First of all, there is no such thing as the "Bush Doctrine." President Bush never referred to any of his policies as such. That was a media term, there have been about 3 or 4 of those and the one Gibson, who was very condescending throughout the entire interview, referred to is not even the most recent. He could have asked anyone in the White House or the State Department to describe the "Bush Doctrine" and 99% of them would not have known what he was talking about. That question was a "gotcha" question, and "gotcha" questions are a good example of dishonest journalism because they are not designed to inform, but to embarrass. It was just another example of how the media was in the tank with Obama.
Your team won. What's the point in continuing to pound the opposition? I would imagine that in a head to head debate, Palin would whip your liberal ass.
She never became rattled. She was merely a bit confused over a question that had no real answer. "Gotcha journalism" is not journalism and it is not designed to be handled, i.e. responded to effectively. The whole purpose of gotcha journalism is to avoid an effective answer.
I see "Doonesbury" is hitting Palin pretty hard. Are Dems that insecure that they have to go after now "in case" she decides to run in 2012?
Sorry, Bud. Of course there s a Bush doctrine. Just Google it and bring up thousands of references. It has been around for some time, it's widely know and widely interpreted to be: the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate; a policy of spreading democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating terrorism; and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way. So what? The Powell Doctrine was also a media term and so was the Monroe Doctrine 185 years ago. Everybody understands those terms clearly, too. The policymakers never coin these terms for themselves. They are applied popularly and find their way into the official vernacular. It was embarrassing all right and it killed her, as it should have. A Presidential candidate has to be smarter than that. She should have known it if she knew anything at all about recent US foreign policy. This "gotcha" business is a lame attempt to expain away her clear naivite.
And Mallard Fillmore still goes after Obama. So what else is new? Political cartoonists will lampoon politicians. Doonesbury will no doubt soon have some cynical avatar for Obama like he did for Bush and his predessesors.
It is not the media that generates foreign policy; it is the White House. As I said, there have been more than one "Bush Doctrine" promulgated by the media. If that question had been posed to the State Department, 99% would not have known the answer because there is no official Bush Doctrine. It has been used by the media to a variety of foreign policy issues: not just the one mentioned by Gibson. Failure to answer one suspect question hardly makes Palin stupid or naive. I doubt if Biden would have been able to figure out what Gibson meant by the Bush Doctrine. She has really gotten into the heads of the liberal Demos.
My team lost, I was cheering for Ron Paul. When someone throws out an opinion I disagree with, occasionally I feel obligated to participate in the conversation. And I might hold some liberal beliefs, but I probably am more conservative than liberal.
