12 Sep 2008 1045H

What is the Bush Doctrine anyway?

Yeah, it didn’t help that Mrs Palin didn’t know what Charlie Gibson was talking about, suppose you could call it a kind of casting of pearls before swine, really . . . but as it turns out, according to the WaPo, there are multiple versions of the Bush Doctrine, so who can blame her for not knowing what he’s talking about?

Permanent link to What is the Bush Doctrine anyway?

Filed under Politics

2 responses to "What is the Bush Doctrine anyway?"

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

16 Sep 2008 0643H

K writes:

I’d accept that if she hadn’t tried to bluff her way through since she had nooo idea what he was asking. I would have accepted her asking which version, or if she had addressed a different version, or if she had said do you mean “preemptive strikes?” Because really, that’s the one that most people think about and especially within the context of that interview? It was the one that made sense. So, no mercy on that one from me.

16 Sep 2008 0705H

Gino888 writes:

Agree. The twist on the Bush Doctrine which makes it so scary is that there need not even be a clear and present danger, only the suspicion that a foreign state or entity might just pose a future threat, which I take as “if he so much as looks at me cross-eyed.” That’s scary, especially when nuclear weapons are involved.

Just goes to show in a pissing contest between Biden and Palin for experience points, I’d go with Biden. How much about foreign policy can you cram in two weeks anyway? I guess Bush 2 showed us that the hard way.

And now it's your turn.

Fire your weapon, soldier. Just be careful of friendly fire. NAME & EMAIL required.

You must be logged in to post a comment.