Gibson interveiw on ABC
Unbiased Paraphrased to reflect her answer, NOT HER STYLE.
Don't not read this as an interpretation of her personality.
1. GIBSON: The central question. Can you say, I have the experience, to be president of the United States of America?
PALIN: I do, we’ll be ready. I’m ready.
2.GIBSON: When McCain asked you to take the spot on the ticket, for a moment, did you think no?
PALIN: I did not. I thought yes, right off the bat. the first thing I said to him was, if you really think that I can help the ticket, help this country, absolutely, I want to do this with you.
Short answer: She did not think.
3.GIBSON: And you didn’t say to yourself, am I experienced enough? Am I ready?
PALIN: I didn’t hesitate, no.
4.GIBSON: Doesn’t that take some hubris?
PALIN: I answered him yes because I am confident in my readiness. You can’t blink. You have to be committed to the mission, reforming this country, and victory in the war. That you can’t blink. So, I didn’t blink.
5.GIBSON: This is not just reforming a government. Its running a government on the huge international stage, in a very dangerous world. John McCain cited your command of the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close to Russia as evidence of your national security credential
PALIN: But it is about reform of government. And it’s about putting government back on the side of the people. And that has much to do with foreign policy and national security issues.
Umm, What ??? Foreign Policy is about reforming American government ?
The credential I bring to this table, Charlie is that I’ve been working on energy independence for years, As both Governor Alaska and as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conversation Commission to produce more Oil & Gas.
GIBSON: National security is a whole lot more than energy.
PALIN: It is. But - but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It’s that important. It’s that significant.
Read this as: foundation of national security involves maintaining a supply of energy.
Energy equals oil and gas
GIBSON: Did you ever travel outside the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?
PALIN: Canada. Mexico. And then, that trip that was a trip of a lifetime, to visit troops in Kuwait and stop and visit injured soldiers in Germany. That was a trip of a lifetime. And it changed my life.
Do Canada, and Mexico really count as foreign countries?
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?
PALIN: I have not. As many vice presidents have not. The desire is in this nation is no more politics as usual. And somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yeah, they’ve had opportunity to meet heads of state.
Ahh now I understand the answer to the experience question: Experience, understanding of whats going on, having facts, understanding the culture of foreign nations are all a bad thing. If you actually have gone outside north America and talked to foreign heads of states.
IT MEAN YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.
GIBSON: Let’s start with Russia and Georgia. The administration has said, we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
PALIN: First off, we’re going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak the other day and giving my commitment, as John McCain’s running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we have to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have asserted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable. And we have to keep …
Did she say that she talked to a foreign head of state?
GIBSON: You believe unprovoked?
PALIN: I do believe unprovoked. And we have to keep our eyes on Russia. Under the leadership there.
Sorry I have not researched whether it was provoked.
But a quick scan of seems to indicate that it was.
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.
Didn't answer the question. Unless you interpret 'insight' as being able to physically see some thing.
GIBSON: You favor putting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO?
PALIN: Ukraine definitely yes. Yes. And Georgia. Putin thinks otherwise, obviously he thinks otherwise.
A straight answer as to her opinion
GIBSON: Under the NATO treaty, would we have to go to war if Russia invaded Georgia?
PALIN: Maybe. That is the agreement. If a NATO country is attacked, you are expected to help.
GIBSON: Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be a threat to Israel?
PALIN: In The hands of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.
GIBSON: So, what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: Make sure weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons are not given t Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and need to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends of Israel, and I don’t think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves, and for their security.
Does that mean if you are our friend you can do what they want
GIBSON: So if we didn’t second guess it and if they decided they needed to do it, because Iran was an existential threat, we would be cooperative or agree with that?
PALIN: I don’t think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right?
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
What does she mean by 'second-guess' Does that mean it is ok?
We can have no opinion. Or that we should not interfere?
From free dictonary : evaluate or criticize with hindsight, explain or interpret something
To criticize or correct after an outcome is known. To outguess. To predict or anticipate To criticize a decision after its outcome is known.
GIBSON: Why did 9/11 happen? Why did they want to hurt us?
PALIN: A very small percentage of Islamic believers are extreme, violent, and they do not believe in American ideals. And they attacked us. And now we are at a point, here, seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post- 9/11 world, where we are able to commit to never again. The only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that all Americans have, instilled in us, because we’re a democratic and we are a free, we’re a free-thinking society.
Answer: They do not believe in American ideals.
The rest of the answer is interesting. Why is that their only option ?
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view?
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, annunciated September 2002, before the Iraq War.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine as I understand it is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with us?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country.
A lot has been made about this answer so I left it as if. Figure it out for your self.
What I hear her say is that yes we can invade preemptively if she thinks it is right.
It opens up many more questions, in light of the 'evidence' used to invade Iraq, Who vets the information
GIBSON: Can we make cross-border attacks into Pakistan,without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: As for our right to invade, we’re going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world, where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be and military strike a last option.
Does not in any way answer the question. It sound admirable
In the light of her previous responses, the short answer is yes.
GIBSON: But governor, I am asking you, do we have the right, in your mind, to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN: We must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink. In making those tough decisions of where we go, and even who we target.
Now this is one that truly scares me. She used the phrase about not blinking, to answer how much thought she put into whether or not she should be VP and that answer was No thought I just knew I should do it because J McCain Said I would be of help.
(See Question 4)
GIBSON: Is that a yes? We have the right to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?
PALIN:America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists, we have got to have all options out there on the table.
No Direct answer but yes.
Again much has been made of this exchange so I left it intact:
GIBSON: You said recently in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.”
PALIN (on video tape): Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right, (pray) also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God.
GIBSON: Are we fighting a Holy War?
PALIN: That’s a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words, when he said, first he suggested, never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak god’s words, but what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was, let us not pray that God is on our side, in a war, or any other time. But let us pray that we are on God’s side. That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie.
Today is the day that I send my first born, my son, my teenage son, oversees with his Stryker brigade. Four thousand other wonderful American men and women to fight for our country, to fight for our freedoms.
GIBSON: But you went on and said, “There is a plan, and it is God’s plan.”
PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world, and that plan, for this world, is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country, to be able to live and be protected within inalienable rights, that I believe are God-given, Charlie. And I believe those are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That in my world view is the grand plan.
“There is a plan, it is God’s plan and I believe we are following it.”
Please tell em I am wrong, please I am scared !!!
GIBSON: Then, are you sending your son on a task from God?
PALIN: I don’t know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision. What he decided to do, in serving for the right reasons in serving something greater than self, and not choosing a real easy path, where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer