Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. Just hilarious Jack. You quote an egomaniac newspaper columnist who cites Wikipedia as the best support available for his column: “I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term.”

    <

    p>Next thing you know Krauthammer is going to write a column about how the population of African elephants has tripled in the past six months.

    <

    p>Wrap the Bush administration’s leadership of this country for the past eight years in newspaper and it still stinks. Elect McCain and get four more years of the same: war, incompetence, and a declining economy.  

    • People are really tired of hearing them and most of us can pretty well recite them by now…yaaawwwnnn. You need new stuff Bob

      <

      p>Meanwhile, you seem to have problems handling the actual facts of the matter…that being there technically is NO such thing as a ” Bush Doctrine” . Unlike WRITTEN Doctrines ie  Monroe, etc, the so called Bush doctrine is  a media term.
      Regardless of your dismissal of the article of Krauthhammer, the FACT remains that there are multiple definitions ( at least 4)and interpretations of the so called Bush Doctrine and that FACT is indisputable…facts suck, don’t they, Bob?

      • Like Rich Lowry of the National Review!
        http://corner.nationalreview.c…

        <

        p>

        The foreign-policy session was a white-knuckle affair. She barely got through it and showed no knowledge more than an inch deep. What she did demonstrate was amazing self-possession. She somehow bluffed her way through the Bush doctrine question. Gibson apparently didn’t want to go into full “gotcha” territory by asking flat-out if she knew what it is. And then he muddled things further with his dubious definition of it, so she was never truly nailed and there was enough ambiguity there for conservatives to defend her. The fact still remains that she very likely didn’t know any of the possible definitions of the Bush doctrine.

    • I got a nice chuckle watching him look over his spectacles with that condescending all knowing look about something that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about …hilarious!

      • He was dumbfounded that she had no idea what he was talking about.  It was clear she had never even heard the term “Bush doctrine” used before.  And then her answer was to repeat Gibson’s words back at him.

        • They’re not going to have the same foreign policy doctrines, they’re starting fresh (or at least Palin is).  She certainly seemed to have the correct understanding of when to defend against imminent threat, it seemed a little more cautious than Bush, in terms of needing evidence and good intelligence.

          • They have mostly the same advisers.

            <

            p>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…

            <

            p>

            Speaking Monday at a fascinating on-the-record session on U.S.-Russia relations at the Nixon Center, former Reagan administration official Robert McFarlane declared that McCain’s first year as president would be “neocon redux.” McFarlane, who was Reagan’s national security advisor and who supports McCain’s candidacy, emphasized that he wasn’t speaking as a member of McCain’s team, but as a practical realist and private citizen. His remarks were uttered in a calm tone, and all the more blistering for it. McFarlane pointed out that Ronald Reagan was dealing with a declining Soviet Union and from a position of strength, while McCain would be dealing with a resurgent Russia, one that it would be foolish to heedlessly antagonize. According to McFarlane, “the youngsters” would run foreign policy the first year and then likely be “fired” by the second after they mess up.

            • of her not saying she agrees with whatever the “Bush Doctrine” supposedly is, she just has her own understanding, which seemed more cautious.

              <

              p>I also do believe her about how she’d have a fresh perspective on avoiding war and working things out, she’s not nursing old grudges like Bush was.  I do think that her view of Russia as a neighbor allows her to see Russians as actual people who fish in the same harsh arctic that Alaskans do, and is better than seeing it the old eurocentric way, of Harvard-trained experts in Washington dealing with Moscow with a stale script that is probably just as annoying to Russians as they are to us.

        • …that being that Gibson didn’t know what he was talking about. I interpreted her response of “in what respect, Charles?” as meaning which ONE of the media’s multiple  (at least 4 definition) of the so called Bush Doctrine are you talking about. Actually , her describing the Bush Administration’s policy of trying to spread Democracy by all means is consistent with what is the most recent definition is of the 4 so called media defined  “Bush Doctrines”.

          <

          p>In any case, it was pretty obvious that Gibson is biased and was looking for a “gottcha” and it now, after the fact , is making him look somewhat pompous, biased ,condescending and
          actually foolish.  

          <

          p>It’s understandable that the left is incensed , confused and panicked with the increasing possibility that the first woman to actually break “the glass ceiling” is , God forbid!!  a CONSERVATIVE! woman. Even O Biden has suggested that “she ( Hilary) might have been a better choice for VP.

          <

          p>IMO as long as you persist in trying to belittle and bash this woman, you lose… check out the poll numbers that you usually like to tout so much….hmmmmmmm  not pretty. In fact, it’s so bad that the big rout of the seats in Congress by Dems is now very much in jeopardy. You can thank the incredibly unpopular positions on drilling by Pelosi Reid and Obama for the fact that many first term Dems voted in in 96 are now trying to distance themselves from these increasingly unpopular people.

          <

          p>Hey, as a conservative guy, I honestly hope the Palin attacks on her person continue. It’s doing wonders for the McCain/Palin ticket. Thanks!

          • That isn’t a possible interpretation unless one is looking through a reality distortion field.

            <

            p>Krauthammer agrees she didn’t know anything about it.

            <

            p>

            Yes, Sarah Palin didn’t know what it is.

            <

            p>Eviscerates his own defense that the question was ambigous etc, because whether it was ambiguous or not she still had no idea what it concerned.

      • yesterday:

        On her assertion that it’s not unusual for a vice president to have not met world leaders: “Palin was mistaken, at least where recent history is concerned,” per ABC’s Lisa Chinn.

        “If you were to ask every living vice president — they would say she’s wrong,” ABC’s Jake Tapper reported on “GMA” Friday. “Palin would be the first vice president in 32 years who had never met a foreign head of state.”

        Charlie Gibson, who also works for ABC News and obviously prepared for his interview, and just as obviously has access to the same information as Chinn and Tapper, offers his correction to Palin’s false statement:

        ” “

Archives