Liberal Media Concedes Governor Palin Would Have Made The Exact Same Decision As Obama on Bin Laden, Only Faster
Earlier I wrote about how the left, the media and even republicans have been turning head over heels praising the president for his wonderful, gutsy and brave decision. I noted how any person occupying the Oval Office would have made the same decision. The difference is that some wouldn’t waste sixteen hours calculating how the decision would help them politically.
As it turns out, by the liberal media’s own admission, Governor Palin would have made exactly the same call. In fact she had already made the call during the campaign in September 2008 with the difference being that at the time, the media considered her call a gaffe whereas they are treating the exact same thing from Obama as a gutsy decision.
Sarah Palin told a customer at a Philadelphia restaurant on Saturday that the United States should “absolutely” launch cross-border attacks from Afghanistan into Pakistan in the event that it becomes necessary to “stop the terrorists from coming any further in,” a comment similar to the one John McCain condemned Barack Obama for making during last night’s presidential debate.
During Friday’s debate, Obama criticized the Bush administration for sending billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan without ridding the border region of terrorists.
“If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out,” Obama added.
McCain fired back hard, arguing that newly elected Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari has had his “hands full” and suggesting that Obama’s tough talk was na?ve.
“You don’t say that out loud,” McCain said. “If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government.”
Palin’s apparent disagreement with McCain’s position on Pakistan came as the Alaska governor was picking up a couple of cheesesteaks at Tony Luke’s in South Philadelphia. She was approached by a man wearing a Temple University t-shirt, who later identified himself as Michael Rovito.
“How about the Pakistan situation?” Rovito asked. “What’s your thoughts about that.”
“In Pakistan?” Palin responded.
“What’s going on over there, like Waziristian?”
“It’s working with Zardari to make sure that we’re all working together to stop the guys from coming in over the border,” Palin said. “And we’ll go from there.”
“Waziristan is blowing up,” Rovito replied.
“Yeah, it is,” Palin said. “And the economy there is blowing up, too.”
“So we do cross-border, like from Afghanistan to Pakistan, you think?” Rovito asked.
“If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should,” Palin said.
Republican presidential nominee John McCain defended running mate Sarah Palin on Sunday, even as she contradicted his policy against talking publicly about attacking terrorist targets in Pakistan.
Osama bin Laden and other top al-Qaida leaders are thought to be hiding in tribal areas along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Obama has said he would support sending American troops into Pakistan to attack such high-value targets.
“You don’t say that out loud,” McCain said during the debate. “If you have to do things, you do things.”
But on Saturday, Palin said much the same thing to a customer at a Philadelphia restaurant, with the press nearby.
“If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should,” Palin said in the exchange, which was captured on video and reported by CBS News.
When the Republicans’ then-vice-presidential nominee sat down for her first network television interview on the 2008 campaign trail, her relatively smooth performance was briefly jeopardized during the awkward silence that followed ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson’s curt question, “Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?”
After Palin offered an indirect response that suggested she didn’t know what “Bush Doctrine” meant, a visibly disdainful Gibson clarified his original query and asked if she believed in the use of preemptive force. And that was when Palin leaned forward in her chair.
“Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country,” she said, shaking her fist authoritatively.
A couple of weeks later, a moment caught on camera at a cheesesteak joint in Philadelphia encapsulated even more thoroughly Palin’s instinct-driven foreign policy. When a customer confronted her over whether the U.S. should launch raids from Afghanistan into Pakistan to capture or kill high-level terrorists, Palin responded, “If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should.”
Just days earlier, Palin’s running mate, Arizona Sen. John McCain, had criticized the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, for publicly declaring that he would unilaterally send forces into Pakistan to hunt down terrorist leaders — a declaration that McCain suggested was naïve for a leader to make publicly.
Palin’s blunt reply at the Philadelphia restaurant was regarded as a gaffe at the time, which McCain later complained was instigated by “gotcha journalism.” But with the recent killing of Osama bin Laden in just such a raid, Palin has plausible grounds to tout the episode as an example of how her instincts can trump intellectual deliberation and decades of experience.
I have often argued that during the 2008 campaign Governor Palin did not agree with McCain on many issues. One example would be TARP where it was obvious that the Governor disagreed with McCain but since she was running on his ticket, she had to defend his positions. It was during the “unscripted” moments when the Governors real views came to light. Only then, they were mocked. Now it appears that had she been the occupant of the Oval office she would have made the exact same call Obama made only it wouldn’t have taken her sixteen hours to do it.