It's rather amusing that nobody questioned Palin's blank look as anything other than ignorance for a couple of days, until this excuse was hatched; then, all of a sudden, no Republican had ever heard of the "Bush Doctrine".
Let's cut through the obfuscation to a simple fact: When asked the question, Palin tried to bullshit her way through it. Not once, not twice, but three times. She tried to bait Gibson into giving her a clue, but he caught himself just in time, and bored in on her attempt to weasel.
If Palin had the slightest clue about the subject, and in particular she knew of four or six or however many versions of the Bush Doctrine, why wasn't her reply a simple "which one, Charlie? There's [this one] and [that one] and ...."
No, she didn't have a clue.
Current Events » in reply to Bush doctrine
Totally clueless
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
