Sarah Palin, The Bush Doctrine, and Why It's Smart To Be Dumb

It's one of the most cringe-worthy moments in recent American political history:

"Do you believe in the Bush Doctrine?"

The awkward pause, then the smug, patronizing comeback.

"In what respect, Charlie?"

Charlie Gibson, taken aback, perhaps realizing that this is The Moment for which he'll be known for the rest of his career.

"The Bush -- w-w-well, what do you interpret it to be?"

Story continues below

advertisement

And then the painful, filibustering non-answer that I can hardly bear to watch without feeling embarrassed for Sarah Palin, John McCain, and this great nation of ours.

I'm not saying that every American besides Governor Palin knows what the Bush Doctrine is. Hell, I wasn't sure I knew what it was until Charlie Gibson confirmed it for me. But then again, I'm not a Republican governor who's running for national office.

Now, if Joe Biden had said this on national TV, the election would be over. Obama would either be calling Hillary Clinton and begging her to take over the #2 slot or he'd be busy getting to work on his concession speech.

But these are the Republicans, they of vaunted attack machines and vast right-wing conspiracies. Masters of spin, purveyors of semi-libelous commercials, wizards of righteous indignation and instigators of class warfare. If Sarah Palin doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is, well, my goodness, neither do a lot of hardworking, God-fearing hockey moms out there in the heartland. They don't have time to read those fancy city newspapers with lots of big words explaining the Bush Doctrine. They're not eggheads like Barack Obama and Joe Biden, those elitist intellectuals who sit around studying doctrines while raising taxes on hardworking Americans like you and me.

You think Governor Palin is going to waste her time reading books about the Bush Doctrine? No, she's busy with the responsibilities that come with being governor of the great state of Alaska. She's got moose to field-dress, bridges to nowhere to say "No" to, jets to sell on eBay. Maybe community organizers have the time to talk about the Bush Doctrine. But Sarah Palin's too busy trying to reform Washington. By way of Alaska.

Before long, Obama and Biden will have to defend themselves against accusations that they're smart. They'll start claiming that they not only didn't know what the Bush Doctrine is but that they were unaware that Bush was even president. "We thought we were running against his father," they'll say. "We were too busy going to church and shooting animals and saying 'No' to lobbyists to pay attention to any of that Washington election nonsense. Hell, we don't even know how to read."

And the election will become about who's dumber and more ignorant.

And you know which party's going to win that one.

Comments

[neworleanslady68]

I couldn't believe when I heard the spin that this blunder was a good thing because "ordinary" people could relate.

I'm no dummy, but I'm with Bill Maher on this subject: "When it comes to picking a president, a want someone so much smarter than I am that it positively SHAMES ME."

[rcwblessed]

Sometimes I feel like HALF of this nation has been so dumbed-down under the Bush administration. In that respect, it's believable that "ordinary" people could relate to the spin put on Palin's inability to answer the "Bush Doctrine" question. Daily, I thank God that I am a part of the other half!!! And I totally agree with Bill Maher's position on this.

BARACK the VOTE '08

[Adelise]

Charles Krauthammer 9/13 Washington Post article "Charlie Gibson's Gaffe" on Bush Doctrine

"no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. There have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another...and the one Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

When the Iraq war was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of preemptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine. It's not. It's the third in a series, superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years: the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was 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." This sweeping, universal declaration of American freedom agenda was meant to echo Kennedy's pledge in his inaugural address that the US "shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." It draws also from Truman doctrine and from Wilson's 14 points.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html

[realpolitic]

Well, Palin had never even heard of the Bush Doctrine. She thought it may have been some idea of his world view. The thought of the world view of George Bush is very scary, by the way.

Besides Charles Krauthammer is one of the biggest neocon around and a huge Republican apologist. You may as well listen to the McCain campaign for your sound bites.

[PensiveObserver]

How is it that McCain/Palin are just an extension of Bush if she doesn't even know what the Bush Doctrine is? Guess that whole argument is blown....

[realpolitic]

In Office, Palin Hired Friends and Hit Critics

Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.

Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska professor, sought the e-mail messages of state scientists who had examined the effect of global warming on polar bears. (Ms. Palin said the scientists had found no ill effects, and she has sued the federal government to block the listing of the bears as endangered.) An administration official told Mr. Steiner that it would cost $468,784 to process his request.

When Mr. Steiner finally obtained the e-mail messages " through a federal records request " he discovered that state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger, records show.

"Their secrecy is off the charts," Mr. Steiner said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1221343324-tGxa66AkDRYq1tsNYpjoIw&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

[realpolitic]

Can you imagine a candidate for vice-president being so casual about war with Russia, as Palin was?She almost welcomed such a fight. Does she even know they have thousands of nuclear missiles? She seemed to think going to war with Russia was like invading Iraq. Our country will be in a sorry state with McCain/Palin/Bush leadership.

[Guynemer]

I was just listening to a former mayor on the radio. He'd attended a local Obama ralley, and was asked his opinion about Governor Palin. I expected some sort of responsible retort such as, " her policies would hurt our economy", or "she doesn't represent real change", you know something like that. Instead he launched into this tirade about how McCain showed poor judgement in selecting someone who had no qualifications to be Vice President. "She doesn't even know what the Bush Plan (his words) is." First, how any Obama supporter could sit down and with a straight face and question Palin's qualfiications to be V.P. is beyond me? Second, two days after the event this clown still hasn't gotten the message that his DNC talking points (which he got wrong - Bush Plan???) have already been thoroughly discredited.

It is unimagineable that this tool was ever even a dog catcher, much less a mayor in our community.

[TomR]

----
Maybe community organizers have the time to talk about the Bush Doctrine. But Sarah Palin's too busy trying to reform Washington.
----

It's funny how they compare Obama at age 22 with Palin at age 32. Palin was a sports reporter when Obama was a community organizer. And when Palin was a small town mayor, Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School and worked at a law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development.

I guess to Republican operatives, small town mayor doesn't sound as impressive when compared to a constitutional law attorney.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_palin

- Tom

[BabbleOn]

I lived in England for six years. If Western Europeans were voting in this election, Obama would win 80% of the vote. EIGHTY PERCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[tom ellison]

Thank God they're not voting in the election. The United States will avoid the steep decline of socialist Europe.

[realpolitic]

The U.S. has been in its own steep decline the last eight years under George Bush. Where have you been?

[js1234]

Here s what your really smart western europeans just decided in a court jury. So whether or not you even agree with man made global warming the socialist decline has contributed to outright consentual anarchy. Unreal.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cleared-jury-decides-that-threat-of-global-warming-justifies-breaking-the-law-925561.html

[realpolitic]

"...the socialist decline has contributed to outright consentual anarchy." What does this statement mean? Your garbled syntax is confusing!

[js1234]

I agree with Charliedan. Although I wouldn't ever quote wikapedia, the question he asks Palin is flawed and unfair. There is no such thing as one Bush Docterine like the Monroe or Truman. Its an obvious ploy to attempt to stump her with an ambiguous question that could mean several policies. If he wanted to ask a fair question related to this he could have asked her if she agrees with certain specific foregin policies of Bush, or the general foriegn plocies realting to the "war on terror". Just another example or unfiar, borderline sexist treatment by the media that will backfire on the democrats, and its sad becasue this should be more about the policies and ideology of the predidential candidats, not the VP. It will just fuel the idealist critisisms the GOP presents and exaclty what McCain wanted by picking her. So the attention is moved to her and she comes out as a defenseless attacked woman instead of the critisism of his policies...

[charleydan]

Gibson got it dead wrong.

Charles Krauthenmauer(sp) was the first to coin the phrase per wikipedia. It is a doctrine of several doctrines.

That is why Palin asked which one and looked questionable at Gibson, because whe wanted to know which one Gibson was referring to if he even knew that it contains several.

Gibson finally clarified which one and she answered the question right. Did Gibson know there is more then one doctrine contained in the Bush Doctrine as coined by the original author?

[Guynemer]

Charles Krauthammer provides a very entertaining and educational story on the term "The Bush Doctrine". As you stated, I would assume he's an authority, as wikipedia credits him as being the author of the term.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

He sums it up thusly:
"Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. And at least she didn't pretend to know -- while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, sighing and "sounding like an impatient teacher," as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes' reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage."

[realpolitic]

Charles Krauthammer is a major neocon. He can probably think of 50 incarnations of the Bush doctrine. The rest of us know it is a doctrine of unilateralism and preemption. What it is is a giant middle finger to the rest of the world. Palin has spent too much time hunting moose and wolves from helicopters.

[wealwaysknow]

It is not an issue that Palin could not give a precise definition of the Bush Doctrine.

Her first two requests for clarification "In what respect, Charlie?" and "His world view?" clearly- CLEARLY - proved Palin had NO IDEA that something called the Bush Doctrine even existed.

That is the issue.

There is no way to spin that fact.

[realpolitic]

It is so odd and almost surreal to hear conservatives on this site compare Obama's experience to Sarah Palin's. Each time Obama opens his mouth to discuss an issue one can tell he has spent years thinking it through and reading and discussing it. On the other hand, Palin sounds as if she has not read a newspaper in years. Palin's thinking of policy matters was formed by the biblical account in Genesis.

[charleydan]

The difference of their political stance is quite different.

Obama comes from new ideas of old ideas of socialism. Socialism was never intended by our forefathers and they flat rejected it for individual freedom. They rejected it so much they had a revolution war over it.

Our forefathers believed in a very defined individualistic freedom with very minimal Federal government control.

Palin policies come from American Heritage of Washington, Lincoln, Thomas, Webster, and etc. She has based her ideas of government on our forefathers intentions and ideas.

If one is well versed in the papers written and arguments presented in forming our government. You would find she is quoting most of them. Including her prayer which was from Lincolns prayer over the civil war.

[realpolitic]

Palin does not have a set of policy prescriptions. She has admitted she has hardly given any thought to the war in Iraq. When her son was leaving for Iraq the other day, she still tried to tie Saddam into 9-11, which is very sad seven years after 9-11 and very deceptive. Almost all of us know by now, Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11.

Obama recognizes that individuals acting on self-interest can not face the challenges of climate change, can not build bridges and rebuild our nation's infrastructure, and can not protect people from the ravages of natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina. Working people should be able to take their children to a doctor when sick, thus Obama wants to extend health care to families who may not otherwise be able to afford it.

Your ideas of socialism are nonsense. The economy expanded rapidly under Bill Clinton and I bet you labelled him a socialist. Democratic presidents have had much better job creation records than Republicans. In fact, George W. Bush has only created about 5 million jobs over almost eight years, not even enough to keep pace with immigration into the country. Clinton created about 23 million. Real wages are down under Bush. The number of poor are increasing. We do not want an economy lke that found in Victorian England and that is what you Republicans are leading us to, while taking away our civil liberties.

[rosscarpenter]

Your comment that "every time obama opens his mouth blah blah blah" is so much baloney. The only answers Obama has that even sound remotely inspired are the ones that the Democrat machine has coached him on before hand. Notice that when Obama is asked a question that is not on the script given to him beforehand, his pat answer is "ahh, ummm, ahhhhh, ahhhh, ummmmm, ohhhhh". My, those impressive answers cetainly MUST take years to come up with! BTW, the term "Bush Doctrine" was apparently coined by some communist left wing democrats, and since I do not watch the Clinton Broadcasting System, All Bill Clinton Network, Nothing But Clinton network, or the Clinton News Network, I had never heard the tem Bush Doctrine before either. I am a respected political commentator, and if I have never heard of it, I am sure most other people haven't either.

[realpolitic]

Obama does not need coaching. He wrote his terrific book Dreams of My Father by hinself. Can you imagine George W. Bush trying to write a book by himself or even read one for that matter?

Obama is a thoughtful guy. If he occasionally pauses, it is fine with me. He has been thrown off by the constant Republican attacks, but false attacks are the only way you guys can win elections. He will baalnce the budget and get us out of Iraq.

Can you think of any other networks with the word "Clinton" in it? You are like a rapper who keeps ryhming with the same word over and over. In conservative circles, you may be a respected political commentator, but they are the ony ones who would tune in to hear such right-wing, fanatical drivel as you posted above. It must be like listeming to someone scratching a blackboard.

[tom ellison]

Washington Post columnist who coined the term "Bush Doctrine" says Gibson was wrong, the Bush Doctrine has various meanings:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

[Carolab]

The so-called "experts" quoted in this article are ALL neocons. They are covering for her, because McCain-Palin is the neocon-big oil ticket a.k.a. Bush-Cheney Ver. 2.

Just about anyone who has paid any attention in the past seven years reflexively answers "pre-emptive strikes" when Bush Doctrine is mentioned.

Why don't we talk about how she denied ever saying that she didn't believe climate change was man-made? She lied about that too, changing her story in a matter of days from a Newsmax interview on August 29, 2008 in which she clearly stated she did NOT believe climate change was man-made.

[Carolab]

Look at who the "experts" cited are. Nuf said.

[realpolitic]

Yes, you are right! Charles Krauthammer is the biggest neocon on the planet and a Fox news sycophant. He has come up with several variations of the Bush doctrine. The rest of us know it is a doctrine of unthinking unilateralism and preemptive war. We must get back to the idea of war as a last resort. Anyway, Palin had not a clue about such a controversial statement of principles as the Bush Doctrine. Sad!

[Carolab]

That article is being panned. Read the comments on WaPo.

[tom ellison]

It is not panned by the experts. Just anyone who wants to come on and make a comment. Fact remains, the doctrine has many different meanings. Gibson overplayed his hand and came across as condescending.

[Carolab]

That article in the Post linked above is really interesting, because it directly contradicts another in the Washington Post called "Good Riddance to the Bush Doctrine" from July 18, 2008 (just a few months ago) which clearly states the focus on "pre-emption" and in addition it shows that Palin isn't aware of the shift away from defining it in the context of a war against terror.

Some excerpts: "The Bush team set out to speak explicitly about doctrine, emphasizing U.S. dominance of the world system, a willingness to go it alone and an insistence that Washington was entitled to take preemptive action to fight emerging threats....Even the Bush doctrine's encapsulating phrase, the "war on terror," has lost support. Some of Washington's closest allies reject the premise that the animating feature of world politics today is a war on radical Islam."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/11/AR2008071102391.html

[realpolitic]

From the article in the post:

"The Bush team set out to speak explicitly about doctrine, emphasizing U.S. dominance of the world system, a willingness to go it alone and an insistence that Washington was entitled to take preemptive action to fight emerging threats. The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, offered Bush a historic pretext for articulating this set of ideas, which were trumpeted in the administration's now infamous 2002 National Security Strategy. "

It is a shame that the Bush team wanted such a doctrine of preemption even before 9-11.

[realpolitic]

Palin is not familiar with any of the various meanings.

[dohickey]

Tony..

do you know what the Bush Doctrine is? not likely... because there are 4 different versions of the Bush Doctrine and sorry to inform you that Sarah correctly outlined one of them.

if you disagree, take it up with Carl Rove who should have a good idea what is meant by the "Bush Doctrine" and he explains there are 4 different versions. so argue all you want.

Charlie came off as condescending and a little full of himself. which will not be lost among woman watching.

[realpolitic]

Karl Rove also wanted a permanent Republican majority. Fat chance! He also thought Republicans would win the last election, where Democrats made historic gains. He should be in jail!

[robllawrence]

I don't particularly care that she did or did not know the salient details of the "Bush Doctrine" so much as I was appalled at the prospect that a potential president of the US had not considered her opinion on the most important decision facing any commander in chief: When is the use of force justified? If she had any awareness of her opinion on that subject, if she had read even fifteen minutes of basic international relations theory from any major contributor, she wouldn't have sounded like a pageant contestant groping for an answer that gets her to the red light time limit.

[naeldwyck]

The problem was not so much that she didn't know what Gibson meant with the "Bush doctrine" (the doctrine has, after all, shifted several times in several directions since 2002), but that she didn't understand the word "doctrine" per se, as became clear from her reply: "you mean his world view, Charlie"?

[cuddles99]

That's right... The Doctrine has shifted, to suit the dangers on the ground and the political situations. What cracks me up is that he beat out both a politically connected and corrupt Republican and an even more corrupt and connected Democrat, has been a mayor and a Governor and she doesn't understand the word Doctrine...

[Carolab]

An article in the Washington Post called "Good Riddance to the Bush Doctrine" from July 18, 2008 (just a few months ago) clearly states the focus of the Bush Doctrine was originally on "pre-emption". In addition it discusses the shift away from defining it in the context of a war against terror.

Some excerpts: "The Bush team set out to speak explicitly about doctrine, emphasizing U.S. dominance of the world system, a willingness to go it alone and an insistence that Washington was entitled to take preemptive action to fight emerging threats....Even the Bush doctrine's encapsulating phrase, the "war on terror," has lost support. Some of Washington's closest allies reject the premise that the animating feature of world politics today is a war on radical Islam."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/11/AR2008071102391.html