Andrew McCarthy takes direct aim at the left's attack on Palin's response on the Bush Doctrine, for with various understandings of the doctrine's full nature, "It was utterly reasonable for Gov. Palin to press Charlie Gibson on what Gibson meant by the Bush Doctrine."
Richard Starr concurs, indicating:
Palin was well within bounds to have asked him to be more specific. Because, as it happens, the doctrine has no universally acknowledged single meaning. Gibson himself in the past has defined the Bush Doctrine to mean "a promise that all terrorist organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated" - which is remarkably close to Palin's own answer.I noted last night that Palin's underlying ideological foundation puts her squarely in line with our nation's tradition of international exeptionalism.
As that's a stance at odds with Palin's enemies, they'll be in full attack mode throughout the weekend distorting her record, and portraying her as a sinister force of ignorant fundamentalism. In fact, Anne Kornblut, at today's Washington Post, is already smearing Governor Palin statements on al Qaeda and pre-2003 Iraq.
Palin, of course, is not claiming Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, as William Kristol clarifies:
Video Hat Tip: Wolf HowlingHere are the headline and the first two paragraphs from an article posted online that apparently will be on the front page of Friday's Washington Post:
"Palin Links Iraq to 9/11, A View Discarded by Bush"
By Anne E. Kornblut Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 12, 2008; A01FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 -- Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."
The idea that Iraq shared responsibility with al-Qaeda for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. On any other day, Palin's statement would almost certainly have drawn a sharp rebuke from Democrats, but both parties had declared a halt to partisan activities to mark Thursday's anniversary."
Kornblut's interpretation of what Palin said is either stupid or malicious. Palin is evidently saying that American soldiers are going to Iraq to defend innocent Iraqis from al Qaeda in Iraq, a group that is related to al Qaeda, which did plan and carry out the Sept. 11 attacks. It makes no sense for Kornblut to claim that Palin is arguing here that Saddam Hussein's regime carried out 9/11--obviously Palin isn't saying that our soldiers are now going over to Iraq to fight Saddam's regime. Palin isn't linking Saddam to 9/11.
No comments:
Post a Comment