enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Jack's so right he's wrong
by Breaker
Yes I'm sure any old Washington hand would know what the code words "Bush Doctrine" means.

Of course that's only important to Washington insiders who like to laugh up their sleeves at people who don't sniff their glue.

What's important to people outside the beltway is not whether a candidate knows all the DC code words, but rather what they think about the underlying issues.

If as Jack thinks Gibson thought he was making a big point because he had to tell her what the code meant, it shows he's part of the problem.

By inference anyone not steeped in Washington lore or who hasn't been on the national campaign trail for a year isn't eligible for the VP slot.
Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by mismos00
Yes, I agree. Why should the VP know or pay attention to Washington?
Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by bsharporflat
agreed Breaker.
Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by Cornhog

Yes, why should someone placed in charge of foreign policy know anything about foreign policy? That sounds downright retarded.

If you wanna paid attention to what she thought about the underlying issues then you would be scared shitless like the rest of us. She chuckles when mentioning potential war with Russia? Yowza. Let's hope there's no Cuban Missle Crisis while she's president. I dunno about the rest of you, but I kinda have a fondness for life on this planet.

Seriously dude....
by Trebuchet

The reason we are in the Iraq mess is because people like you are so ignorant about how we got there.

The fact that Sarah Palin shares you ignorance guarantees us another four years of the bush Mess if she and her old friend win.

You Republicans need to stop sneering at people and start thinking.

Re: Seriously dude....
by iwiwiwa
If serious, objective thinking about their own best interests were a realistic possibility, 50% of the republicans in this country would be democrats.

Anyone in the middle class who could weigh the implications of the different candidate's health care or economic plans, or international relationship possibilities, without being blinded by the idea of what women they don't know are doing with their bodies, would have a fairly simple choice here.
Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by garkon38

"DC code words?" Really? What do you do when you think about foreign policy? Try to find comic books with nice big text and lotsa "swoosh" sounds?

"Code words." Try again.

Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by Breaker
Your point is that as governor of Alaska she should have spent a great deal of time following foreign affairs?

That seems idiotic. She should have attended to the job at hand.

Obviously someone not imbued with inside the beltway lore, or had any reason to be immersed in foreign policy issues, has to learn. Unless the voters choose, as does Shafer, to reject a Washington outsider out of hand, then the issue becomes, can he or she learn.

In point of fact, voters seem to like Washington outsiders. Obamba is trying to run as an outside and McCain as a maverick. Yet you and Shafer view an outsider with contempt.

Is being an outsider a guarantee of a good President or VP? Of course not. Carter ran and won as an outsider, and was smart as a whip besides, and was very bad. Reagan was great. Clinton was mediocre but provided lots of entertainment value.

Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by garkon38

Good God. You're not serious, right? My point is that she could have cracked a newspaper sometime in the last 7 years. The "Bush Doctrine" is not exactly ivory tower ephemera. Hell, I think Howard Stern could recite it. I know she was really busy on those wolf-hunting bills, but I'm not even asking for foreign policy expertise. A "nodding acquaintance" with world affairs would do. We don't necessarily require brilliance, but at least curiosity does not seem too much to ask from someone who would be president.

Anyway. The gaffe is the least of the worries frankly. The fact that this farce is being carried so far is far more dismaying. Seems like real contempt for the intelligence of the American voter. But I guess that was your point Breaker.

Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by Breaker
Sorry I read a lot of papers and I would have gliched on the "Bush Doctrine".

I'm curious why you're not bothered by the Obama farce which has gone on 18 months. Or maybe you are.

My point is exactly that whatever fundamental concerns there are, that's what we should be focusing on not this gotcha ephemera. I don't care whether Obama slips up talking about "his Muslim faith" the important underlying point is whether he's going to do a job job dealing with Muslim fanatics and Muslim's in general.
Re: Jack's so right he's wrong
by garkon38

Read more carefully. Sound out the words as you go. Seriously. Google "Bush Doctrine" under news. Not sure what papers you're reading, but you must be skipping awfully fast to the sports section.

And as I said, this is minor in the greater scheme of things -- just a bit revealing about just how cynical the Repubicans' view of American character and intelligence is. This is not "gotcha." "Gotcha" would have been asking her to recite the name of the ministers of Benin. "Gotcha" would have been someone asking her to explain how many penguins are killed by polar bears each year. If there was a "gotcha" here it was in the challenge for her to defend a reprehensible set of policies that have gotten the US into perhaps one of the worst geopolitical crises in its history. She managed instead to flub before even reaching the question by revealing a depth of ignorance that no one would have expected. This is a moment of dull realization that the bar has been set even lower than anyone might have feared.

Remember Harriett Myers? Try to find the connection. And no, it's not the fact that neither of these people have testicles. Keep thinking...

View as RSS news feed in XML