Hey folks,
Of course you knew that I had to talk about this one. I know a lot of people saw this. I know that some of you may have even gotten a little anxious thinking that perhaps Gibson got her on a couple of points. Truth is though folks, she nailed it.First up was this exchange. Experience?
GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you. And it is really the central question. Can you look the country in the eye and say, I have the experience, and I have the ability to be not just vice president, but perhaps president of the United States of America?
PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20th, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, we’ll be ready. I’m ready.
No need to elaborate. The truth is clear. Mayor. Governor. Bills past. Reforms made. ACTUAL responsibility. 80 percent approval rating. Obama? Voted Present. No experience at all running anything. 143 days in the Senate. Community organizer? Oh by the way, if you actually read his {Obama's } books you will find he failed at that. So Palin REALLY needed not elaborate. She has FAR more experience than Obama. He kept pushing the issue, but she remained firm. Truth is easy to keep.
Then this. I love this one.
GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage, in a very dangerous world. When I asked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact you have command of the Alaskan National Guard and Alaska is close to Russia. Are those sufficient credentials?
PALIN: But it is about reform of government. And it’s about putting government back on the side of the people. And that has much to do with foreign policy and national security issues.
Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie. And that’s with the energy independence that I’ve been working on for these years, as the governor of this state, that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy. That I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conversation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas developments in our state, to produce more for the United States.
GIBSON: National security is a whole lot more than energy.
PALIN: It is. But - but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It’s that important. It’s that significant.
She nailed that one too. She knows what he was trying to do here. But she is RIGHT. As I have been telling you. We are currently dependent on foreign Governments that hate us. It would be really easy for anyone of them to hurt America by simply cutting off their Oil supply. If we were to dill, produce, and use our own, we WOULD be FREE from this, and be FAR safer than we are today. That is just fact folks. Just flat out FACT.
Then some petty questions. Then this.
GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.
PALIN: Sure.
GIBSON: Let’s start, because we are near Russia. Let’s start with Russia and Georgia. The administration has said, we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
PALIN: First off, we’re going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak the other day and giving my commitment, as John McCain’s running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we have to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have asserted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable. And we have to keep …
GIBSON: You believe unprovoked?
PALIN: I do believe unprovoked. And we have to keep our eyes on Russia. Under the leadership there.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions particularly in the last couple weeks does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.
GIBSON: You favor putting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine definitely yes. Yes. And Georgia. Putin thinks otherwise, obviously he thinks otherwise.
GIBSON: Under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: Perhaps so. That is the agreement. When you are a NATO ally, is, if another country is attacked, you are going to be expected to be called upon and help.
You know why I love this exchange so much? Because he did not know what the NATO agreement is. Neither do some of the complete idiots attempting to report to you that she would be all for going to war with Russia. If a country, ANY country, is a NATO ally, then we have an agreement with that country to assist and protect them in times of need.
You know some of the LWL HATE this one too.
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.
ABSOLUTELY!
GIBSON: So, what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.
Which we have been doing, and will still not work. However, this is a PC answer.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and need to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends of Israel, and I don’t think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves, and for their security.
That is a great answer. As well we should not. But he kept trying to put words in her mouth. He REALLY wanted her to say something like "Hell ya, we should help Israel bomb Iran." But that is not what she said.
GIBSON: So if we didn’t second guess it and if they decided they needed to do it, because Iran was an existential threat, we would be cooperative or agree with that?
PALIN: I don’t think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right?
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
This drove some on the Left nuts. She would not play the game and they are not happy. I love it.
GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?
What a stupid question this was. But her answer?
PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme, and they are violent, and they do not believe in American ideals. And they attacked us. And now we are at a point, here, seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post- 9/11 world, where we are able to commit to never again. The only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that all Americans have, instilled in us, because we’re a democratic and we are a free, we’re a free-thinking society.
Right ON!
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
There really are three. Some want you to believe this is a stumble. But it really wasn't. She was asking him which part did he want her to answer. But then again, HE probably didn't know what the three DIFFERENT parts of the Bush Doctrine are.
GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view?
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, annunciated September 2002, before the Iraq War.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
He would not give specifics, so she gave a general answer.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine as I understand it is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with us?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country.
You see, he got specific, she answered. Right on again.
GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan, from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: As for our right to invade, we’re going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world, where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be and military strike a last option.
Now this is an answer that the Media would MARVEL at if it had been Obama giving it, but since it was one the are seeking to destroy, he continued to push.
GIBSON: But governor, I am asking you, do we have the right, in your mind, to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America, and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink, Charlie. In making those tough decisions of where we go, and even who we target.
{Laughing} He really just could not win here. She is too smart for him. He tried to wave her answer off in a condescending way. But he really just ends up looking like a fool.
GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes, that you think we have the right to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government? To go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?
PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying America, and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table.
Right on, yet again.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GIBSON: You said recently in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.”
That is not what she said. She actually said PRAY that it is the right thing to do. THAT is what she said. "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right, also for this country, that our leaders, {That meaning THAT they are doing what is right} our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. THAT is what she was saying. But of course, Gibson, and some reporting this, have no clue about ANYTHING involving God, so they just simply could not understand this concept.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PALIN: Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right, also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GIBSON: Are we fighting a Holy War?
PALIN: That’s 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. That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie.
Today is the day that I send my first born, my son, my teenage son, oversees with his Stryker brigade. Four thousand other wonderful American men and women to fight for our country, to fight for our freedoms.
EVEN with this. CLEAR elaboration as to what she meant. Charlie STILL either did not get it, or was purposely distorting it.
GIBSON: But you went on and said, “There is a plan, and it is God’s plan.”
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world, and that plan, for this world, is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country, to be able to live and be protected within inalienable rights, that I believe are God-given, Charlie. And I believe those are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That in my worldview is the grand plan.
GIBSON: Then, are you sending your son on a task from God?
You know folks, I really do not think that Charlie Gibson is an idiot. But I guess you never know.
PALIN: I don’t know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision. What he decided to do, in serving for the right reasons in serving something greater than self, and not choosing a real easy path, where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.
You can also find the UNEDITED version of this interview over at Newsbusters.org. Interesting to see what ABC actually edited out of this. Truth is folks, they are mad because she would not play their game. I hope she keeps it up. She did not waver, studder, hesitate, and she did not allow Gibson to put words in her mouth. Sorry Charlie, but she pasted your interview with flying colors.
From what I understand, there will be two more separate interviews. I'll have to keep an eye out for them. But it is funny to me, every time they THINK they got her, she just smiles and runs circles around them all. Way to go Sarah.
Peter
Sources:
ABC Interview
Newsbusters.org - ABC News Edited Out Key Parts of Sarah Palin Interview
No comments:
Post a Comment