In his blog at the Herald Sun (Australia), Andrew Bolt looks at headlines about the "scary" Sarah Palin:
Sarah Palin has given her first interview since being picked as the Republican's vice-presidential candidate. The media has scrabbled for evidence of fumbles, and evidence that a shootin', cussin' redneck is about to plunge the world into war.
He proceeds to examine the candidate's statements. For example:
The first war a President Palin would allegedly start was with Pakistan, by invading it in the hunt for terrorists, and perhaps from the transcript you might agree the words are indeed naive and alarming:We should start with the premise that the United States, like all sovereign nations, has the unilateral right to defend itself against attack. As such, our campaign to take out Al Qaeda base camps and the Taliban regime that harbored them was entirely justified… (I)f we've got (Osama bin Laden) in our sites, we should ask for Pakistan's cooperation, we should ask Pakistan to take him out. But if they don't, we shouldn't need permission to go after folks that killed 3,000 Americans.Oops, sorry. That was actually Barack Obama. This is Palin:ABC News Anchor Gibson also asked Palin several times whether or not U.S. forces have the right to make cross-border attacks into Pakistan with or without the approval of the Pakistani government…"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..."
Read his post for more of the same.
The obvious theme here is that Sarah Palin is a dumb hick who, once given any power at all, will plunge the nation into a war with perceived enemies. I remember another candidate about whom much the same thing was said. He was elected President in 1980.
No comments:
Post a Comment