Posted on 09/11/2008 2:38:36 PM PDT by Chet 99
ABC News
Sarah Palin Defends Experience, Takes Hard Line Approach on National Security
Republican VP Candidate Speaks with ABC News' Charlie Gibson in Exclusive Interview
By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
Sept. 11, 2008—
On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Gov. Sarah Palin took a hard-line approach on national security and said that war with Russia may be necessary if that nation invades another country.
In her first of three interviews with ABC News's Charles Gibson and the only interview since being picked by Sen. John McCain as his Republican vice presidential nominee, Palin categorized the Russian invasion of Georgia as "unacceptable" and warned of the threats from Islamic terrorists and a nuclear Iran.
The Governor advocated the accession of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.
When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "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 called upon and help.
"And we've got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable," she told ABC News' Charles Gibson in an exclusive interview.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Do you think they know she is only running for VP? I wonder if McCain isn’t just a little jealous.
“Also, I’ve wondered if she might even have been a Freeper at some point herself. Have we been missing any especially plain-spoken, sharp and charming Freepers from Alaska as of late?”
I wouldn’t be surprised. This forum is looked at quite a bit. Just for fun, take a look at the number of views on any given thread versus the number of posts. The number of views is usually about 10 times the number of posts. I’ve also noticed ideas and opinions that I’d not seen before posted here, and then picked up by political leaders or the media a few days later.
“Also, I’ve wondered if she might even have been a Freeper at some point herself. Have we been missing any especially plain-spoken, sharp and charming Freepers from Alaska as of late?”
I wouldn’t be surprised. This forum is looked at quite a bit. Just for fun, take a look at the number of views on any given thread versus the number of posts. The number of views is usually about 10 times the number of posts. I’ve also noticed ideas and opinions that I’d not seen before posted here, and then picked up by political leaders or the media a few days later.
I just finished watching the interview, and I liked how she handled the “Bush Doctrine” question.
She correctly asked which one. That took Gibson back, probably thinking she had a “canned” answer ready. She’s showing that she can think on her feet and answer any question.
If you notice, after her answer, Gibson referred to a “specific” part of the “Bush Doctrine”. It’s like she took Gibson off his script.
I expect that in the next interviews she’ll look more presidential.
I loved her answers, and the fact that she does not have “canned” statements. She showed me, beyond any doubt, that she has a bigger brain than 0bama and Biden combined.
So does my husband and he has two masters degrees ( one in plasma physics ) and a PhD......I correct him all the time.....to no avail......(sigh)...
That is how it is pronounced by the people in the trade.
Better in the last half than the first. Overall, I think she held her own and stayed “Sarah”. She was direct, made eye contact, and her voice never lost pitch and no “ah’s or I,I,I,” either.
She lost a few points on the “Bush Doctrine”. Heck, I didn’t know what it was either. Overall a B+. Our Sarah will learn from this. She will be loaded for Polar Bear on the next interview.
Don't forget that she was a Journalism Major with a minor in Political Science.
She is already inclined toward current events.
She went to college in Idaho, and my experience with westerners is that many of them are in the commodities and natural resources economy, and have to pay attention to world events as they affect their products.
Those ranchers and farmers are well-informed and savvy guys, and they would have been among her classmates at U of Idaho.
I have great respect for ordinary Americans who choose to inform and educate themselves. She appears to be of that mold, as are MANY of the people on this forum.
Somebody tell Charlie Gibson that there are twenty-something number of NATO countries including Estonia, Lithuania, Bulgaria.
Yet only Sarah Palin gets asked this question now, about Georgia.
Sarah and Georgia, a pair of politically incorrect Drive-By outcasts.
>>When Charlie asked if she supports the “Bush Doctrine”, she correctly asked in what respect. Unfortunately, she got a bit of the “deer in the headlights” look when he simply repeated the question. Obama would NEVER get these questions.<<
I can’t find any government doc that uses the term “Bush Doctrine.” I have some ideas of the various things it could mean.
If it’s not a term used exclusively (and probably scornfully) by the MSM, can anyone find the term in a real government document?
Palin never said that Georgia is in NATO. I think you just whiffed.
The interview at the World News main page uses multiple camera angles. I'm amazed at the clumsiness of the editing at time -4:00 was (Palin: "...Pressure on Iran" CG: "What...if...Israel"). Not only were Gov. Palin's lips moving silently before the cutaway, but CG's next line seemed to have been badly overdubbed.
“CHURCHILL has returned...and he’s wearing high-heels.”
Now there’s an image I could have done without!
Debunking Plains supposed “Bush Doctrine” gaffe:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2080404/posts
Debunking Palins supposed “War with Russia” gaffe:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2080327/posts
Fox...CNN...analysts did not seem hard on her.. (what I heard of them).
So, was it good for the first time out?
They WILL try to make her look like a warmonger, of course they will.
It would be interesting if, in the event she gets called on it, someone could present some non-classified audio recordings of clearly-educated people in the trade.
It was great.
No one was expecting her to win a Nobel prize in foreign policy. She needed to seem knowledgeable and bright to doubters, and she did just that.
Other than obvious trolling attempts on various sites, no one could find a reasonable fault with her performance.
Good post devolve.
Holy Cow! Compare the questions from Gibson in the Obama interview to the questions Gibson asked Sarah.
Somebody needs to take the time and post the two sets of questions side-by-side.
I agree. I don’t know if she did know all of what the so-called “Bush Doctrine” is, but then no one does since it is not a stated doctrine, but a laundry list of foreign policy initiatives from the administration relating to the War on Terror. Gibson’s paraphrasing of the doctrine was a misstatement of one part of that “doctrine”. Bush didn’t say we’d preemptively strike any country that posed a threat, but any country that threatened us AND harbored terrorists and gave them assistance.
Her answer was actually quite good—she and McCain need to (and should) differentiate themselves from Bush’s doctrine and make their own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.