the media calls it the bush doctrine, and the meaning is very vague. it could be about harboring terrorists, etc. Not even GWB knows the meaning of the "bush doctrine" anymore. lol.

can we call it call it the footlovr doctrine or the ter doctrine instead?

-- Modified on 9/12/2008 7:36:45 AM

It clearly states that to defeat John McCain in an election, you need to raise the issue of the confederate flag.  That's how Bush beat McCain in 2000.

What Bush Doctrine????

You mean the Idiot Bush has an actual "Doctrine"?? It must be the basis for the Grand Idiot's justification for the shit he pulls out of his ass! It must be the one wherein "the ends justify the means."

A more scholarly tome: http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.15845/pub_detail.asp

-- Modified on 9/12/2008 12:45:18 PM

I see it as an ingenious Rovian plot!

Where the left see her flub as evidence of how unqualified she is the right sees it as further evidence on how far she has distanced herself from Bush.

I have a Bush Doctrine too

My Bush Doctrine is as follows: How much alcohol, drugs or money will it take for me to get into her bush?

It is the job of journalists keep trivial facts in their head. So, if the criteria for the President and Vice President is trivial facts, then we should elect on of those people who can answer every geography question in a Trivia Pursuit or the ones that can name all of the world leaders in TV Game show.

Using the same logic, one can conclude someone who can name all the planets is an astronaut, one who can recite a poem from Shakespeare is a poet, one who can mix Baking soda in water to get corrosion out of the battery is a chemist.

This is classic case of trying prove something with absurd logic. As Einstein said "anyone can prove anything with absurd logic".

I actually send an email to Mr. Gibson this morning with same logic. Don't expect a reply.

My initial reaction was "which one." I then checked on Wiki (which I normally don't do) and found there are at least 7.  In this case Wiki has to be right because it described 7 "doctrines" all of which have been labeled this way.

For example, one doctrine is his support for democratic movements in every nation, which was not what was being asked about.  

This is hardly surprising.  After 50 years, history will distill his presidency, for better or worse, and come up with some ideas that will be associated with him.  Then there will be A doctrine.

The Monroe Doctrine did not become identifiable by name for decades.  It was just his policy.

The fact is that there is NO ONE "Bush Doctrine."

Just read Krauthamer's column on this.  He was the first person to use the phrase "Bush Doctrine."  

He mentions that there are several "Bush Doctrines"

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

The best part was his last paragraph"

"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."

They are so anxious for a "gotcha" that it turn out that her biggest "mistake" of the interview will work in her favor.