Originally posted by MerkExactly right.
Well, considered Charlie Gibson himself didn't know what the Bush Doctrine is and refused to tell Palin which version he was talking about, we can hardly expect anyone to hit that one out of the park.
However, someone better prepared would have pointed out to Charlie that there is no singular 'Bush Doctrine'. That's a construct of the political left. Putting it back in his face and making him look like the moron would have been a far better answer.
The only person that committed a gaffe on the "Bush Doctrine" question was Gibson.
Originally posted by EladarI'm not talking about a peculiar group, but the leading popular journal for policy makers and policy analysts, indeed one of very few credible journals in any field where government officials and university intellectuals are equally welcome. Condoleezza Rice has written for Foreign Affairs. Recent and forthcoming issues include essays by John McCain, Barack Obama, Jon Edwards, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson, and other similarly obscure folks.
Wulebgr,
Just because one group uses the term one way does not mean that this is the definition of the term. I'm sure it does for you, but it doesn't from me.
one group pretty well describes that crew.
I'd say the definition in that peculiar journal might be something a potential vice president should have some grasp of
I'd say the definition in that peculiar journal might be something a potential vice president should have some grasp of
I'd say that unless they had a person get lucky and prep them on this one, neither McCain, Obama or Biden would have known either. I know I didn't know. I don't think 99.9% of all americans knew about this reference either. Pehaps after an internet search or reading some article about the matter after the fact would anyone have a clue.
As I've said before, but you are unwilling to acknowlege, there are at least three different Bush stances that could be known as the Bush doctrine. The one most people would identify as the Bush Doctrine is the War on Terror. It really isn't a war on terror. It is really a war on Islamic Extremists who really do need to be wiped off the face of the earth and something needs to be done about the circumstances that produced this kind of person.
Let's face it; if Palin had got the name of this country wrong, the same right wingers would be on this board saying she was outstanding and Gibson was biased. No fair minded person can watch the interview and believe anything but that Palin was repeating bland talking points given her by Republican handlers. If she's out of her league with Charles Gibson, I shudder to think how much damage this far right wack job could do as President.
Originally posted by EladarAll three positions have been articulated and evaluated in Foreign Affairs. I'm not bringing it up to highlight obscure points in some academic journal read only by 1% of the country. On the contrary, an easily accessed journal is simply one way to note that this conversation has been ongoing for years.
As I've said before, but you are unwilling to acknowlege, there are at least three different Bush stances that could be known as the Bush doctrine.
Make no mistake, if she had watched the first Kerry-Bush debate in 2004, she would have known all that is necessary, but only if she had listened and weighed Kerry's critique of the Bush doctrine.
Palin's answer demonstrated that she could not talk about any of the Bush doctrines, nor any other aspect of foreign policy from a simple prompt. Contrast Palin's Gibson interview with Obama's O'Reilly interview, and her ignorance becomes even more impressive.
The issue is not that every VP candidate should already be an expert in foreign affairs. Her stumbling to answer Gibson highlights the comedy of her hubris in directly challenging Obama on the issue of experience. It's clear that she is no where near in the same league as he is with respect to the capacity to discuss foreign policy.
Even if you agree with the Bush doctrine, you've gotta see that an unfortunate event that debilitates President McCain will leave the United States wholly unprepared to confront a hostile and dangerous world.
OTOH, Obama well understands that the Bush doctrine is one of the key messes the next administration must clean up so the world might become less hostile, and consequently American security something more than a fantasy.
These "three different stances" of Bush are each part of a coherent overall approach: unilateral actions rooted in the notion that the US no longer requires the approval of our allies. AS they say in my part of the US, "Cowboy up, let's git 'er done." That's bad foreign policy and anyone running for Vice President, President, or even Congress ought to at least be able to discuss it with some evidence of prior reflection.
Originally posted by no1marauderI agree. I think Palin did poorly in that interview. I've compared it to a muffed pump with a good bounce.
Let's face it; if Palin had got the name of this country wrong, the same right wingers would be on this board saying she was outstanding and Gibson was biased. No fair minded person can watch the interview and believe anything but that Palin was repeating bland talking points given her by Republican handlers. If she's out of her league with Charles Gibson, I shudder to think how much damage this far right wack job could do as President.
Now, she did a little better that we think, but not much. The interview aired suffered a lot of editing. The version with less editing is better.
Originally posted by MerkLOL, you crack me up. She could have come out and said "I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some, people out there in our nation don't have maps and, uh, I believe that our, uh, education like such as, uh, South Africa and, uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as, and, I believe that they should, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., uh, or, uh, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future, for our [children]." and you would have thought she did well.
I agree. I think Palin did poorly in that interview. I've compared it to a muffed pump with a good bounce.
Now, she did a little better that we think, but not much. The interview aired suffered a lot of editing. The version with less editing is better.
Originally posted by Eladar99.9999% of Americans are not running for Vice President of America.
I'd say that unless they had a person get lucky and prep them on this one, neither McCain, Obama or Biden would have known either. I know I didn't know. I don't think 99.9% of all americans knew about this reference either.
If there are 3 or 4 distinct ideas that can be construed to be the "Bush Doctrine" then at least you would think that a person putting their hat in the ring for the 2IC position may be able to rattle them off. Now whether she knew and because she didn't want to get into what it meant because at this moment the strategy seems to be forget our President is a republican with the name GW BUSH we may never know, but regardless of the spin on both sides and whether or not she had a ready soundbite, the point is that the unique aspect of the Bush teaching is not just a war on extremism or the use of pre-emptive strikes, its that as has been pointed out online, the Bush Doctrine is about attacking an "enemy" on the pretext that it has the capacity to be a belligerent influence.
Thats a significant evolution of pre-emptive action. Its not a unique act to pre-emptively strike, but you would at least expect them sabre rattling on your border, armed to the hilt. Going after a nation because they might soon posses that capacity is where Bush's doctrine differed with the rest of the world making his method of dealing with enemies unique enough to warrant giving his strategy a name all of its own.
If there are 3 or 4 distinct ideas that can be construed to be the "Bush Doctrine" then at least you would think that a person putting their hat in the ring for the 2IC position may be able to rattle them off.
Total BS. She answered the question based on what she believed to be "the Bush Doctrine". Since there is no such thing as "the Bush Doctrine" she answered the question based on what she believed "the Bush Doctrine" to be.
As I said earlier, I'm 99.9% certain that neither of the other candidates knew Charlie would have meant by "the Bush doctrine" either. The difference is that Charlie would have played it off it was a democrat. That's because Charlie is one of the left leaning journalists.
You wouldn't have noticed because anything the leftists do is right and anything conservatives do is wrong.
Originally posted by EladarI think he was pretty specific in his question. Here is a transcript:
[b]If there are 3 or 4 distinct ideas that can be construed to be the "Bush Doctrine" then at least you would think that a person putting their hat in the ring for the 2IC position may be able to rattle them off.
Total BS. She answered the question based on what she believed to be "the Bush Doctrine". Since there is no such thing as "the Bush Doctri ...[text shortened]... d because anything the leftists do is right and anything conservatives do is wrong.[/b]
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated 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 other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
PALIN: I agree that a president's job, when they swear in their oath to uphold our Constitution, their top priority is to defend the United States of America.
I know that John McCain will do that and I, as his vice president, families we are blessed with that vote of the American people and are elected to serve and are sworn in on January 20, that will be our top priority is to defend the American people.
He even fed her the answer.