Wait though. How did Gibson screw up by defining what he thought the doctrine was (which was, actually close to the original creation)? Even if he didn’t define it correctly in the end, him pointing out that she did not have any sort of knowledge about the doctrine is telling (it’s not like he set out to do that, he just asked her and she responded back like a dumbfounded teenager). Sarah should have had an idea of what it was, to begin with. Instead, she said, “In what regard,” and “his worldview” which was a QUESTION. Those sentences speak volumes about what she doesn’t know regarding foreign policy.

I love this country and I love that we are both liberal, conservative, republican, democratic, moderate, whatever. I don’t comment on here because I want to spread my worldview (taking from Sarah Palin), instead, I comment because I think it’s interesting and “fun” (if I could use the word) to have a meaningful debate. One of my best friends is a conservative and we talk about this stuff all the time and I’m really not liberal or conservative, I think I’m just common sense. I don’t disregard your opinion, what you think, or anything like that. I signed up here to be educated on a certain point of view and I’m learning a lot. That’s all.

But, I have to say (you knew that was coming), I would love to support Sarah Palin. BUT (again), you say you connected with that “what the heck is he talking about” mentality. That’s fine. However, Sarah Palin is trying to be the VP of this country. It’s ok for you, for me, for any of us not to know what the Bush doctrine is (at least to a degree), but for a person who is running for a major federal position to have no idea what it is is really scary. It’s the reasoning behind the Iraq War, it could explain many wars in the future, and for her to not know what it is, again, terrifying.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Are you telling me that it’s OKAY for a governor to be nominated for the VP when she has no idea what the Bush Doctrine is? Even if it has evolved, over time, the premise is relatively the same as it was when it was proposed. It’s not Charlie Gibson’s fault that he asked if she believe in it or not. If you watch the interview instead of react to transcription, you see that he didn’t even think that she would wonder what the doctrine is. When he saw an avenue to make a point, that she didn’t know what the doctrine was, that’s not a blunder, it’s called good journalism.

i’m not an obama supporter, but if barack obama had been asked that question, and couldn’t answer it, we’d all be jumping down his throat.

and yes, i believe in many things. one of the things i believe in the most is that stupidity should not help you get elected in politics, yet somehow, sarah palin still stands…

In other blogs on this site, some have heaped scorn upon those in countries such as Australia, [from where I'm writing] who strongly favour Obama.
Surely, now Ms Palin has been selected, you know why--this is Serious!
Ms Palin may be a few months from ascending to the presidency. If so it would occur at atime when the natural supporters of the U.S, those who regard the U.S as the natural leaders of democratic thought, will be in complete despair.
Is this unreasonable? Your current president has botched international relations completely. Far from showing leadership, he's spuurned the chance to lead a coalition with essentially similar interests. It's not altogether surprising--I think I recall that he'd rarely travelled outside the U.S prior to hiselection.
Now the Republicans have chosen as the running mate of a decent 72yo, another person with zero interest or knowledge of the world ouside the U.S. [I have no interest in any internal Alaskan issues]What reaction would you expect this `to produce amongst those who desperately wish the U.S to recover the ground which has been lost.The U.S reputation must be regained-can you be sure it will be?

Calling the interview editing “curious” is being gracious. I would have used the words purposely deceitful, and have written abc news about it. I understand the media has to sensationalize to sell newspapers and eyeballs, but they crossed the line by willfully biasing their “reporting.” And most of their viewers will not even know of the manipulation. Shameful. Disgusting. Unacceptable.

Check out KRNV TV (krnv.com)’s homepage for a clip of a Reno reporter who attended the Palin rally in Carson City, NV on Saturday, September 13. Contrary to national media reports of a crowd of “5,000″, the reporter at the rally says in the clip that the crowd was “at least 10,000″.

You’ve got to see the clip to feel the enthusiasm of the crowd. Go to local news outlets for McCain/Palin rallies and you get a MUCH better for feel for what is ACTUALLY going on at the rallies, contrary to NYT/Wash Post/ABC reports…..

Barack Hussein Obama must withdraw from the Presidential race and forfeit the election because of his ongoing conspiracies and attempts to overthrow the government of the United States. He has counseled, aided and abetted others to do the same, committing and causing acts of subversion, infiltration, and insurgency in or about Chicago, Illinois, while acting as a covert Marxist propagandist, agitator and indoctrinator, and posing as a community organizer. His acts are “high crimes and misdemeanors,” within the Constitution’s meaning, and disqualify him for the office of President. His acts, and those of his co-conspirators, are also actionable under criminal law.

I am a well read, well informed college graduate with a consuming interest in foreign policy, but I was unaware that there was a “Bush Doctrine” until Charlie Gibson mentioned it. After reading the leftist apologists for Charlie Gibson, I realize it is now pejorative liberal codespeak for resolute foreign policy, having evolved from Mr. Krauthammer’s original usage. They have learned, much to their chagrin, that the label “cowboy” is not taken as an insult in “flyover” country. So, to term it “Cowboy Diplomacy” would not have the damning effect they want.

I am not surprised that Sarah Palin was momentarily confused by the question. I do not believe she has attended many of the Inside-the-Beltway/ Malibu/ Manhatten parties where Bush-bashing and counting the days until January 20, 2009, are the highlight. She is too busy being Chief Executive of the republic’s largest state and raising a family with an undocumented Guatemalan nanny.

I also find it interesting that the media is spending so much time and expending so much effort to diminish the Republican VP candidate in order bring her closer to the Democrat’s Pesidential candidate. Am I the only one to notice that the media has to set up traps for Sarah Palin in hopes of recording a gaffe, but one needs only turn on a camera at a Joe Biden or Barry O appearance to achieve the same result?

claim that Palin got off easy with softball questions by historically “conservative” Gibson. But, is it not funny that Palin as a VP candidate is being questioned on whether she is ready to be president, but Obama as a Presidential candidate is not. Hell, I wonder if he is even ready to be VP much less President. Even the Democrats don’t discuss Obama’s experience that will lead him to be an effective President, instead they claim that of course he is ready to be President “because he has been campaigning for the last 18 months”.

I was totally turned off by Gibson at the very beginning when he asked Palin if she was being arrogant by her admission of being ready to be VP and perhaps President if it one day came to that. Obama has not been asked if he is ready to be President. Obama has not been accused of being arrogant because he is running for President on such a lean resume. Of course she feels ready…she would not have accepted if she did not. I thought his comment was completely inappropriate and unprofessional.

To the point of the Bush Doctrine…I thought she nailed it. The Dems lost their number one argument of “more of the same”. If she represented another four years of Bush, wouldn’t she have known what Gibson was talking about and answered the qeustion with more rhetoric?

I personally have no problem during an interview with the interviewee asking for clarification to be able to answer a question effectively. On the other hand, I cannot listen to Obama stutter with his “uhms”, and “I-I-I” and “wait a minute, hold ons”. Sarah spoke with eloquance, she answered from her heart instead of pandering. She nailed the interview on all aspects and handled silly-belittling questions with grace.

The media and the rest of these folks do not get and never will.
Video shot at the Palin rally in NV yesterday

The people love Sarah Palin
Not because she is a conservative.
Not because she is a women.
Not because she is independent.
Not because she is a Mother.
Not because she is a hunter.
Not because she is a Hockey MOM.
Not because she is smart

Its because of all of those things and none of those things.
People look at Sarah Palin and in her they see themselves.
And every time the MSM takes a swing at her they are really taking a swing at all these people in America that see themselves in Sarah.

I proofread my comment several times and still messed up. It goes to show my brain knew what I meant even though my fingers did not.

I meant to say she is raising a famliy WITHOUT an undocumented Guatemalan nanny. I can hear many of the elite out there protesting “but my nanny isn’t Guatemalan” while missing the whole point.

Once again, sorry. I am not part of the Obama jihad that is spreading scurilous rumors.

I check the Intrade quotes several times a day, and McCain’s progress is steady and inexorable. Be sure that the deocrats are following this too. I feel, no I glory in their pain. Is that disrespectful?

By the way, for a couple of days early last week there were strange swings in the presidential quotes, as though someone were trying to prop up Obama’s value. If I were Axelrod/Plouffe/Soros, that’s what I would do.

Comparing Gibson’s interviews with Obama and Palin points out just how biased his “journalism” is.

Nancy Kallitechnis at Journal of Feminist Insight gives the following summary of the questions asked of the two.

Obama interview:
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5000184

• How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?

• How does it feel to win?

• How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?

• Who will be your VP?

• Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?

• Will you accept public finance?

• What issues is your campaign about?

• Will you visit Iraq?

• Will you debate McCain at a town hall?

• What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/11/raw-data-palins-interview-with-abc-news/

• Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?

• Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?

• Questions about foreign policy

• -territorial integrity of Georgia

• -allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO

• -NATO treaty

• -Iranian nuclear threat

• -what to do if Israel attacks Iran

• -Al Qaeda motivations

• -the Bush Doctrine

• -attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan

• -Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]

Thanks to “Dimsdale” commenting at Michelle Malkin’s blog for pointing out this link.

Given the lack of any negative commentary in this post directed to any response by Governor Palin to any other question posed to her by Charles Gibson during his two-day interview designed solely to embarrass her, I think it’s fair to conclude that she teed up Mr. Gibson and knocked him out of the park on every other question. Her response to the “Bush Doctrine” question can fairly be called a Ground Rule Double.

All questions and answers aside, I found the body language actually pathetic! Chin down, peeking over his reading goggles, stiff lipped and giving the all around appearance of a bully. What I saw was some form of superiority he was trying to portray. He never would have done that to his girl, Hilzilla.

It is pretty clear the socialists, the media and Hollywood Hippies just don’t like her because she is a true threat to their aganda, period! A candidate who actually believes in a republic with a constitution is just not what they want.

Vote For Barry – He has the final solution!

There is a lot of misrepresentation and misconception as to the working names of Bush foreign policy ideas being pushed in reaction to Palin’s performance, especially in Krauthammer’s article. What he is describing as the fourth Bush Doctrine, is not in fact the Bush Doctrine. He’s actually referring to the Freedom Agenda. I know it sounds just like jargon, but in reality there is a difference. If you look at White House press releases, and the stuff coming out of the State Department, programs related to the development of democracy are aways discussed as being part of the Freedom Agenda. The Bush Doctrine, at least in State Department and International NGO circles (those are the people I am most connected to here in DC) is as Gibson stated it was, the use of preemptive military force against potential threats. Promoting democracy abroad falls under the guise of the Freedom Agenda. There is a difference, at least to individuals working here in DC on foreign policy matters. Anyway who tries to tell you they are the same is either lying, doesn’t know what they are talking about, or are trying really hard to make Palin seem like she was knowledgable on this issue. Listen, she screwed up. It’s ok. What drives me insane is feeding people false information, like the Bush Doctrine has no set meaning, to try to smooth it over. Dumbing down the electorate is not the way to win an election. I hope both sides will stop with this from now on, but I doubt it.

DC71 provides a nice explanation of the differences between the Bush Doctrine and the Freedom Agenda, but also illistrates the point about the “inside the beltway” mentality. I do not fault DC71 for knowing and caring about the differences, but DC71 misses the point that it only matters to the wonks working on it daily. To the “great unwashed” in the hinterland the difference is academic. I am sorry that drives DC71 crazy.

I could hold forth ad-nauseum regard the different physical and chemical properties of various types of steel and the uses of each type, but, as long as the crane or bridge or building containing the steel does not collapse, it doesn’t matter to most people.