[kabar]

Not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was is a major stumble, a gotcha moment, but it may be a blessing in disguise given the controversial nature of preemption doctrine. She muddled her way thru without supporting or opposing it specifically. I would like to hear McCain's position on it.

I thought she handled the NATO question very well. Article 5 of the NATO charter says an attack against one is an attack against all. If Georgia is a member, the assumption of the question asked by Gibson, then her response was spot on. I also liked the way she did not say that our response had to be limited to just a military option.

Gibson tried to make her into a religious zealot bent on launching a crusade against Muslims and using a plan from God. She handled it well along with her son's service.

The editing was atrocious sometimes cutting her off in mid-sentence. The question is what was cut out. And Gibson's palpable condescension was transparent and offputting. What an a**hole.

[padre35]

People tend to notice those things, if Gibson was a jerk, it will show, the camera never blinks, but the editing room floor is tough to escape from...

I hear she did fine, which means the Koz Kidz will be in a frenzy at the moment....the more they scream war monger, the better for Sarah Palin...

[dan on the right]

Bush Doctrine means several things (look it up), and the one “Charlie” quoted was only one - and the most controversial - hit before being hit. I had the same thought she did, this is a trick question, what part are you talking about.

Saw both segments - she did OK, didn’t fall in the obvious traps, but did repeat the same answer a few times to avoid answering questions - like invading Pakistan. All in all, not bad at all if you see the whole thing.

[PerConPat]

Not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was is a major stumble...

The interview is scheduled to start in a few minutes, in my locality. I will be listening very carefully to this exchange. It will be interesting to to hear Gibson's description of the "Bush Doctrine."

[tirednvirginia]

I disagree. Your version of what the “Bush Doctrine” is could be totally different than mine. Best to get what Charlie thought the Bush was before saying yes or no.

[PerConPat]

Not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was is a major stumble...

Palin's response was essentially to state that Bush is doing what he thinks necessary to fight terrorists hellbent on our destruction. This is not a response sufficiently specific to satisfy purists, and the "in what respect?" reply from Palin certainly implies a lack of exact understanding.

However, there will be enough room for both sides to maneuver and spin the exchange. I heard nothing fatal in Palin's responses.