Skip to comments.Charlie Gibson's Gaffe (He doesn't know the Bush Doctrine)
Posted on 09/13/2008 3:39:34 AM PDT by Mikey_1962
"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.
He asked Palin, "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?"
She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, "In what respect, Charlie?"
Sensing his "gotcha" moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, Gibson grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense."
I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Karl Rove addressed this very thing last evening on the O’Reilly Factor and made the exact same point(s): there have been no fewer than four “Bush Doctrines” as circumstances have evolved; the current incarnation is NOT what Charlie Gibson was pontificating about in his sneeringly condescending way.
Smart-assed “reporter” screws it up while trying to play “gotcha” with Palin and gets patted on the back for it. These people are just laughable.......
i am thinking of Sarah’s parents’ home, with the mooseheads mounted on the walls, and think they should consider making a space for a nice rendering of Charlie’s head as a Sarah trophy. go Sarah!
I watched a bit of Thusrday night and a most of last night, and from what I gather it would seem that Gibson’s entire purpose for these ‘interviews’ is to ask her question that she does not know. That seems to be the criteria for the questions. It’s confrontational in nature, It’s not really interviewing.
Obama has been running for president for going on 2 years and he has never had to answer questions such as these.
Palin has acquitted herself well and has come across as a bit tense and I think that is fine considering the confrontational format that ABC is using.
The work that she has put into this interview will serve her well when she is in friendlier confines, as well as when she is in the debate with Biden ~ if he’s still around.
Obama has been running for president for going on 2 years and he has never had to answer questions such as these.When Saturday Night Live did the skit in which Obama got asked the debate questions, "Are you comfortable? Do you need a pillow?", they were exaggerating for comedic effect. But not by much.
I watched the interview last night. I called charlie several names I’ll not list here. I wanted to smack him.
What an *sshole Charlie Gibson is. But now it is revealed for all to see. Way to go, Charlie!
I know she’ll give more interviews but I would also love it if she just went back to campaigning in her own style and ignored the press for the remainder of the campaign. She doesn’t need them. She’s better than they are.
One might almost say that the definition of the ‘Bush Doctrine’ has evolved to reflect Bush’s current worldview...
If you ask me, I’d say he’s a Bible-based Christian, leaning to an evangelical brand of Methodism.
But as for foreign policy and national security, there is no specific, singular “Bush Doctrine.” Gibson may as well have asked Palin, “How do you feel about Saurumanism?”
bush doctrine ping
I'm sorry I missed that, though I did get to read about it and enjoyed that. However, I would have added one more question from the MSM, "Would you like another Lewinski?"
Gibson was the one with hubris in this mini-event.
He hadn’t fully researched his own question - damning Palin for catching him at it.
I had the feeling he was going to insert his newly learned word hubris into the mix somehow... because he hadn’t researched his idiot question re the Doctrine....
Rove explained it well last evening on the Fox network which appears to be the only medium left for us which is not in an evil campaign to install the democrats as our governing party.
We think we have freedom of the press?
How about freedom FROM the press!
My guess is yours is an almost universal response outside of NYC, DC, KOS, DU, and mental hospitals.
I wouldn't be surprised if it brings us yet another million votes.
We got the PO'd PUMAs and this should get us anyone who has ever had an ill-prepared, ignorant of his own subject, put-down-the-student to compensate for his own inadequacies type of professor or even just a HS teacher.
Hmmm. That's a lot of people. We might get more than a million votes out of it.
With regards to the SNL “Do you want a pillow” excerpt, you have to find it suspicious that this video has ceased to exist on-line. The Obama camp must OWN the networks when one of the best clips out there has been completely expunged from existance.
And if you flipped by MSNBC by accident, you would have seen about a dozen of their analyst tell us Palin showed she is unqualified for office because of her answer. Not one of them even knew that Gibson got it wrong.
Gibsons interview of Palin was a disgrace. Here he had an opportunity to show even he can be fair and balenced and as Michelle Malkin said on her blog, ABC blew it. He would never have talked down to Obama the way he did to Palin. I guess you really cant teach an old dog new tricks.
By Charles Krauthammer
Saturday, September 13, 2008
“I've never met an unrepentant terrorist either, but I'd know what to do if I did”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.