hahahahahahaha

Well, that lays to rest my concerns.

I was worried they'd find a way to make her look credible.

Look, she really IS a politician... It is one of my most utterly hated politician traits, the thinking in their head 'oh crap, I have a yes/no answer here that if I answer TRUTHFULLY I will commit political death'... so what do they do? Mince around, refuse to give that yes/no answer and just keep spouting bullcrap like 'Islamic extremists who want to end the American way of life'.

F*ck Palin, F*ck her complete inability to grasp the magnitude of the decision to make pre-emptive strikes against other countries and F*CK anyone who actually considers voting her in as VP.

outside of a teleprompter she is a train wreck waiting to happen.

^What NetRunner, Spoco2 and imstellar say! I continue to hope that America realizes that there is a rufee in her drink before she's laying face down on McCain-Palin's dirty futon. Journalism like this will help.

When you don't have an informed opinion on an international situation... fall back on the justification that your extremeist religion hates another extremeist religion.

Matt Damon was right (did i just say that?!)

Palin's one heart attack away from controlling the nukes, and shes as thick as an overgrown potato.

They can't cover EVERYTHING in the pre-interview prep sessions. I mean, just think... just a few months ago she had no idea what the VP does!?!

She has really been cramming, you can tell by the way she name-dropped Mikhail Saakashvili (not in this clip) and pronounced it better than I ever would have. That has got to count for something, right? So what if she didn't know about preemption, right... she learned to pronounce a hard name!

I'm upvoting, but it comes dangerously close for me to having too many edits and splices.

Call me crazy, but it appears that she got some coaching before this interview.

It makes a heckuvalot more sense when you realize that Palin, herself, thinks Obama is the better candidate!

This is a textbook example and the definition of spinning a question.

We live in some really scary fucking times, my friends. Even if Obama wins, how long will it take for him to fall under an assassin's bullet? If McCain wins, how long before the nukes are flying (launched by him or Palin?)

I can only hope that the LHC is really some sort of Stargate operated by the NWO/Illuminati/whatever-the-fuck and there are a few of us that get off this rock before the roof caves in on the rest of us... (I am kidding of course...I do know what a particle accelerator is )

did it seem to anyone else that the conversation fragments in this video were uncomfortably close together, like it could have been edited or something?

overacting to this... how would obama (who i support) answer the same question? he also would not give a yes or no answer, he would answer in a similar fashion... look she's a horrible vp pick but cmon don't just jump on every little thing

I don't know how that woman had kids at all, she crosses her legs tighter than a virgin's daughter.

Oh my. The poor woman is way out of her league; she clearly hasn't yet had enough time to memorize all of the McCain/Republican bullshit propaganda.

Yes ladies and gentlemen, this could someday be the president of the United States, simply because she has a cunt and is willing to sell out her country in standard Republican fashion.

Biden will eat her alive. She stands no chance whatsoever. None. Unless the debate is rigged. Check her back for a bump...

just say "yes".

you already look like a clown, for not knowing "the bush doctrine" meant preemption.

not admitting your support for that policy, as well?
makes you a coward.

I don't fault her for not knowing what the "Bush doctrine" was referring to.. But her lack of knowledge showed through (not to the degree of Bush jr, though, and he still got elected). Her answer wasn't that terrible, the way she refused to give any specifics was, though.

Wow, what a fucking stupid bitch. Is a yes or a no really that hard?

Heaven help the world if she ever ends up in the president's chair.

Stop your sexism, you all know full well anyway that not knowing stuff, coupled with evading questions mixed with a bit of lies is the presidential ticket.

Heckuva job, Sarah.

*fear *fear *fear *fear *fear *fear

Invocations (fear) cannot be called by schma because schma is not privileged - sorry.

Charlie!

CHARLIE!

Upvote for the summary, "all your base" etc.

*upvote, Charlie, that is an *upvote.

yeah, blunders along the way. Killed a million people. Oops, pardon my bombs.

Min. qualifications for VP --> --------------













               Sarah Palin --> --------------

Yeah the editing does seem a little off. Can always just read the transcript at http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=5782924&page=1

I'm sad that there isn't enough room for the * wtf tag. That was my first thought after viewing this clip...

^http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd219/marinephoto/petarded-1.jpg

She totally didn't even know what the Bush Doctrine was.

Wow, she is a piece of work.

She annoys me even more than Hillary... and that is a tall order.

Godamn, if she says Charlie one more time, Im gonna get pissed off. EDIT: O SHIT!!! TO LATE, AFTER A DAY OF DIGG AND FOX NEWS HANNITY BULLSHIT ... I HAVE HAD IT.

There is no need to say the name of an interviewer over and over.

If she was trying to get manipulative control over charlier, saying his name that many times broke the spell.

I gotta say, I'm not much of a Palin fan, but I thought she answered the questions okay. She didn't answer directly which was a little annoying, but if anything Charlie seemed a bit crude and manipulative with his questions. How about a true neutral look at these people instead this constant media bias for or against someone?

Typically you get a good feel from commentors on this site about facts and views. On this specific post it seems like the liberal mindset is overwhelming and ready to fire. I hope it doesn't get worse as this election goes on here. We all need to take a step back and think and stop just reacting, imo.

This cannot be said enough. Quayle the posterboy for unqualified at least had a law degree and elected twice to US House and US Sentate. The last moron this inexperienced was from Texas and political background just as Gov. (He also at least managed a baseball team, but that is probably like being mayor of Wasilla).

What kind of moron lists PTA and beauty pageants on their resume or campaign website????? Who BRAGS because they left the country once to go to Kuwait and see some of them "arabs". Yeee-haw. Go shoot some more wolfs and bears. She is like a parody of crazy Bush. Like Bush minus the years of coke and drinking.


>> ^T-man:
Min. qualifications for VP --&gt; --------------<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Sarah Palin --&gt; --------------

She forgot the part where the U.s. american's don't have maps.

In response to ElessarJD:

There is always political posturing when a presidential candidate chooses his (or her) running mate. The choice of Palin was a ridiculous yet brilliant political move. Brilliant that it will mobilize evangelical voters. There are a lot of women voters who feel connected to any female contender. It is brilliant because she distracts everyone - myself included - from the issues that are affecting us now and will continue to for a long time.

The choice of Palin was a blatantly political move. The roster of men and women for McCain to choose from were very experienced. So after 8 years of a misguided war, a huge deficit, falling dollar, many people want someone capable of governing & representing the United States.

>> ^ElessarJD:
I gotta say, I'm not much of a Palin fan, but I thought she answered the questions okay. She didn't answer directly which was a little annoying, but if anything Charlie seemed a bit crude and manipulative with his questions. How about a true neutral look at these people instead this constant media bias for or against someone?
Typically you get a good feel from commentors on this site about facts and views. On this specific post it seems like the liberal mindset is overwhelming and ready to fire. I hope it doesn't get worse as this election goes on here. We all need to take a step back and think and stop just reacting, imo.



boggle.

Stop it with all the "Charlies," Sarah, it's like you're a unicorn.

"whatever it takes"?! Does that mean she's going to nuke them all and start WWIII?

shes so hot tho

>> ^ElessarJD:
I gotta say, I'm not much of a Palin fan, but I thought she answered the questions okay.

No, she didn't. Mr. Gibson asked essentially two questions:
- Do you know what the Bush doctrine is?
- Do you agree with it?

She completely failed on the first question as it was blatantly obvious she didn't know the answer. She didn't answer the second question at all, and instead prevaricated using the typical "extremist islamofacsists want to kill you. We can't take any options off the table" line. Saying that doesn't actually mean anything, as it gives no sense whatsoever of her approach to foreign policy. She made some statements indicating that military force would only be used as a last resort, but we've heard that one before - fool me once and all that.

I feel Sarah Palin's selection as VP candidate was both foolhardy and carefully calculated. McCain's people knew he needed the diehard base to win, so they couldn't piss off "values voters" by selecting anyone pro-choice or anything but an evangelical Christian. They also needed to try to woo Hillary supporters, so they needed the VP to be completely penis-free. In that regard, Mrs. Palin is the perfect choice - the more obviously qualified republican women are (as far as I can tell) all pro-choice. The foolhardiness becomes obvious when watching this video, or looking into her qualifications with any sort of critical eye at all - she's just blatantly not a good fit for the job.

I'm not a huge fan of Obama (amongst the initial candidates from the two parties, he would have been probably my fourth or fifth choice), but he has demonstrated some qualities that make him well-suited to the office: thoughtfulness and a solid understanding of the constitution. I'll happily give that a chance after these last 7.5 years.

She did a fantastic job of avoiding a lethal soundbite. That's all people care about these days, and she refused to give in to Chaaaaarlie!

Shun the non-believer! Shuuuun!

Charlie! Chaaaarlie! Chaaaaaaaaaaarlie!

This is the woman that will likely be president if McCain gets elected... She's barely a better speaker than Bush and sounds much less informed. Yet somehow people think this IMPROVES McCain's chances of winning? It's like they haven't even listened to her speak... Maybe they're counting on the perverted old men vote who just want to wank it to the state of the union address.

He still never got a straight up yes...that's all the question was asking for...Yes...or No...

Holy shit. Not only is she frighteningly ignorant, she can't even fake her way out of it.

What does she have to offer again?

Charlie...Charlie....Charlie....Charlie, is she snorting Charlie - Bush did Charlie and he made it to president!

The tragedy is that 90% of americans aren't capable of evaluating a serious interview like this. They have no clue what the words "anticipatory self defense" and "preemptive strike" mean, or the implications of her support of them. All they hear is "America's Great!!!"

This is why Comedy Central and Maher are far more effective vehicles for getting across the message that 'she's ignorant and dangerous' to the average american dolt.

Technically, she did answer his question. He asked if she thought it was okay to cross Pakistan's borders to go after terrorists, and she said we should do whatever it takes. Not only is she not avoiding the question, she's answering with an emphatic yes. Which makes me shudder to think of her in a tactical situation where our intelligence is later found to be faulty. Sound familiar? Of course she's a fan of the Bush doctrine. She just said she'd shoot first and ask questions later, if at all.

Holy crap, the pessimist in me is scared for November 4th. I saw it once in 2004, when I was certain Bush would lose by a wide majority. I'm actually afraid for this country.

I don't care that she's inexperienced. I care that she's a maverick, like her psycho running mate. BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB IRAN!

seriously, anything has to be better than that.
miss carolina took evening classes in foreign relationizing.

those hellebent terrorists that only want to destroy. they must be destroyed.

Look, I'm not a Palin fan by any means. In fact, I don't care for her much at all. I also believe she was picked to help McCain win and not necessarily for the betterment of my country. My point in my rant was to tell the majority of the commenters to settle down. This isn't a witch hunt. Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean they're automatically wrong in everything they do.

^ Point taken, ElessarJD. I would give Palin (& Administration) about a year to demonstrate rational leadership if it got to that point. If McCain wins I will start learning another foreign language as a back-up plan. I'm serious.

Let's face it. NONE of the runners are qualified to be in office. NONE! How depressing.

Why can't we just take all 50 governors and start from there weeding them all down and let 4 or 8 of them run. The 2 top vote winners gets the jobs.

::awaiting flames::

Moose in the headlights!!

--cribbed from aretheyinsane.org

>> ^ElessarJD:
We all need to take a step back and think and stop just reacting, imo.


There are a lot of Ron Paul folks on here, too, who are not fans of non-answers to straight-forward questions.

How hard is it to say, "Yes, I believe there is a place for the Bush doctrine on the table of the 21st century leaders of the US. The preemptive defense has its detractors, but we have yet to experience anything resembling the attacks of Sept.11th again..."

... that was the crappy Republican answer I expected, but she not only failed to recognize that he was referring to preemptive strategy but tried as hard as she could to not really answer his second question.