"Charlie Gibson's Gaffe
By Charles Krauthammer
Saturday, September 13, 2008; Page A17
"At times visibly nervous . . . Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of 'anticipatory self-defense.' "
-- New York Times, Sept. 12
Informed her? Rubbish.
The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.
There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Linked from http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/
If you bother to read Krauthammer's article, you might begin to understand why I've said Bush's foreign policy is liberal rather than conservative. Assuming you have understanding of these terms beyond cartoon concepts.
Bush doctrine
The whole thread (46 posts)
- Bush doctrine
- Totally clueless
- re: Totally clueless
- You shouldn't be so harsh, Robert.
- re: Bush doctrine
- I thought the Bush Doctrine was to make the oil company executives rich...
- Typical Krauthammering nitpick CYA maneuver.
- Odd that I, and most other observers, knew exactly what he was referring to....
- If you read Krauthammer regularly, you probably do believe Bush is a liberal. (n/t)
- "I've said Bush's foreign policy is liberal rather than conservative." So much for you. (n/t)
- Totally clueless
