( Sep. 12th, 2008 03:23 pm)
Last night I watched the first interview of Sarah Palin with Charlie Gibson on Nightline. As I watched this it became painfully evident that she was grossly ignorant of fairly simple foreign policy issues. Gibson has been accused of tossing softball questions in the past, and while I can't say he was hammering her with difficult questions, he didn't let it go when she didn't give direct answers and would ask them 2-3 times before moving on to the next one. He also let her hang herself on one question in particular with regards to the Bush Doctrine. Only when it was obvious she had no clue what the Bush Doctrine was, did he explain it. He then asked her the question again, which she also failed to directly answer.

Most critics have already called her on the pat and obviously coached answers, but I'm surprised they're not calling her out on the specifics:

- Didn't even vaguely know the Bush Doctrine.

- Didn't understand the full implications of US duties to go to war if Georgia and the Ukraine are made NATO members and are attack by Russia.

- Didn't understand Bush's go ahead for US troops to enter Pakistan and go after al Qaeda operatives against the wishes of the Pakistan government is an act of war on the part of the US.

But my favorite was her reply after Gibson showed a clip of her telling a church congregation that the war in Iraq was God's plan.

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 holy war?

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 let us pray that we are on God's side.


Except for the fact that Lincoln said we should pray that we're on God's side and Palin said that God is giving the orders in this war and we best march to He's beat - yeah they're saying the exact same thing. At best she doesn't understand what Lincoln was saying, at worst she's lying.

I suppose the Republicans would call me a self-loathing misogynist for saying the Empress has no clothes, as any attack on her is somehow an attack on her gender. Facetious Comment --> But as we all know, rational thought has an obvious gender bias.

I look forward to the second half tonight...

(EDIT - Forgot the link to the ABC interview: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5782924&page=1)
I think no group annoys me as much as the Hillary for McCainers. Whatever you think of Obama, you cannot present me with an rational argument to support McCain in the wake of Hillary's loss. These people do a nice job of destroying the credibility of women in politics. Hillary lost in a fair fight. Democrats chose Obama. Agree with him or not, he was democratically selected as the nominee. The people told Hillary no. So by throwing a fit and taking the ball home with them, all they have done is shown they have no grace in defeat.

Worse yet, they have a super cheesy ad of a nutjob-sore-loser type holding up signs for why she supports McCain now. It's done like a really bad online school advertisement complete with poor timing standing in for thoughtful contemplation.

One of the Hillary supporters at the DNC called me and [livejournal.com profile] sandiaheights "gender traitors" for not volunteering to hold a Hillary banner. Not only was it a moronic thing to say to someone you don't know, it was indicative of how blinded these people are their own cause as being the only cause. For all she knew, I didn't want to hold it because I have carpal tunnel or I support the Green Party candidate, Cynthia McKinney. The idea that one isn't a feminist or for equality because they don't support Hillary Clinton is ludicrous.

There were others wearing t-shirt that said "Radical Feminists for Hillary." Way to be totally oblivious to what Radical Feminism stands for - which by the way isn't Hillary. Radical feminism totally rejects the patriarchal heirarchy system that Hillary has embraced by cracking that glass ceiling. They don't look to break through the ceiling, they look to dismantle the entire structure. Hillary is a feminist to be sure, but she's not radical even slightly. And if you claim to be a radical feminist for McCain, you might want to get a refund on that lobotomy.

Behind the cut-tag are photos of the Hillary Supporters at the DNC )

I'd say it will be interesting to see if the Hillary for McCainers embrace the oil grubbing, anti-choice, anti-gay, pro-gun, no-experience, ex-beauty queen, trophy Veep, Sarah Palin, but I don't think it will be interesting at all. They'd be far more interesting if they said they were writing in Ron Paul or better yet, Zoltar, their alien master.
.

Profile

catscradle

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags