Gibson's Interview Of Palin

I'm looking forward to watching ABC's Charlie Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin tonight. Much of the interview has already been uploaded to the Internet and pundits on the left and right are already weighing in with their critiques. The focus of the debate seems centered on these issues: (a) does Palin come off as a war monger because of her hard line position on Russia; (b) does Palin know what the Bush Doctrine is; (c) is Palin unprepared because she hasn't traveled abroad much and met with any other heads of state; and (d) is Palin a religious zealot who will act impulsively based upon Biblical prophecy.

The debate over Russia centers around Russia's recent intrusions into Georgia. For the record, Obama is on record as saying he supports admitting Georgia into NATO as proposed by the Bush Administration. Many on the left quickly pounced on Palin's comments about defending Georgia against Russia. Palin quickly points out the defense obligations NATO member countries have to one another in the event one of them is invaded by an enemy force. You can't have it both ways. You can't say you want Georgia as a NATO member if you are unwilling to help it defend its sovereign status. Palin astutely answered Gibson's question on this subject.

On the issue of the Bush Doctrine, does anyone really know what the Bush Doctrine is? Clearly, Obama did not understand the Bush Doctrine to mean what Gibson interprets it to mean. Gibson sees it as a willingness to pre-emptively go to war to combat a perceived threat. Last year, when Obama criticized Sen. Hillary Clinton's support of the Bush Doctrine, he interpreted it to mean "only speaking to leaders of rogue nations if they first meet conditions laid out by the United States." By Gibson's definition, Obama got it completely wrong. He made matters worse by saying he was willing to meet with "leader of rogue nations" without any pre-conditions. He got even goofier when forced to defend that position by suggesting that we shouldn't be so concerned about "tiny countries" like Iran. Palin saw it is as "Bush's worldview" of the necessity of confronting Islamic extremist terrorists where they exist. Perhaps not a precise answer, but a damn sight closer than the completely off-base answer Obama spouted off last year with much fanfare.

Charlies Gibson traveled this summer with Sen. Barack Obama on his world tour and was given several interview opportunities with Obama throughout that tour. His interviews consisted of very softball questions and played up the "historic nature" of Obama's trip, bolstering his perceived weak foreign policy credentials. Gibson's zeroing in on the fact that Palin had never met with a foreign head of state and had only visited Kuwait and Germany as part of her duties as Alaska's Commander in Chief of the Alaskan National Guard. The truth is that Obama, despite chairing a subcommittee with jurisdiction over European Affairs which has yet to hold a meeting, had little experience in this regard until his widely publicized trip this summer. Arguably, the trip was more show for his presidential campaign than substance. Obama met with leaders of Afghanistan, France, Germany, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Palestine and the U.K. Some argue that he completely stepped over the line and appeared to be conducting foreign policy with foreign heads of state in usurpation of President Bush's authority and in violation of the Logan Act. I thought Palin's emphasis of her strength on energy policy and its vital importance to national security was an astute response to Gibson's obvious put-down of her experience.

Like most liberal journalists, Gibson is easy to find extremism whenever the word "God" is mentioned by a conservative Republican. He was singing to the Daily Kos crowd when he took her to task for a prayer she offered to our troops fighting in Iraq. Palin's prayer "that there is a plan" and to pray "that that plan is God's plan." Palin correctly pointed out that Gibson incorrectly quoted what she said to make it appear she said something she hadn't. Palin made it clear that she wasn't trying to suggest that the U.S. was on God's side. Reminding Gibson of what Lincoln said in a time of war--to pray that the country was on God's side. I thought her response was spot on. The lefties are already dissecting her words and trying to make something out of this that is simply not there. In so doing, they simply further offend people of faith. It is hypocritical for these people to twist her words while giving Obama a complete pass on his use of overt religious symbols in his campaign and messianic aura his campaign has craftily attempted to create for his candidacy.

As much hype as the Left is trying to make out of Palin's interview, the fact is they are still left scrambling to rescue Obama from his free fall in the polls. I would urge you to go watch Gibson's interview with Obama and compare it to Palin's. He came off as openly hostile to Palin, which was quite obvious in the tone of her answers to him. I think that was his plan. He wanted to make her look like a shouting housewife who didn't have a clue what she was talking about. Contrast that to his frat boy like approach to his interview with Obama. If the people on the Left think they are going to defeat Sen. McCain by trashing Gov. Palin, I think they're barking up the wrong tree. But I'm more than happy to extend all the rope they need in that direction if that's the route they wish to continue to follow.