Israpundit had an interesting report on Sarah Palin in Denver concerning the use of force by the US:
I believe our criteria before we send our young men and women, America’s finest, into harm’s way, I believe that our criteria should be spelled out clearly when it comes to the use of our military force. I can tell you what I believe that criteria should be. I can tell you what it should be in five points:
First, we should only commit our forces when clear and vital American interests are at stake, period.
Second, if we have to fight, we fight to win. To do that we use overwhelming force. We only send our troops into war with the objective to defeat the enemy as quickly as possible. We do not send our military and stretch out the mission with an open-ended and ill-defined mission. Nation-building, a nice idea in theory, but it’s not the main purpose of our armed forces. We use our military to win wars.
And third, we must have clearly defined goals and objectives before sending our troops into harm’s way. If you can’t explain the mission to the American people clearly, concisely, then our sons and daughters should not be sent to battle. Period.
Fourth, American soldiers must never be put under foreign command. We will fight side by side by our allies, but American soldiers must remain under the care and command of the American officers.
And fifth, sending our armed forces should be the last resort. We don’t go looking for dragons to slay. However, we will encourage the forces of freedom around the world who are sincerely fighting for the empowerment of the individual.
Pretty significant set of policy opinions. I’m sure the media with an election coming up decided to examine it carefully.
Well not quite, instead they decided to focus on something much more important:
Sarah Palin gave passing praise to President Obama’s “decisive leadership” in the operation to kill Osama bin Laden, though in a speech here Monday night the former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate did not once use Obama’s name.
“We want to thank our president,” Palin said, but then she quickly shifted focus to the previous administration for having laid the groundwork.
Some on the left don’t even give her that much credit:
However, making a specific point not to mention President Obama (and, yes, it must have been a specific point. I doubt she and her speech writers just forgot his name) was a bad move. It’s just a distraction.
Of course we must assume the left believes that when she says “The President” she must mean Jefferson Davis.
Now as John Notle points out, the MSM doesn’t want to focus on the substance when it comes to Sarah, can’t paint Palin as a dunce that way, so they invent a meme. Why? Remember the Golden Palin rule.
…watching Palin in context tends to make people like her.
Thus forget the policy stuff, let’s re-define what she means by “The President.”
The MSM will tell you who they fear.
Update: Instalanche, thanks much.
Update 2: Put update 1 in the right place, and Linking Ann Althouse who looks at Huff Po’s latest “gotta” moment and notes:
Those White House Correspondents’ Dinner “attendees” who “had no problem coming up with answers” were journalists giving laughably self-interested answers like “my boss, Arianna Huffington.” And there were plenty of attendees who couldn’t come up with an answer or who changed the question to “my favorite journalist.”
(Ask me who the most influential law professor is, and my answer will say something about me as I decide to promote my own school, suck up to some particular individual, highlight somebody obscure, or drivel about how there are so many wonderful law professors.)
Don’t go looking for the Palin Doctrine list there, after all Ariana doesn’t pay them for that.