« Previous | Main | Next »

The Note: Palin Parries as Rollout Reaches Phase Two

Share

September 12, 2008 8:40 AM

ABC News' Rick Klein writes in Friday's Note: So Gov. Sarah Palin is a God-invoking, line-memorizing, superpower-provoking, nuke-u-lar pronouncing, dangerously unprepared Bush-Cheney clone (if she even knew what the Bush Doctrine was) . . .

Or she is a Lincoln-quoting, homework-doing, Russian-scaring, regular-acting, ready-to-lead energy expert of a hockey mom (and who cares who knows what the Bush Doctrine is, anyway?).

The Palin who sat down with ABC's Charles Gibson Thursday (with more to come Friday, on "World News" and "20/20") was -- in keeping with the phenomenon that has flashed across the political landscape these past two weeks -- pretty much whatever you wanted her to be.

(Similarly, Sen. Barack Obama's planned pushback -- not the first or second or third time his campaign has signaled a new aggressiveness -- is pretty much whatever you want it to be, too.)

(And the 9/11 pause didn't spread into 9/12: New ads, with a new tone -- Obama goes both positive and negative -- with the sharper one featuring Obama saying McCain has become an out-of-touch Washington insider. John McCain pushes back hard, saying Obama folks have been "disrespectful" to Palin, even as the media declares en masse that Team McCain is not playing fair.)

Read the rest of The Note -- and get all the latest on the 2008 election, Congress, the White House and the wide world of politics every day -- from Rick Klein by bookmarking this link.

On the key question, Palin, R-Alaska, didn't hesitate: "I’m ready," she said. "I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink." 

Yet the first day of this next stage of Palin’s public definition again showed how much we still don’t know about the would-be No. 2 (and, perhaps, what the would-be No. 2 still doesn’t know about the job) -- and how much is at stake in this phase of her public rollout.

On the question of the Bush Doctrine, no real answer: "She stopped short of saying whether she supports 'anticipatory self-defense,' leaving open the question of whether she subscribes to the Bush Doctrine," per ABC's Teddy Davis and Rigel Anderson. "Asked if Palin's bar for the use of force is higher than the one contained in the Bush Doctrine, the McCain-Palin campaign said that it was a highly conceptual question that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., himself may have never answered." 

On Pakistan, maybe a shade toward Barack Obama. "Gibson also pressed Palin three times to give a yes or no answer to the question of whether she believed that the United States has the right to launch crossborder attacks on Taliban and Al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, a close ally of the United States, without the Pakistani government's permission," Michael Kranish and Farah Stockman write in The Boston Globe. "Earlier in the campaign McCain had ridiculed rival Barack Obama for saying that he would authorize such unilateral crossborder actions, emphasizing that cooperation with Pakistan is essential."

On the Russian-Georgian conflict, she went maybe a smidge further than McCain. (And she knows NATO's Article 5.) "If John McCain were asked, 'would we act to defend another NATO member that was invaded?' the answer would be yes," she said.

Continue reading today's Note by clicking HERE.

ABC News' Hope Ditto contributed to this report.

September 12, 2008 in Biden, Joe, Bush, George W., Clinton, Bill, McCain, John, Obama, Barack, Palin, Sarah, Vote 2008: Democrats, Vote 2008: Republicans, Washington | Permalink | User Comments (184)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You guys are a real out of touch piece of work. Anything that anyone on the right says you will attack and take out of context. You all are so transparent into who you are supporting and the funny thing is is that you think that middle average America doesnt know it. We know it, we see it, and we will continue our support for Gov. Palin and the next President of the United States John McCain.

Posted by: Mike Witt | Sep 12, 2008 9:03:10 AM

Once again, more East coast liberal biase in the media. Even a comment on libersal leaning NBC this morning - Gibson's attitude toward her, tone of voice, talk-down to type questions were shameful. I seldom watch ABC but tuned in to see excerpts of the Palin interview. Gibson's a hi-paid bush leaguer. Ld

Posted by: Lin | Sep 12, 2008 9:03:36 AM

Judging from her obvious lack of experience, I think she did quite ok during the interview.

Those that gave her a crash course on foreign policy have done a pretty good job. However, they will still need to do more before the debate with Biden.

From what we saw last night, she was repeating lines like someone rehearsing a script and she seems pretty nervous at times. She was much more comfortable with questions on energy policy than she was on foreign policy. I ll give her 6 out of 10.

Posted by: Ro | Sep 12, 2008 9:03:42 AM

Well, what do we call them mavericks or WAR MONGERS? Oh, the rest of the interview indicatted that she is not ready for this JOB.

Posted by: y.sister | Sep 12, 2008 9:04:04 AM

It's funny how people expect, no, DEMAND to know every one of Palin's positions in a two week period, but yet, nobody knows what "hope" and "change" BHO has in store for America after 2 years of asking questions.

Posted by: Edward | Sep 12, 2008 9:04:33 AM


Palin shot a 3-pointer.

Now Obama & Company are in meltdown mode!


Posted by: dl | Sep 12, 2008 9:04:34 AM

No substance. Does John McCain really love counrty first? She would start WWIII.

Posted by: MarRey57 | Sep 12, 2008 9:05:57 AM

MarRey57

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling"

Posted by: dl | Sep 12, 2008 9:11:13 AM

Mike Witt

you think that that woman should be deciding whether or not we launch Nuclear attacks on someone in the world?

you think she is qualified and knowledgable to decide whether commercial airliners full of ASmericans should be shot down over NYC and Washington?

if you say yes...you are either lying or crazy...

it is not just everything on the right

it's that the right is trying to spin this election just like they did with 2004...and look what that got us...

it is not Palin's fault...she is a pawn

but she is like picking someone who was running for your town board because she is a woman and saying she is going to be leader of the free world...and the defenses that we see republicans putting up about that interview last night prove that it is not about the safety and welfare of our country...it is about them holding power.

and it is disgusting.

that interview last night should scare the s#$t out of everyone watching it.

Posted by: dl | Sep 12, 2008 9:11:50 AM

NO ONE AT ABC NEWS KNOWS WHAT THE BUSH DOCTRINE IS: September 21, 2001 CHARLIE GIBSON DIDN'T KNOW: Senator Daschle, let me start with you. People were looking for a Bush Doctrine. They may have found it when he said the war on terror will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped or defeated. That’s pretty broad. Broader than you expected?

December 9, 2001 GEORGE WILL DIDN'T KNOW: The Bush doctrine holds that anyone who governs a territory is complicit in any terrorism that issues from that territory. That covers the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Second, the war on terrorism is indivisible, it’s part of the Bush doctrine.

September 20, 2001 PETER JENNINGS DIDN'T KNOW: . . . Claire, the president said at one point, ‘From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.’ Should we be taking that as the Bush doctrine? CLAIRE SHIPMAN reporting: I think so, Peter,

December 11, 2001 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS DIDN'T KNOW: Two years ago, September 1999, Bush gave his first speech when he was running about terrorism. And his first–had the first explanation of the Bush doctrine, that if you harbor a terrorist, you’re going to be attacked. The Bush White House is putting this out, saying it shows that Bush was very prescient, but that was only one speech given in the campaign.

January 28, 2002 BOB WOODWARD DIDN'T KNOW: This is now the Bush Doctrine . . . , namely that if we’re attacked by terrorists, we will not just go after those terrorists but the countries or the people who harbor them.

January 29, 2002 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS DIDN'T KNOW: It was striking and significant that the president really expanded the Bush doctrine. If a nation builds a weapon of mass destruction–Iraq, Iran or North Korea–we will reserve the right to take out those weapons even if we’re not attacked or even if there’s not a threat.

March 19, 2004 TERRY MORAN DIDN'T KNOW: That was the Bush doctrine we just heard. On this one-year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, President Bush offered a very broad justification of American leadership in the world under him since 9/11. Not just since one year in Iraq. For American voters as an argument that the country is safer, but more as you point out, for the world, which has been divided by his leadership, that Iraq is knit, in his mind, very firmly into that war on terrorism. One omission which I believe will be noted around the world, he made no mention of the role of multilateral institutions, the UN and others, in this fight against terrorism. In his mind, it’s clear it’s American leadership with others following along.

May 7, 2006 GEORGE WILL DIDN'T KNOW: Now the argument from the right is the CIA is a rogue agent because it has not subscribed to the Bush doctrine. The Bush doctrine being that American security depends on the spread of democracy and we know how to do that. The trouble is, Negroponte, who is considered by some of these conservatives the villain here and an enemy of the Bush doctrine is the choice of Bush, which makes Bush an insufficient subscriber to the Bush doctrine.

Posted by: HP Boston | Sep 12, 2008 9:13:11 AM

She's so warm, and friendly, so condescending


You know Charlie...Charlie it's so important to...Charlie my national security credentials...Charlie what we need to do...In what way Charlie...

The more you talk the less questions you need to not answer, isn't that right Sarah?

Posted by: Charlie says | Sep 12, 2008 9:14:09 AM

I think dl has an Obamabot stalker.

Posted by: Edward | Sep 12, 2008 9:15:14 AM

I know what the Bush doctrine is. It was regularly debated a few years back and PBS had documentaries dealing with it. America is dumb and Palin is a symptom of that ignorance. And I admit I am not qualified to become vice president.

Posted by: Yvonne | Sep 12, 2008 9:16:53 AM

hard to believe there are still lunatics out there who believe this woman is qualified, "you can see russia from alaska" is that the extent of her foreign policy experience?

Posted by: Mark | Sep 12, 2008 9:16:58 AM

When macho journalists like Charlie Gibson deliberately try to fluster Sarah Palin, and Hollyweird types like Matt Damon suggest that a woman isn't strong enough to lead a country, it makes me all the more determined to vote for her. I've been a Democrat my entire life, but in this election I will stand with the Republicans. I never thought I'd see the day when Democrats would try to destroy a woman simply because she doesn't fit their model of feminism, or share their political values. I am sickened by these attacks on this woman. Charlie Gibson and Matt Damon can go straight to you know where. And so can the rest of the left-wing Socialist Democrats out there.

Posted by: Carrie | Sep 12, 2008 9:20:25 AM

her answer about Israel was incredibly reckless, showed signs of someone who doesn't understand the carefulness and precariousness of the situation and words used... and makes us and any attempt at a peace process there... that much closer to impossible if she were the freakin VP or backup[ leader of the free woprld...

do you all understand that

do you all understand that the people asking to be elected to that office that is the worlds best hope at negotiating peace in the middle east can't make statements the way she made statements?

do you understand that she should have a grasp of the details of the doctrine that has been the guiding principal that got us where we are? as she is asking to lead us out of that?

do you understand the importance of knowing the basic basic details of the challenges we face?

If like D Cheney she suddenly was given ...9 months from taking office this coming year...she was given the authority to shoot down commercial jetliners would she know the ramifications ...if the airline wasn't american...if it was Russian? if it was British...or canadian? or it was a middle eastern airline?

this woman is the worst choice for Vice president and show s clearly that John mcCain should not be picking the people who are going to be getting us out of this mess...

between that and thefact that he has already picked the lobbyists who got us in as his leadership team and the ones whio literally wrote his policy platforms on everything


what is anyone thinking that this man should be anywhere near the white house after the last 8 years.

Posted by: dl | Sep 12, 2008 9:20:28 AM

The interview was pretty bad. I now understand their reasoning for keeping her hidden.

You know it's bad when the Republicans come out in great numbers calling the media bias blah blah blah.

Watching her interview with Gibson and Biden's interview on Meet the Press (Biden was asked harder questions)I don't see how she'll face up against Biden.

Posted by: Vanessa | Sep 12, 2008 9:20:56 AM

Wow,

The mainstream media seems to have remembered what their job is. Enough of the unbalanced 'fairness' that compares lies to gaffs, and manipulation to
honest campaigning.

Thank you Mr. Gibson and thank you ABC News for the way in which you have handled the task some thought was going to be another free advertisement.

There may yet be hope for an honest election.

Posted by: Leonard Peltier | Sep 12, 2008 9:21:40 AM

IT'S NOT GOTCHA WHEN YOU JUST DON'T KNOW

I can't believe it!! You mean all those people at ABC News didn't know what the Bush doctrine was EITHER!! Word either in caps to emphasis the fact that Palin didn't know.


Wow that is just scary. Well those guys at ABC News need to withdraw from the race.

What? They aren't running as Vice President? What? Palin is running as Vice President? Then she sure as h*ll
should know that if she want's to be Vice President.

Maybe she should she have just continued her career as a sportscaster.

Posted by: POTATOE THIS | Sep 12, 2008 9:22:43 AM

In your dreams, Mike Witt. This was Palin-lite we saw, and more and more of us are becoming unwilling to leave our country in the hands of this person. She should stick to what she knows - evangelism and converting the Jews.

Posted by: outtahere | Sep 12, 2008 9:24:46 AM

Post a comment