought for you: perhaps the US didn't make a gratious enough offer in exchange for the status-quo and "respect of territorial integrity of Georgia". Just couldn't bargain well enough. Especially as the US declined to bargain over it's little vassal directly.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Oh, that's a good one. Say that you like Sarah Palin because she reminds you of your mommy, and then warn that you don't want anyone to say anything bad about your mommy. Why the fuck did you make a point of mentioning her in relation to Palin's suitability, asshole?

Say what you want about Palin, I was just hoping to avoid 'Then you're mama's a crazy bitch' or anything like that.

The fact is that intelligent people should not pick people for such high office based on idiotic criteria such as "she's like my mom". And you've really lowered the bar here, haven't you? Instead of demanding evidence that she has made an effort to learn about national-level and international issues, you seem to think that the job of Vice President is some kind of entry-level position, where all you need is to be enthusiastic and to not be a sociopath. It's OK if she has no idea what the fuck she's talking about, because she can get on-the-job training, right? Unbelievable.

She ran her town, she ran her state, she got rid of a whole bunch of corruption. She sat on the energy commission, and folks seemed impressed with what she did there, and I happen to like her faith and her Christian values on the broad beam. Bringing in 'her church might think this' or 'she kinda seems like that' won't convince me. Bring me something like 'I hate queers because Jesus said to' and then you'll have something. I don't think she's nearly the inbred, zealous, country bumpkin of a monster you think she is. She couldn't have gotten that far if she was, and I think she'll surprise and impress the lot of you given time.

In the meanwhile, its still 50+ days till election, and while I've got my mind set, I havn't made up my mind yet. We'll see if the shine comes off the buckles between now and then.

[Darth Wong]

CC, does it honestly not bother you at all that this woman is running for Vice President of the United States and she is so goddamned politically unaware that she needed someone to explain the Bush Doctrine to her? The overriding doctrine that has governed US foreign policy since 2001, and she needs a media talking head to tell her what it is?

Given that President Bush has done many things since the preemptive invasion of Iraq that are not preemptive military action, I think it's fair to ask what someone means by "The Bush Doctrine".

The Bush Doctrine was widely discussed and described in the media covering the Iraq War at the time it was beginning. It was always clearly described as a strategic doctrine (like the Monroe Doctrine), and no one who paid attention or read newspapers at the time could seriously think that it was ever supposed to refer to everything President Bush does while he happens to be president.

[SirNitram]

She ran her town, she ran her state, she got rid of a whole bunch of corruption.

Tell me. This 'Corruption'. Was it where she botched eminent domain and left the per-capita debt of the city of Wasilla 3000 dollars in the red, was it where she hired a lobbyist to lobby for the city, was it where she was campaigning vigorously for the bridge to nowhere, where she illegally misused e-mail accounts for business, billed the state for time spent at home, charged rape victims the cost of their kits, violated ethics rules to try and fire a man and be so abusive to him she got the judge threatening her, or perhaps was it where she tried to ban books off the legal channels?

Real record against corruption there! Real winner!

[Superman]

Flame me if you want, but don't flame my mom.

Did I miss something?

Anyway, helping Georgia in the event of... well, needing help because of Russia doesn't automatically mean we should jump into some half cocked war. I would think that a leader would be aware that are always options to consider. Instead of taking a more diplomatic approach, though, her answer about the possibility is "perhaps so," then goes on to say, "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 called upon and help."

Once again, everything is either black or white. Good or evil. If they do "that," then we have to do "this." Republicans like Palin can't seem to realize that every situation is unique and must be treated accordingly. Not unlike getting pregnant at 17. The best course of action isn't always marrying the father.

[Metatwaddle]

She also forbade city employees to speak to the press without her permission. I've never worked for a municipality, but that doesn't sound normal.

[Gerald Tarrant]

CC, does it honestly not bother you at all that this woman is running for Vice President of the United States and she is so goddamned politically unaware that she needed someone to explain the Bush Doctrine to her? The overriding doctrine that has governed US foreign policy since 2001, and she needs a media talking head to tell her what it is?

Given that President Bush has done many things since the preemptive invasion of Iraq that are not preemptive military action, I think it's fair to ask what someone means by "The Bush Doctrine".

The Bush Doctrine was widely discussed and described in the media covering the Iraq War at the time it was beginning. It was always clearly described as a strategic doctrine (like the Monroe Doctrine), and no one who paid attention or read newspapers at the time could seriously think that it was ever supposed to refer to everything President Bush does while he happens to be president.

Just out of curiosity I checked the Wikipedia page on the subject.

The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan.[1] Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate (used to justify the invasion of Iraq), a policy of supporting democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating the spread of terrorism, and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way.[2][3][4] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.[5]

Wiki

Given the evolving definition of "The Bush Doctrine". I would most definitely like clarification on what a questioner defined "The Bush Doctrine" as. I've seen talking heads treat is just unilateral preemptive military action. I've seen others talk about the "With us or with the terrorists" aspect. Asking the questioner for clarification is totally legitimate.

And, here's a transcript from the question

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?
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. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.

Link

You'll note Palin's bolded answer; it's inarticulate, but consistent with the wiki definition of "The Bush Doctrine" as a method of combating Terrorism. Palin also says "There have been blunder along the way, though." That's consistent with McCain's view of Iraq, the right strategic move improperly executed (too few troops, de-Baathification, and other missteps.) Palin's answer is a direct answer to the most prominent (or only) exercise of "the Bush Doctrine" (the Iraqi invasion). Gibson's definition is much narrower than other definitions, and the confusion that stemmed from it is unsurprising.

[Durandal]

She ran her town,

Yes, and her legacy was building a sports complex on land which the town didn't have the title to and preemptively raising the sales tax to support it. It was a $15 million complex in a town with a $4 million annual budget, and due to an eminent domain lawsuit, the land wound up costing the city around 10x as much as it should have. In the mean time, her little venture wound up sucking money from capital improvement projects to pay the legal fees.

Woohoo. Hockey rink.

she ran her state, she got rid of a whole bunch of corruption.

She also had the foresight to get knocked up while she was the governor of Alaska. And 44. And the child has Down's Syndrome. Having a child that late is irresponsible enough, but to do it while you're running a state and then accepting a vice presidential nomination? That's ludicrous. I guess running Alaska gives her plenty of free time to spend with her special needs baby. Must not be that hard of a job.

Oh yeah, and she gave a speech and flew while she was 8 months pregnant and leaking amniotic fluid. Without telling flight attendants. On an 8 hour flight. And she made sure to give birth in a medical center that wasn't equipped to deal with prematurely-born babies, passing up several perfectly-equipped hospitals along the way.

Oh yeah, and she apparently fired people who didn't fire the people she wanted fired for personal reasons. And she sucks at the federal government's tete when it suits her and then turns around to lie about it. She took somewhere around $300 million for the "bridge to nowhere" and then, only after it became a farce, did she drop support for it. But she kept the money.

She sat on the energy commission, and folks seemed impressed with what she did there,

Which "folks" are these, exactly? Because there are a lot of dumb-ass "folks" in America. Perhaps you're referring to her crowing about the Alaskan oil pipline? The one that's not built yet? She makes it seem much further along than it actually is, but attracting some developers to the negotiating table doesn't make a pipeline appear magically overnight.

and I happen to like her faith and her Christian values on the broad beam. Bringing in 'her church might think this' or 'she kinda seems like that' won't convince me. Bring me something like 'I hate queers because Jesus said to' and then you'll have something. I don't think she's nearly the inbred, zealous, country bumpkin of a monster you think she is. She couldn't have gotten that far if she was, and I think she'll surprise and impress the lot of you given time.

Her irresponsible parenting, advocation of ridiculous "abstinence only" education (despite having a daughter who's living proof that it doesn't work) and pathological lying about her little "bridge to nowhere" project haven't really impressed me so far. Sorry. Neither did her comments that demeaned community organizers -- people who volunteer their free time to help the less fortunate and take on the responsibility of helping the most downtrodden people in our society.

I guess "Christian values" include spitting on the type of work her own Messiah is purported to have done in front of a national audience.