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

To: Polybius
The Palin doctrine right now is simple: point out what a loser Obama is.

She's not President yet -- but when she is, the Palin doctrine will be the same as the Reagan doctrine: "We win, they lose."

Cheers!

13 posted on 03/17/2011 6:59:14 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: grey_whiskers
The Palin doctrine right now is simple: point out what a loser Obama is.

By that criteria, every single one of us on Free Republic can claim a Doctrine. The difference is that many of us on Free Republic can articulate just HOW Obama messes up. By contrast, look at Sarah Palin's answer regarding Egypt. She could not articulate either her own position (she did not seem to have one) or articulate Obama's position. When asked to specifically explain HOW Obama handled it wrong and HOW she would have handled it it differently, she was totally lost and spent a lot of words saying absolutely nothing.

She's not President yet -- but when she is, the Palin doctrine will be the same as the Reagan doctrine: "We win, they lose."

I voted for Ronald Reagan twice. I spent the entire Reagan Administration on active duty in the U.S. Navy.

Sarah Palin is no Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan:

From 1975 to 1979 Ronald Reagan gave more than 1,000 daily radio broadcasts, the great majority of which he wrote himself. .... These addresses .... revise our understanding of the late 1970s - a time when Reagan held no political office, but was nonetheless mapping out a strategy to transform the economy, end the Cold War, and create a vision of America that would propel him to the presidency. These radio programs demonstrate that Reagan had carefully considered nearly every issue he would face as president.

Sarah Palin:

"Palin couldn't explain why North Korea and South Korea were separate nations. ..... Asked to identify the enemy that her son would be fighting in Iraq, she drew a blank. Later, on the plane, Palin said to her team: 'I wish I'd paid more attention to this stuff'."

In order to accomplish the Reagan doctrine: "We win, they lose" in 2008, a minimum requirement was to have a clue who this guy was.

If the 1980 Reagan had been alive in 2008 and running for President, he could have told you everything there was to know about Sayyid Muqtadā al-Ṣadr and then some.

By contrast, Sarah Palin had absolutely no clue who was killing Americans in Iraq in 2008 even though her own son was headed to that war zone.

That is the difference between Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin.

16 posted on 03/17/2011 7:48:55 PM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

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


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