2012 Predictions...
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I'm not "spinning" anything, you fucking retard! YOU are spinning with this bullshit about her 'demeanor' and 'tone' instead of concentrating on what she said. The question was, do you agree with the Bush Doctrine? That's almost like asking, do you agree with water? Well? Do you? I mean, people do need water to live, plants need water to grow, but flooding isn't a good thing, mudslides are bad.... isn't it appropriate to ask, in what aspect?
The Bush Doctrine evolved over the course of the Bush presidency, it encompassed several different concepts, from preemptive military action against imminent threats, to establishing democracies. WHICH ASPECT! That's all Palin asked, and Gibson was the one who DIDN'T HAVE A CLUE!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Because she was perplexed by the rather simpleton questioning! Why couldn't Gibson be SPECIFIC and ask her about SPECIFIC aspects? My guess is, he didn't KNOW the different aspects, he was like a typical nitwit moron pinhead, and thought the Bush Doctrine was a single defined principle, which it's not!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Let's not be just a little bit OBTUSE about this, okay?
"In which respect" and "which aspect" are essentially the SAME thing, you goofy bitch!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
You know, I look at this and think... She could have schooled Gibson's ass on the various aspects of the Bush Doctrine, and explained to his stupid ass, that the Bush Doctrine had evolved and encompassed more than a single premise or ideal... BUT THEN, she would have come across as a real bitch, talking down to Gibson and humiliating him on his own show. Instead, she politely asked him to clarify his question, which he never did.
klaatu
Fusionist
Im not so sure that questions about one's background is completely idiotic, especially when the same liberal press had no problems conjuring up such questions for the previous President. However, I dont recall CNN, NBC and their subsidiaries ever questioning Obama about any of that. They were to busy coiffuring the hair that Obama was raising on the back of their legs.
christiefan915
Catalyst
IF she had a friggin' clue, she could have said what you just said. "Charlie, there is more than one bush doctrine and they all have distinctly different aspects. For example, ..... "
Then Gibson gave her a chance to recover when he asked "what do you interpret it to be?" and she still could have come up with something.
But she wasn't smart enough to do it because seriously, she DIDN"T KNOW.
I have never heard a Palin solution, just blather about what the other guys are doing, but no serious solutions, do any of them have serious solutions?
"were to step up with the solutions" the country needs to "get the economy back on the right track" and fight "those on the extreme left who seem to want to dismantle some of our national security tools that we have in place."
What does she propose exactly? What are "the plans"?
christiefan915
Catalyst
I agree that vetting a candidate's background isn't idiotic, but promoting conspiracy theories that Obama's this side of being a "Manchurian Candidate" was ridiculous.
People like Orly Taitz and Philip Berg cluttering the court system with their bogus lawsuits... well, at least we had a lot of fun here generating our own Kenyan birth certificates when that nonsense was going on.
http://kenyanbirthcertificategenerator.com/
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Uhm, yes... she DID know that the Bush Doctrine is an extremely complex series of policy initiatives, with various aspects. Gibson asked a dumbass question that illustrated his own clueless ineptitude, and you are simply parroting his ignorant view of the Bush Doctrine. "What do you interpret it to be" doesn't clarify what aspect of which Bush Doctrine he wants her to comment on!
Go back to the analogy of whether you approve of water? If you simply answer "yes" you approve of water... the next day, all the media is going to report that you endorse floods and mudslides... in essence, that's what you said! The same applies with regard to Palin's view of the Bush Doctrine. I am sure she agrees with some parts and aspects of it, but not every single aspect or part. She asked for some clarification, so she could answer his question, but he didn't have enough sense to understand what the fuck he asked her! And here you are, claiming he was some journalistic genius and SHE was the clueless one! It was the other way around!
christiefan915
Catalyst
McCain kept her in the background? Of course he tried to! She wasn't the presidential candidate laying out her own platform. She was supposed to support McCain's position, not "go rogue".
You guys sure jumped Biden when he veered off so why shouldn't Palin have been held to the same standard?
christiefan915
Catalyst
What's clear to me is that we're looking at this with different perspectives. You want to put the entire blame on Gibson, that it was his responsibility to clarify what he wanted from her down to the last crossed "T" and dotted "I".
My position is that I want a candidate to look and act like a leader and to think on her feet; not needing to be spoon-fed by and taken by the hand in the direction he wanted her to go.
Also: I believe Gibson knew what the bush doctrine was but even if he didn't, he wasn't the one running for office. If he was so clueless, then Palin should have used her superior knowledge of it to educate him.
christiefan915
Catalyst
Dixie;711721 The Bush Doctrine evolved over the course of the Bush presidency said:
christiefan915
Catalyst
It's a funny to hear that NOW means you have to be pro career and pro abortion to be a librated woman...I thought it was merely about equality; including the equality to choose how to live your life as a woman.
Further, by christie's shrill logic, all women have not earned anything except what NOW gave them....odd logic.
nailed it 
christiefan915
Catalyst
You're right about one thing, I should have said "platform', not "voice".
Women have always had strong messages and made valid points but society didn't always give them the platform to express themselves. Listening to you one would think Palin had been in the front ranks of the feminist movement, yet she was only born during 2nd wave feminism of the 60s, and was able to take advantage of all the political, social and economic trends that evolved from it after she grew up. Please stop misinterpreting me. I didn't say Palin got all her power from NOW, just that she benefited from those activists who helped to open the doors and break the glass ceilings. There's an unwritten history full of brilliant, talented women who never had a chance to shine, due to the fact that male-dominated societies change at glacial speed. Palin just happened to be born in the right place at the right time.
Don't quit your day job to enter the business of mind reading. You're batting zero in this paragraph.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
From Wikipedia:
The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of former United States president George W. Bush. The phrase was first used by Charles Krauthammer in June 2001 [1] to describe the Bush Administration's unilateral withdrawals from the ABM treaty and the Kyoto Protocol. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to secure itself against countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups, which was used to justify the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.[2]
Different pundits would attribute different meanings to "the Bush Doctrine", as it came to describe other elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate; a policy of spreading democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating terrorism; and a willingness to unilaterally pursue U.S. military interests.[3][4][5] 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.[6]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know if you are intelligent enough to understand Wikipedia, but it seems relatively clear to me, there are a variety of policies which can be called "The Bush Doctrine" and there really isn't a single definitive "Bush Doctrine." In fact, the Bush Administration seldom, if ever, used this term. So the question Gibson asked was unanswerable. It would be like asking; Do you agree with Supreme Court rulings? Well??? What is your answer to that, christie? DO YOU or DON'T YOU? Come on now... time to "think on your feet" and show us something!
And I don't really give a flying fuck what you think! It's Gibson's job as the interviewer, to ask credible questions that can be answered, it's not up to the interviewee to clarify the questions or presume to know what the fuck he's talking about!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No, you shouldn't have insinuated Palin was "given" anything. She was ELECTED by the vote of THE PEOPLE, she was not "given" a damn thing! Now, if you want to pretend that women never made any contributions before NOW and feminism, that's fine... you're just plain wrong about that, but if you want to believe it, I have no problem with that. But we're not going to LIE and claim NOW "gave" Palin her opportunity.