Thread: Vp Debate!

Originally Posted by w4jchosen

And the outlets like MSNBC beat it like a drum all the way up to the debate.

The media didn't make Palin look foolish in those interviews, Palin did. Pundits from both sides of the political spectrum agreed. Quit making stuff up.

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

How is that classless? They were pounding on her for her pregnant daughter, they brought her family into this. Then they mocked her like there's no tomorrow. All fine by me, any president, or vp will be made fun of from time to time, but in all honesty, the mainstream media was portraying her poorly. What a shock eh?

Bullshit! It was in reference to her interviews with Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson. It had nothing to do with her daughter. Palin made herself look bad in those interviews. Quit throwing smoke grenades.

She didn't like the way the media was portraying her, so she called them on it. In your opinion, you think she looked bad in those (edited) interviews. She feels otherwise, so naturally she believes she was portrayed poorly. Bullshit my ass, she called the media on their bias, and you didnt like it.

*Agrees with Rock*

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Those interviews were not edited. When Gibson asked for her take on the Bush Doctrine she asked "in what respect Charlie?" She didn't know what it was. And yes she should have b/c she's running for the second highest office in the land.

Rock it doesn't help your arguement when you make things up or lie about your candidate.

of course they're edited. otherwise we'd be seeing them cough, drink water, talk about the lighting, or take a pee break. don't be a fool. They are entire lines of questioning that can and are cut out of interviews like that.

As for not knowing what the bush doctrine is.....even I don't know what that is. You don't know what it is, either, since there isn't one.

What's the bush doctrine? A war in iraq? There's only one iraq...so it's not much of a doctrine, or way of doing things. Taxes? Dimplomacy? Policy positions? How, exactly, are they different than any former president, or most especially the republican party?

The "bush doctrine".......is status quo for what the country has been doing for the last 50 years. We don't talk to North Korea. We don't talk to Iran. We don't talk to assholes and rogue nations. Reagan didn't do it. Bush 1 didn't do it. Clinton didn't do it.....so what the fuck are you talking about, other than getting your politics from blogs and tshirts? Seriously. Quit with the buzz words, and actually bring up something SPECIFIC.

Maybe Palin didn't explain, as I just did, what the "Bush Doctrine" is and isn't.....but it's essentially the same answer: What the fuck is the Bush Doctrine other than american foreign policy as it has been over the last 50 years?

Do you know the last time we had an ambassador to Iran or North Korea? A real deal embassy? No, you don't. Right now, you're having to go look it up. And that makes you full of talking points and bullshit, and not facts. So shut it.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Originally Posted by w4jchosen

And the outlets like MSNBC beat it like a drum all the way up to the debate.

The media didn't make Palin look foolish in those interviews, Palin did. Pundits from both sides of the political spectrum agreed. Quit making stuff up.

I didn't see the interviews so I can't judge the negative, only the defensive. Can somebody post the interview here.

Nobody is making stuff up.

Originally Posted by Nuckle

Palin seemed more prepared and seemed to have her heart into it. She made me feel like she really does care about this country and its middle class. I felt Palin did a better job reassuring the decisions I have made to vote for her party better than McCain did last week.

Nuck

I do like how Palin called the Obama/Biden campaign on how they focus backwards when placing blame instead of focusing on what they will do in the future.

Palin won the likability polls by a very large margin as well as doing better than expected, which seems promising for their ticket.

Biden did well, but that was about it. I think many folks were expecting him to roll over Palin like a tank, but it didnt happen.

i'll tell you 3 things I was surprised of in the debate (not really surprised, but noticed).

#1. Biden didn't say a negative thing about Palin. Didn't say anything about her possible ethics and abuse of authority in firing the cop in alaska that was married to her sister. Didn't bring up anything about her support for drilling in anwr, or experience (or opinion that she lacks it). didn't bring up any of her exeuctive decisions in alaska (and I'm sure there's a few that could be criticized). Didn't talk about her Bridge to Nowhere back and forthness. Didn't talk about her gaffes with Couric and Gibson interviews. Not even once. obviously, he was trying to not take the bait and beat up on a poor defenseless mother of 5.....which was good advice from his advisors.

#2. Palin did 10X better than I expected. Neither side can deny that. She didn't stumble and stutter and pass off questions like she did with Couric and Gibson. She didn't let them control the questions, and instead fought back, calling the media straight up what it is, and that's dead journalism and weak politics. It's about time both parties did that, so we can start firing journalists. hillary did a bit of that, but it was too little too late in the campaign for her.

#3. Palin pointed out, as it's become more and more obvious, that Biden and Obama's platform for their presidency is to make fun of the "Bush doctrine", use scare tactics into "having more of the same" and blaming bush for everything that's wrong in the world, rather than stepping forward, and explaining what's going to change, and how.

Did biden explain how he's going to withdraw troops? No. Neither has Obama. Because it won't happen, because it can't. They know it. We know it. Too bad it's ok to lie off your ass in the campaign, and expect people to forgive you in office. and they do, sadly. Look at the democratic congress.....just sad.


Did biden explain how they're going to "act on actionable intelligence on al qaeda in pakistan", and go kill terrorists? Sure, he says that we'll act on it even if pakistan is unwilling or incapable of doing so. And we'll act on it even if our allies in the region aren't ready to rumble with us in invading a soverign, nuclear armed nation.

Sounds like "the bush doctrine" to me. And it's a bald face, ridiculous lie to say you're going to invade pakistan, or any nation. It's unilateral. It's "going it alone". And it's dumbass legislators giving speeches and not true deal executives being presidential. You don't say things like that. Sure, you can admit that we might do some covert shit. And it certainly is a lot smarter to say you'll cut off military and humanitarian aid (like Obama finally said as an option). But you don't run your mouth like a fool, when everyone knows it's not just a bluff, it's a joke of a bluff.

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Those interviews were not edited. When Gibson asked for her take on the Bush Doctrine she asked "in what respect Charlie?" She didn't know what it was. And yes she should have b/c she's running for the second highest office in the land.

Rock it doesn't help your arguement when you make things up or lie about your candidate.

As for not knowing what the bush doctrine is.....even I don't know what that is. You don't know what it is, either, since there isn't one.

You're not running for office bigdog, she is. She should know these things. We shouldn't want our officeholders to be mis-informed.

But I guess since the bar was lowered so far with W and crew she's not too much of a disappointment.

"Can I call ya Joe?"


Poop here's the interview in question about the 'Bush Doctrine'
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=Z75QSExE0jU