16. 'Bush Doctrine' has become a repository of angst. The definition shifts based on who is invoking the term. Her asking for clarification/definition was appropriate.
That said...Charlie is a prick. How about giving Obambi a pop quiz, Charlie. Ask him why he listened to Wright for 20 years, about the two faces he displays (black or white) depending on who he is speaking to, about all his friends who plot to destroy America and who hate America. Ask him about pitching the memorial rose into the pool at the World Trade Center site. Accuse him of feeling embarrassed to be there in front of his Muslim "friends". How about it, prick?

Barb at 12:09AM on Sep 13th 2008

17. Oh, come on! The Bush Doctrine doesn´t exist as a phrase. If you had asked this to anybody before the interview, I bet few or nobody would have known what Charlie Gibson meant!

Sergio Diaz at 12:48PM on Sep 14th 2008

18. Seems to be an epidemic of fear going around...
_____________________

I fear the possibility of a Palin presidency for the same reason that I feared a George W. Bush presidency: Like Bush she is an inexperienced neophyte possessed of a manichean world view.

As a liberal Democrat I have voted for a Republican presidential candidate twice in my life. Both votes were cast for George Herbert Walker Bush. I didn't agree with his domestic agenda but he was a foreign policy realist who came to the office with an impressive foreign policy resume. He also extolled the virtue of prudence which conservatives since the time of Burke have supposedly held in high esteem.

By contrast, George W Bush, early on gave every indication of viewing the world through a simplistic manichean prisim. Together with his relative inexperience and lack of intellectual curiosity he proved especially prone to the kind of idealistic crusading that has led to our current misadventure in Iraq.

Sarah Palin is George W Bush but ten times worse. Her manichean world view is informed by religious sentiments that are no doubt sincere, but not very sophisticated or deep. Not only does she lack the experience and knowledge base, she also lacks the temperment that the office of the presidency demands. I'm not so much concerned about her being manipulated by a Maliki or a Putin; I'm much more concerned about her being manipulated by the same kind of Neo-conservative intellectuals who so easily manipulated George W. Bush.

At the outset of the political season I had a measure of respect for John McCain but no more. The Palin pick was a wreckless and cynical choice; one that put political expediency before the good of the nation.

randy at 12:57AM on Sep 13th 2008

19. So Sarah stumbles answering a question about the Bush doctrine- which is as ambiguous as Obama's change doctrine-

I recall, just the other day, Obama stumbling when asked whether he had heard his mentor, his friend, his pastor of 20 years, the Rev. Wright say any of those inflammatory things he said from the pulpit.

Those are the things you should be writing about. Not whether Sarah Palin's second cousin's dog was seen humping the neighbor kids leg 10 years ago. After all, it is Obama who is trying to become president

MDB at 1:11AM on Sep 13th 2008

20. A WOMAN WHO IS AN EXPERT AT BODY LANGUAGE SAID ON THE BILL O'REILLY SHOW THAT SARAH PALIN'S FACIAL EXPRESSIONS AND MANNERISMS WHEN SHE SPOKE AT THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION SHOWED HER TO BE ARROGANT. I'M NOT AN EXPERT OF BODY LANGUAGE, BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I SAW IN HER TOO, AND ALSO WHEN SHE TRAVELED THE U.S. WITH McCAIN BEFORE RETURNING TO ALASKA AND SOUNDED LIKE A PARROT SAYING THE SAME THINGS OVER AND OVER THAT SHE SAID AT THE CONVENTION. CHECK IT OUT. MUCH OF IT WAS FALSE.

Catherine at 1:16AM on Sep 13th 2008

21. Umm, randy, I believe it is McCain running for president and it is the "inexperienced" Palin running as VP.

And if Bush was inexperienced, just what qualifications does Obama have that make him experienced. A winning smile and a good speech he gave in 2002 will not solve the world's problems.

MDB at 1:19AM on Sep 13th 2008

22. Ohmigosh!! Sarah Palin's arrogant!! Cuz the smart lady on the show said she was!!

Newsflash--- I heard another smarter lady on another show say that Obama was arrogant.

MDB at 1:26AM on Sep 13th 2008

23. Cenk, Cenk, you just can't help but be a massive dumba** can you? There's no hay to be made of this, toolbox. Palin was telling Gibson that the "Bush Doctrine" is some crao liberal commentators made up, and that she would address issues but not as bundled in that smarmy question. Liberals, so sure they're smarter than everybody else. It gets so old. You're not smart. You're just some tool that went to college, followed orders from some ivory tower kook on what to think and read, and here you are. Cenk, you're an average guy. And no one's really paying attention. Good luck with the career, you're gonna need it LMMFAO.....

sub at 2:41AM on Sep 13th 2008

24. and Gibson is for sure a p***k. another liberal one, just like Cenk. just a lot smarter and more successful.....

sub at 2:46AM on Sep 13th 2008

25. Charlie Gibson made a gaffee, which was in fact, the question he asked Palin.

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 current Bush Doctrine.
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, he grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense." common usage today.

The "first" Bush doctrine was In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of The Weekly Standard titled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism,"

Then came 9/11, and that notion was immediately superseded by the advent of the war on terror. In his address to Congress nine days later, Bush declared: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." This "with us or against us" policy regarding terror -- first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan -- became the essence of the Second Bush Doctrine.

A year later, when the Iraq War was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of pre-emptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine, or the Third Bush doctrine.

Current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of Bush foreign policy and the one that most distinctively defines it: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush's second inaugural address: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

Not the Gibson doctrine of pre-emption.

Not the "with us or against us" no-neutrality-is-permitted policy of the immediate post-9/11 days.



Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed "doctrines" in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines, which came out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

Such is not the case with the Bush doctrine.

Yes, Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Gibson. Nor does the majority of those who post comments here, since there is such a differing of opinion here as there is with the general public.

CK ok Ana-go back to watching you tube for your next story. Next time, pick a subject you know something about

Robert OKane at 4:03AM on Sep 13th 2008

26. "Like Bush she is an inexperienced neophyte possessed of a manichean world view."-Randy

And Obama is an inexperienced neophyte who sees everything in massive layers of shades of gray. Everything with him has a bob and weave to it. I want leaders with some commitment and backbone and conviction. You should have core beliefs and flexibility to change if needed, but never continuously search for the most popular response. His foreign policy experience is about eighteen months sitting in committee meetings, telling General Petreaus the surge would never work and a rock star, staged tour through the Middle East and Europe.

As I recall, it wasn't very long ago that the same Charlie Gibson pummeled Obama at a debate that all the Liberals screamed was unfair because he wasn't quite prepared for the Capital Gains question (no teleprompter to tell him what to say)along with a few others. Stepenopolis was skewered by the left for being so hard on him as well. He's had two years to take these media shots, she's had 10 days - she'll be ready for Biden, I am sure. I expect him to make a sexist remark during that debate that will seal the deal. The windbag can control himself.

OpenYourBlindEye08 at 5:03AM on Sep 13th 2008

27. To C A Wren's post # 1 :Sarah Palin negotiating with Nouri Maliki? Don't worry, she and her husband ran a commercial fishing business and she had to negotiate with FISH BUYERS! If you were a well informed and knowledgeable individual, you would know that, after negotiating with FISH BUYERS, Malike would be "duck soup."
To Obama Biden's post # 12 : Do you actually believe and/or expect us to believe that Senator Biden actually fought against a local city law in another state? Come on now! Your gullibility may be catching.

longwalker at 5:47AM on Sep 13th 2008

28. "Aside from the vagueness of the "Bush Doctrine" someone tell me how many up close & personal interviews Obama was subjected to early on in his campaign?"

Obama was doing up close and personal interviews Bobby way back in 2001 before he ever was in the Senate. You guys keep harping on "executive experience". It doesn't mean dick, and McCain said so himself in the primary debates. So we obviously know why he picked Palin. Knowledge, forethought, intelligence and decision making count too. Palin's answers show a lack of knowledge. 2 weeks wasn't enough time to teach her.

"Why is it that the frontrunner for the Democratic ticket 18 mos. later still has so many voters "curious" about his past? Some voters have chosen to "accept" Obama's answers to very important underlying issues."

Because his name is Barack Hussein Obama and he is a person of color. A lot of people can't get passed that. His answers to the issues have been spot on in foreign policy, and I like his proposals for our Country.

"Give Palin 6 mos. on the national scene then re-interview her Gibson."

Less than 2 months to the election. She doesn't have 6 months.

"I think the American public certainly deserves to know the candidates but they also need to be aware of the process that's playing out skewing the objectivity of that same process...."

If you were being objective Bobby, you would come here saying how embarrassing this pick was. She has proven this with her constant talking point lies on the trail, and her seriously laughable interview.

Botts at 6:00AM on Sep 13th 2008

29. Let me count the times that Senator Obama has stumbled and mumbled....too many to name. What is President Bush's doctrine? Not too many voters would know. You are a nit picker, Cenk

sharon at 8:14AM on Sep 13th 2008

30. hey young jerk, what is the "Bush Doctrine"........

robrt lipton at 8:36AM on Sep 13th 2008