Jump to content

McCain picks woman for VP slot


Recommended Posts

Asked three times what her position would be if Israel felt threatened enough to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, Palin repeatedly said the United States shouldn't "second guess" Israel's steps to secure itself.

Oh come on AM. Everyone knows rule number one in politics is don't answer the media's hypothetical questions.

Look back at any candidate's answer during the primaries to questions like:

Senator John Edwards, would you support the death penalty if your wife was raped and killed?

Repeatedly you will see that what a seasoned politician should and virtually always does, is to refuse to answer a wild hypothetical.

Sarah should have been even more firm in her refusal. Gibson was setting an all too familiar trap and she almost fell in. That's to her discredit.

However, her answer is actually remarkably clear and honest and, frankly, true.

Israel sits within spitting distance of myriad countries who want to see her destroyed. She lives in a completely different world than those media pundits who toss the issue back and forth at cocktail parties. Given Israel's precarious circumstances and Iran's explicit desire to 1. see her wiped off the map and 2. develope nulear weapons, Palin's answer (which she shouldn't even have given) was bang on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You may well be right. For many Americans, willful ignorance and stunning stupidity is viewed as an asset in a Presidential candidate. It make them feel he's more like them. Which is probably true. Would I was making a joke rather than an observation.

People will not care what she thinks about creation, contraception, God's role in the war in Iraq or her thin CV. Biden will try to embarrass her and she won't be able to name the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic. People won't care about that either.

People voted for Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. And that was for President. This is only for VP.

Anyway since the primaries finished Obama has been on a slide - and that will continue all the way to November 4th.

Palin has been around the block enough times to be able to handle herself. She will be weakest in foreign affairs, the issue people are least concerned with.

Edited by maldon_road
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is on YouTube. :lol:

Here's a write up about it:

....on the seventh anniversary of Sept. 11, [Palin] appeared entirely unfamiliar with the Bush Doctrine, the central foreign policy tenant of the current administration, which includes the right to wage preventative war strikes in the wake of those terrorist attacks.

She's clearly clueless.

Gibson's explanation was simplistic. In fact the Bush doctrien has become some amorphous it is hard to be specific about it. I generally see it as if the "promotion of democracy" factor dominated. Part of the reason for that is that US has practicied preemptive defence since Pearl Harbour (see just about every war after WWII). Preemption is ahrdly unique to the Bush doctrine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said. It's her first interview, and what it shows is a decided lack of knowledge regarding foreign issues.

Questions about Palin's knowledge of foreign policy dominated the interview with ABC's Charles Gibson. Palin repeated her earlier assertions that she's ready to be president if called upon, yet she sidestepped questions on whether she had the national security credentials needed to be commander in chief.

Asked three times what her position would be if Israel felt threatened enough to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, Palin repeatedly said the United States shouldn't "second guess" Israel's steps to secure itself.

What is that supposed to mean? What is her position? Seems as unclear now as it was before she answered the question.

A prefectly appropriate diplomatic answer. In fact it's the answer any president or Sec State would give today.

Pressed about what insights into recent Russian actions she gained by living in Alaska, Palin told Gibson, "They're our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."

I've "seen" Russia, too. Guess that makes me quite insightful on Russia's recent actions. And by the same token, I guess someone from Key West would be really insightful regarding Cuba and Gitmo.

Furthermore, her statement saying she thinks "man's activities certainly can be contributing to ... climate change" is at odds with her past statements that she doesn't believe man is responsible.

The difference between saying "man contributes to climate change" and "man is responsible for climate change" may be a difficult one for a 5th grader to parse.

It's been said that it seems pretty apparent that she was reciting what she was coached to say, at times repeating the same answers. I think it's going to become clearer to people that she isn't qualified for the position as time goes by and she has to answer more questions on her own -- and face Biden in the debates.

It's perfectly clear you ain't qualified to judge her responses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It says volumes about the character of someone who thinks the untimely death of person like Molly Ivins is a "good" thing--whether you agree with her politics or not.

Cry me a river...I am glad that Stalin is dead too...did I mention Saddam? Ivins was in poor physical health and died.....it happens. She was one of the reasons for wide screen TV.

You can be assured that all world leaders know exactly what the Bush Doctrine is, and its implications for their nations--getting attacked by the US without provocation. It is foolish in the extreme, even delusional, to suggest otherwise.

Now you are backpedaling to just leaders? What about the "diplomats"? Please give us more hyperbole!

If Romney and Giuliani weren't ready for high office, how is it possible that Palin is? Of course, the answer is she's not. McCain could have chosen someone who was ready for high office. But, he chose not to--putting his country at risk to win an election.

That's his choice...and ours...but most definitely not yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
Oh come on AM. Everyone knows rule number one in politics is don't answer the media's hypothetical questions.

Look back at any candidate's answer during the primaries to questions like:

Senator John Edwards, would you support the death penalty if your wife was raped and killed?

There's a huge difference between asking a question about a current foreign affairs issue and personalizing an issue with "your wife." The question about Israel was something Palin could very well have to deal with. If you think not answering questions that would inform the voters what her stands are is the way to go, then you are more easily pacified than I am. Myself, I like to know where a candidate stands.

Repeatedly you will see that what a seasoned politician should and virtually always does, is to refuse to answer a wild hypothetical.

There's nothing "wild" about the question regarding Israel. On the other hand, the question regarding Edward's wife being raped and killed was totally "wild."

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cry me a river...She was one of the reasons for wide screen TV.

Now you are backpedaling to just leaders? What about the "diplomats"? Please give us more hyperbole!

That's his choice...and ours...but most definitely not yours.

As I say, your comments about Ivins reveal much about your character.

As for the Bush Doctrine and whether or not the diplomats of other countries would or would not be aware of it, your position implies that professional diplomats would not be aware the United States' security strategy. Interesting position. Do you know many diplomats? Read many policy publications? Hold the belief if you like. It is, of course, nonsense on the face of it. If you need an explanation as to why it's nonsense, it's unlikely you'd understand the explanation of the obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh! A very astute observation....Americans are "stupid" and don't care about foreign policy! :lol:

Nothing to do with Americans. I would make the same observation about Canadians too - that they are more interested in domestic issues than foreign affairs.

Edited by maldon_road
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I say, your comments about Ivins reveal much about your character.

Well hell, I sure hope so. I'm not here to kiss anyone's ass.

As for the Bush Doctrine and whether or not the diplomats of other countries would or would not be aware of it, your position implies that professional diplomats would not be aware the United States' security strategy. Interesting position. Do you know many diplomats? Read many policy publications? Hold the belief if you like. It is, of course, nonsense on the face of it. If you need an explanation as to why it's nonsense, it's unlikely you'd understand the explanation of the obvious.

No, but apparently you know all the world's diplomats, and what they understand about the so called "Bush Doctrine". Please continue to take a smug and superior stance....it fits you well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with Americans. I would make the same observation about Canadians too - that they are more interested in domestic issues than foreign affairs.

I agree, but let's not ruin the fun. Canadians are well versed in foreign policy...so much so that any city council member in Dawson Creek, BC is ready to become Prime Minister! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a huge difference between asking a question about a current foreign affairs issue and personalizing an issue with "your wife." The question about Israel was something Palin could very well have to deal with. If you think not answering questions that would inform the voters what her stands are is the way to go, then you are more easily pacified than I am. Myself, I like to know where a candidate stands.

There's nothing "wild" about the question regarding Israel. On the other hand, the question regarding Edward's wife being raped and killed was totally "wild."

From the Atlantic - on the five "question traps" to avoid stepping into as a candidate...and NOT answering ANY hypothetical:

3. The loaded hypothetical question, which assumes factors that can’t be known. One addressed to Hillary Clinton: “If Israel concluded that Iran’s nuclear capability threatened Israel’s security, would Israel be justified in launching an attack on Iran?” She replied, “I think that’s one of those hypotheticals that —” and, over the questioner’s interrupting “It’s not a hypothetical, Senator. It’s real life,” she went on to say “that is better not addressed at this time.” She, Biden, and Obama all challenged a similar hypothetical, straight out of 24, about whether they would torture a captive suspect who knew where a ticking bomb was stashed, saying that in reality torture didn’t work and the scenario was too pat. The most famous combination of the gotcha and the hypothetical was of course the question CNN’s Bernard Shaw asked of Michael Dukakis as the very first in a debate 20 years ago: “Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?”

Link to the whole articlae - very interesting by the way:

Link

Edited by JerrySeinfeld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but let's not ruin the fun. Canadians are well versed in foreign policy...so much so that any city council member in Dawson Creek, BC is ready to become Prime Minister! :lol:

We once had a lawyer from Prince Albert. I doubt a city council member from Dawson Creek could be any worse.

I think the equivalent to Gov Palin would be the Premier of the Yukon. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
From the Atlantic - on the five "question traps" to avoid stepping into as a candidate...and NOT answering ANY hypothetical: ... One addressed to Hillary Clinton: “If Israel concluded that Iran’s nuclear capability threatened Israel’s security, would Israel be justified in launching an attack on Iran?”

Palin was asked what her position would be if Israel felt threatened enough to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, not "...would Israel be justified in launching an attack on Iran," which you say is the question asked of Hillary. It's not pertinent to our country if Israel is justified in its actions, but it is pertinent to our country what our position would be regarding/in response to the attack.

I've already addressed the personalizing of an issue regarding the "wife raped and killed" question and how it differs from a direct question about foreign policy; as for the "ticking bomb" scenario, that's not a current issue. Israel is. In other words, the question about Israel is more a possibility than a hypothetical; the actual hypotheticals you gave as examples are really nothing more than a hypothetical-- ie: not actually considered a real possibility.

I don't feel the need to know how Dukakis would react if his wife were raped and murdered, but I do need to know what the administration's position would be if Israel were to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palin was asked what her position would be if Israel felt threatened enough to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, not "...would Israel be justified in launching an attack on Iran," which you say is the question asked of Hillary. It's not pertinent to our country if Israel is justified in its actions, but it is pertinent to our country what our position would be regarding/in response to the attack.

I've already addressed the personalizing of an issue regarding the "wife raped and killed" question and how it differs from a direct question about foreign policy; as for the "ticking bomb" scenario, that's not a current issue. Israel is. In other words, the question about Israel is more a possibility than a hypothetical; the actual hypotheticals you gave as examples are really nothing more than a hypothetical-- ie: not actually considered a real possibility.

I don't feel the need to know how Dukakis would react if his wife were raped and murdered, but I do need to know what the administration's position would be if Israel were to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

That's the same question! What would your posisition be inherently requires one to make a judgment, including whether Israel was justified. Again, Palin's response was pefectly appropriate diplo-speak. had she said soemthing specific you would be calling her reckless. When she is prudently vague, you call her inexperienced.

It has, by the way, been amusing to catch in the microcosm of your posting over the past 3-4 weeks, the feelings of panic and subsequent panic-generated anger that the left must be feeling across the US.

You shouldn't be so scared - Palin will have many opportunities for real missteps. What you latch onto now, is suitable only for desparate attacks by the insecure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but apparently you know all the world's diplomats, and what they understand about the so called "Bush Doctrine".

Do I know all the world's diplomats? Does anyone? Why do you make such silly comments? But what some of us know are the general qualifications necessary to be a diplomat, which is a senior public service position in all governments. Qualifications include a university degree, usually post graduate, and years of experience in the foreign service. To assume, as you do, that the majority of such people would not be aware of the Bush Doctrine and its intricacies and implications is simply ludicrous. Belabor the point if you will. Take the last word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do I know all the world's diplomats? Does anyone? Why do you make such silly comments? But what some of us know are the general qualifications necessary to be a diplomat, which is a senior public service position in all governments. Qualifications include a university degree, usually post graduate, and years of experience in the foreign service. To assume, as you do, that the majority of such people would not be aware of the Bush Doctrine and its intricacies and implications is simply ludicrous. Belabor the point if you will. Take the last word.

Absolutely. Heavy emphasis on the years of foreign service aspect. Nicely said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, Palin's response was pefectly appropriate diplo-speak.

Her response was not appropriate. She should have said, "Mr. Gibson, this venue is not the place for someone who may be the next Vice President of the United States to discuss our relationship with other countries. However, you can be assured that the approach I take will by guided by President McCain and what is best for our country's security and vital interests." That's the correct answer, Sulaco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but let's not ruin the fun. Canadians are well versed in foreign policy...so much so that any city council member in Dawson Creek, BC is ready to become Prime Minister! :lol:

Ronald Regan. What?? OH, not the TV show. And it seems like you have just described Palin to a T. But .. Canada .. right??

No, but apparently you know all the world's diplomats, and what they understand about the so called "Bush Doctrine". Please continue to take a smug and superior stance....it fits you well.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/09/11/j...perience-energy

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/09/11/r...sh-doctrine-is/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
That's the same question! What would your posisition be inherently requires one to make a judgment, including whether Israel was justified. Again, Palin's response was pefectly appropriate diplo-speak. had she said soemthing specific you would be calling her reckless. When she is prudently vague, you call her inexperienced.

I didn't call her inexperienced. I said I know nothing more about her stand now than I did before the question was asked. And I don't. But no, they aren't the same question. One is merely a judgment of Israel's actions, the other is the American position regarding Israel's reactions; ie: 'What would you do if that were to happen?'

Again. There is a huge difference from having a position on it and passing judgment on it.

If you can't understand that, perhaps it'll be clearer to you once you reach the sixth grade. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her response was not appropriate. She should have said, "Mr. Gibson, this venue is not the place for someone who may be the next Vice President of the United States to discuss our relationship with other countries. However, you can be assured that the approach I take will by guided by President McCain and what is best for our country's security and vital interests." That's the correct answer, Sulaco.

What a crock....there is more than one correct answer, and yours isn't anything but a dodge. Fact is, none of these candidates would have detailed administration policy knowledge until after briefings which they are only now receiving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...