Free Republic

History is hard when you have a thrill running down your leg.... For a show that prides itself on its knowledge of news and history, Hardball with Chris Matthews made some embarrassing errors last night, including the fact that Ron Reagan Jr. apparently doesn't understand the Bush Doctrine. Chris and Ron, his guest "expert" on Afghanistan, came up with two historical inaccuracies within minutes of one another. When conservative guest Frank Gaffney said he hoped Afghanistan could be pacified, as Germany was after World War II, Matthews snapped: Matthews: There were no American soldiers killed after V-E Day, and...

Somehow NRO is having some trouble posting my full reply to my friend Andy McCarthy. I’m sure it will be fixed soon, but in the meantime, here it is: Nothing is better than getting honest criticism from a serious person. It’s almost impossible to find it nowadays, and I’m very grateful to Brother Andy for his kind words and trenchant comments. Ditto to Mark. How did these lawyers learn to write so well? I thought they beat that out of you in Law School… Bush Doctrine: As I remember it, we declared war on terrorist groups and on the countries...

FORMER President George W. Bush's policy of en couraging Middle East democratization has just produced spectacular results in the Kuwaiti general election. In a major victory for the secular reformists over the Islamists, women -- four of them -- were elected to the 50-seat national parliament for the first time. The Islamists' share of Sunday's vote dropped almost 30 percent from the last general election, held just more than a year ago. The radical Muslim Brotherhood lost three of its four seats, while the hard-line Salafis dropped to two from four. The election of women represents a political earthquake in...

Have you ever made the point that President George W. Bush kept this country safe after 9/11, only to have a liberal respond: "Nuh-uh! You can't prove Bush kept us safe!" This fallacious posturing is rooted in the ridiculous assumption that, because terrorists have not conceded that Bush defeated them, we cannot not say "Bush succeeded in keeping America safe after 9/11." I reference Article I, Section 53 of The Holy Doctrine of Liberalism, which clearly states, "Insist everything George W. Bush ever did was wrong, or you run the risk of accidentally validating conservatism." I'm here to tell you...

Vice President Joe Biden warned Saturday that the US stands ready to take pre-emptive action against Iran if it does not abandon nuclear ambitions and its support for terrorism. But in his first major policy speech as President Barack Obama's No 2, Biden also declared the US open for talks with Iran and Russia to repair relations. And he reached out to the world with a promise that the Obama administration will work with allies to solve global problems. "We will draw upon all the elements of our power - military and diplomatic, intelligence and law enforcement, economic and cultural...

From the day President Bush took office, the long knives were out for him - in ways they will not (and should not) be out for President-elect Barack Obama. The chattering class saw Dubya as a walking style crime in a cowboy suit. They hit Bush for everything - for the way he mangled syntax, for the books he read, because he worked out too much. Note now that the buff Obama is taking office, stories gushing about Obama's daily workouts flood the channels. Oh, yes, and the same people who belittled Bush for sending troops to war even though...

From the day President Bush took office, the long knives were out for him - in ways they will not (and should not) be out for President-elect Barack Obama. The chattering class saw Dubya as a walking style crime in a cowboy suit. They hit Bush for everything - for the way he mangled syntax, for the books he read, because he worked out too much. Note now that the buff Obama is taking office, stories gushing about Obama's daily workouts flood the channels. Oh, yes, and the same people who belittled Bush for sending troops to war even though...

FOR EIGHT years George W. Bush pulled the levers of government—sometimes frantically—never realizing that they were disconnected from the machinery and the exertion was largely futile. As a result, the foreign and security policies declared by the president in speeches, in public and private meetings, in backgrounders and memoranda often had little or no effect on the activities of the sprawling bureaucracies charged with carrying out the president’s policies. They didn’t need his directives: they had their own.Again and again the president declared “unacceptable” activities that his administration went on to accept: North Korean nuclear weapons; North Korean missile tests;...

Two events earlier this month summed up differing views of George W. Bush's Middle East record. In one, Bush himself offered a valedictory speech, declaring that "the Middle East in 2008 is a freer, more hopeful, and more promising place than it was in 2001." In the other, an Iraqi journalist, Muntadar al-Zaidi, expressed disrespect and rejection by hurling shoes at Bush as the U.S. president spoke in Baghdad, yelling at him, "This is a farewell kiss! Dog! Dog!" Ironically, Zaidi's very impudence confirmed Bush's point about greater freedom; would he have dared to throw shoes at Saddam Hussein?While I...

One theme that has become noticeably absent from Barack Obama's recent press announcements, his weekly internet broadcasts, or his discussion of public policy from his imaginary "Office of the President Elect" (complete with its own seal) has been the discussion of immediately bringing the troops home. The signs of Barack Obama going back on his biggest direct campaign promise are numerous. Secretary Gates is slated to stay on as his Defense Secretary. By extension that means that a number of items will likely not be touched. For starters it is likely the new administration will not revise Iraq policy given...

Former Secretary of State George P. Shultz says President-elect Barack Obama should practice President Bush's doctrine of pre-emptive defense against terrorism that has kept the country safe since the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. Shultz credited Mr. Bush with pushing "a controversial but important idea" he said has made the U.S. a harder target when other nations were being hit by terrorists. "That is, that in this age where there are people who want to do damage to us through terrorist tactics, you want to be aggressive in trying to find out what might happen before it happens, and then stop...

On November 8, 2008 newly elected US President Barack Obama in a telephonic conversation with President Zardari offered to play role in revival of Depleting Economic condition and fortifying the bilateral relations of two countries. He also said that he looked forward to further improve mutual relations and will provide full support for Democracy to Pakistan being their important ally. President Zardari while reciprocating his sentiments expressed the hope for better and improved relations between the two countries in coming days. Though Pakistan supported US out rightly in war against terror during Musharraf regime but even then relations between Washington...

WASHINGTON -- It is an odd thing to observe a historical debate on events about which one possesses the knowledge of a participant -- something like watching archeologists dig and sift through your living room, proposing their own interpretations of your photos and knickknacks. And it raises a disturbing prospect: That most such debates are conducted by experts possessing great confidence and little knowledge. This controversy began when ABC's Charles Gibson asked Sarah Palin to give her view of the Bush doctrine. Palin's vague answer provoked a dismissive response from Gibson, who defined the doctrine as "anticipatory self-defense." Charles Krauthammer...

Sarah Palin's reputation survived her interview with ABC News' Charlie Gibson. The same cannot be said for Charlie Gibson. On my radio show last week, I twice defended Barack Obama. Once, against those conservatives who took a comment made by Obama in an interview with George Stephanopoulos out of context and suggested that Obama had inadvertently admitted he was a Muslim. And again, when I contended that Obama did not imply that Palin was a pig in his now famous "lipstick on a pig" reference. I mention this only because I want to assume that people of good will on...

Charlie Gibson’s three-part interview (video) with Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin last week scored big in the ratings, reports trade pub Broadcasting & Cable ... The portion of the interview that created the most buzz was Gibson’s “gotcha” line of questioning on the Bush Doctrine that Palin gamely parried as she tried to figure out what, exactly, he was asking her to comment on until Gibson clarified his question with what turned out to be an incomplete explanation of the Bush Doctrine ... Amazingly, the most sympathetic reactions to Palin’s predicament over the Bush Doctrine came from Dem...

Sarah Palin may be excused for not knowing "the Bush doctrine." The term was thrown at her like a curve ball during an interview last week by ABC's Charles Gibson, whose own description was incomplete. But her assertion of a potential new "doctrine" – one she might bring to the White House – is far less pardonable. She said during that interview that the United States "must do whatever it takes" to fight terrorism. This implies the same amoral existentialism that terrorists use. It goes against the very principles of Western civilization that the jihadists seek to destroy. Ever since...

SARAH Palin, John McCain's vice-presidential running mate, continues to drive the liberal establishment mad - both in the US and around the world (including Australia). When McCain first chose Palin as his running mate, every liberal commentator called it a disaster. She gave a brilliant speech atthe Republican convention and the McCain ticket suddenly shot ahead of Barack Obama, nationally and in key battleground states. The liberal consensus replied that she didn't write the speech herself, as though Obama, McCain and Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, don't have speech writers. Just wait till Palin has to do unscripted interviews, they...

Obama interview: 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: 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...

<p>WASHINGTON -- Informed her? Rubbish.</p> <p>The Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.</p> <p>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.</p>

I guess newsboy Charlie Gibson was the one who didn't do his homework. If, instead of being cute and trying to play gotcha, he had simply asked whether she agreed with the policy of preemptive strikes on America's would-be enemies, he would have been fine. But he was too clever by half. From The Washington Post. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin seemed puzzled Thursday when ABC News anchor Charles Gibson asked her whether she agrees with the "Bush doctrine." "In what respect, Charlie?" she replied. Intentionally or not, the Republican vice presidential nominee was on to something. After a brief exchange,...

September 13, 2008 Op-Ed Columnist She’s Not Ready By BOB HERBERT While watching the Sarah Palin interview with Charlie Gibson Thursday night, and the coverage of the Palin phenomenon in general, I’ve gotten the scary feeling, for the first time in my life, that dimwittedness is not just on the march in the U.S., but that it might actually prevail. How is it that this woman could have been selected to be the vice presidential candidate on a major party ticket? How is it that so much of the mainstream media has dropped all pretense of seriousness to hop aboard...

"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...

Many Versions of 'Bush Doctrine' Palin's Confusion in Interview Understandable, Experts Say By Michael Abramowitz Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, September 13, 2008; A01 Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin seemed puzzled Thursday when ABC News anchor Charles Gibson asked her whether she agrees with the "Bush doctrine." "In what respect, Charlie?" she replied. Intentionally or not, the Republican vice presidential nominee was on to something. After a brief exchange, Gibson explained that he was referring to the idea -- enshrined in a September 2002 White House strategy document -- that the United States may act militarily to counter a perceived threat...

Charles Krauthammer, the man who coined the phrase “Bush doctrine,” turns the table on the condescending Charlie Gibson. Take off your smart glasses, Charlie. Because you’ve been schooled: 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,...

... Bush's refreshing question was: Why? We don't need Russians cutting our offensive weapons through arms-control treaties. And we don't need Russians telling us whether or not to build defensive weapons. This was the genesis of the Bush Doctrine, now taking shape as the Administration takes power....

...In a conference call with reporters, Obama said Clinton would continue the "Bush doctrine" of only speaking to leaders of rogue nations if they first meet conditions laid out by the United States....

Charles Gibson, foot-swinging ABC News “gotcha” merchant, looked like someone poured castor oil in his Cheerio bowl just prior to his interview with Governor Sarah Palin. He had a scowl on his kisser that would’ve made WC Fields envious, all the while masterfully balancing those professorial eyeglasses on the end of his nose like a seasoned circus performer handles the tightrope. In retrospect, he probably should have – and certainly could have - been a smidgen more specific when grilling Governor Palin about the Bush Doctrine. Still, the onus was squarely on the Governor of the great state of Alaska...

"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. 12Informed her? Rubbish. The 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...

Palin Was Right to Be Confused by Question, Experts Say By Michael Abramowitz Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, September 13, 2008; Page A01 Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin seemed puzzled Thursday when ABC News anchor Charles Gibson asked her whether she agrees with the "Bush doctrine." "In what respect, Charlie?" she replied. Intentionally or not, the Republican vice presidential nominee was on to something. After a brief exchange, Gibson explained that he was referring to the idea -- enshrined in a September 2002 White House strategy document -- that the United States may act militarily to counter a perceived threat emerging...

Charles Krauthammer, who originally coined the phrase “The Bush Doctrine” in 2001, thinks Charles Gibson doesn’t know what it means, and argues that “in what respect, Charlie?” is a sensible response to an ambiguous question.

"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...

URL is for search in the Juneau newspaper for "Bush Doctrine" Returns three hits: one editorial and two letters to the editor.

I don't go along with the view that her answers on the "Bush doctrine" were a serious misstep, however. True, she did not know what that term meant. The fact is, it means different things to different people. If Gibson had put that question to me, my answer would have been: "It depends what you mean by the Bush doctrine." In effect, that was what she said. And it deserves to be noted (as Jim points out, but with a kindly lack of emphasis, calling it a minor error) that Gibson himself apparently does not know what it means. GIBSON...

What good are Palin’s libertarian-conservative bona fides if she’s Joe Lieberman on foreign policy? Don’t get me wrong: I am quite delighted to see a Republican running for high office who is a Bush Doctrine virgin. But to my infinite frustration, a moderate degree of hawkishness such as my own — I supported the Iraq war on international-legal grounds; I supported independence for Kosovo on grounds of honor for the US and expediency for Europe; I am a philosemitic friend to Israel, but think the challenges facing the US and Israel are not identical — is inadequate to the folks...

ABC News’ Charles Gibson, who is being credited with stumping Sarah Palin on the definition of the “Bush Doctrine,” has himself defined the nebulous phrase in a variety of ways, including one that mirrored Palin’s disputed explanation. Gibson and his colleagues have been all over the map in defining the Bush Doctrine over the last seven years. In 2001, Gibson himself defined it as “a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated.” But when Palin tried to give a similar definition on Thursday, Gibson corrected her.

From the always objective Wikipedia: (Click images to enlarge) Mind you, this is just page one of the revisions. The rewrites just since September 12th go on for pages.So there is an advantage to being computer savvy after all.

In American foreign policy, a new motto: Don't ask. Tell For eight years the Clinton Administration preached the need for exquisite sensitivity to the Russians. They'd had a rough time. They needed nurturing from their new American friends. They got it. We fed them loans, knowing that much of the money would disappear corruptly. We turned away from atrocity in Chechnya lest we weaken the new Russian state. But most important, we went weak in the knees on missile defense. The prospect of American antiballistic missiles upset the Russians. And upsetting the Russians was something we simply were not to...

Palin not knowing what exactly they were referring to, isn't like she is stupid , she isn't up on the terminology of the inside the beltway crowd. There is NO SUCH DOCUMENT and its not a REAL THING. The main elements of the Bush Doctrine are normally extracted form a National Security Council document, National Security Strategy of the United States, published on September 20, 2002, and this document is often cited as the definitive statement of the BUSH Doctrine. The National Security Strategy was updated in 2006. The Bush Doctrine is only a phrase used to describe various related...

How many of readers here, honestly, know what is Bush Doctrine. I mean, if you ask others whether preemptive attack is a part of Bush Doctrine, many will say yes. Now close book, without hint, what is Bush doctrine? I don’t think many can answer this question. I just don’t understand why Gibson likes this sort of academic questions. Let me give you an example, use “Bush Doctrine” site:www.nytimes.com and search on google, you will only find 658 results. If you search for “President Bush” site:www.nytimes.com, you will find about 183,000 results. If this doctrine is so well-known, why it...

The left is going bananas over Governor Palin's answer to Gibson's "Bush Doctrine" question. Andy McCarthy has a good post on it over in the Corner, but I thought I'd add a little history of the "Bush Doctrine" using the search function at NYTimes.com. The term "Bush Doctrine" looks to have been used for the first time, post 9/11, in mid-November: A senior administration official said Mr. Bush's speech would be a fleshing out of what the White House calls the Bush Doctrine — the assertion that nations that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. In January...

The media is trying to make hay that Palin did not know what the Bush Doctrine was. Wikipedia is not a great source, but it does provide a consensus of sorts that tells us what terms mean. According to Wikipedia: "The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of United States president George W. Bush, created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was...

ABC'S BUNGLES BOTCHES MAR PALIN INTERVIEW September 12, 2008 LAST night, Sarah Palin had her first big-time media interview with Charlie Gibson on ABC World News Tonight. At times, Palin seemed to know less than she should. On the other hand, Gibson sometimes seemed to "know" things that just aren't so. Her responses to Gibson's cross-examining seemed canned and rehearsed, a little like the answers you might give in a tough college interview. But that may be a result of the ham-fisted editing - which seemed to cut her off mid-thought on many answers. ABC should release the entire, unedited...

What Exactly Is the 'Bush Doctrine'? It's being taken in some quarters as revelatory of inexperience that Sarah Palin sought clarification when ABC's Charlie Gibson asked her about the Bush Doctrine. To review, here is the passage from the transcript. GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine? PALIN: In what respect, Charlie? GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be? PALIN: His world view. GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war. PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world...

http://www.mikefrancesa.com/wordpress/?p=1110Flashback: Barack Obama didn’t seem to know what the Bush Doctrine was all about either September 11th, 2008 · No Comments In a Democratic Primary Debate, the One, the Messiah, Barack Obama had a chance to define the Bush doctrine and then give his vision for the Obama doctrine. Here is what he said, see if any of it reminds you of a certain politician: SIEGEL: Senator Obama, the short version of the Obama Doctrine. SEN. OBAMA: Well, I think one of the things about the Obama Doctrine is it’s not going to be as doctrinaire as the Bush Doctrine...

For those here who think Sarah flubbed the "Bush Doctrine" question, I would like to remind you what the moonbats and their MSM supporters think the Bush doctrine is: 1) Invade a sovereign country. 2) Kill 1 million innocent civilians 3) Do it based on what you know is a lie, 4) Do it so that your oil cronies can take over the oil fields. Sarah knew it was a trap (I watched ABC just to make sure - don't tell me I don't have a strong stomach!) She responded by making Charlie clarify what he meant before she answered....

The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of United States president George W. Bush, created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. 1) The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan. 2) Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a threat to the security...

There's been some flap from FReeps on one of the Charlie Gibson Interview threads that Palin goofed on not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was. What the heck does that have to do with shooting moose? Really is this a media created buzz word? Do they teach it in War College? Is it that important to know? Does it matter?

Kosovo's recent unilateral declaration of independence brought back memories. I publicly opposed NATO's attack on Serbia - carried out in the name of protecting the Kosovars from Serb atrocities - in March 1999. At that time, I was a member of the Opposition Front Bench - or Shadow Government - in Britain's House of Lords. The then Conservative leader, William Hague, immediately expelled me to the "back benches." Thus ended my (minor) political career. Ever since, I have wondered whether I was right or wrong. I opposed military intervention for two reasons. First, I argued that while it might do...

The Iranian regime is gloating at having faced down the international community's deadline for halting uranium enrichment. Recently a Kuwaiti paper reported yet another ominous development. Iran is constructing a secret nuclear reactor in the Zargan region in order to avoid international oversight. A nuclear plant would threaten the existence of Israel and hold the rest of the world to ransom. Yet from all the signals coming out of Washington and Jerusalem it seems that the Bush administration has decided not to confront Iran but to appease it. Recent signs of this include its decision to station diplomats in Iran...