[UPDATE: HA! (Scroll down to about line 15)]
I was cobbling this together when Shiplap posted his piece but it has a few different links so I will post it anyway.
The fact-checking of the mainstream media and their Democrat overlords proceeds apace, so let’s scan some recent examples.
It turns out that on Thursday night, when Charles Gibson asked Sarah Palin whether she agrees with the Bush Doctrine, and Palin responded “In what respect, Charlie?” – well, that was the correct answer.
As the Washington Post reports, “Bush Doctrine” can refer to a number of different things.
Peter D. Feaver, who worked on the Bush national security strategy as a staff member on the National Security Council, said he has counted as many as seven distinct Bush doctrines. They include the president’s second-term “freedom agenda”; the notion that states that harbor terrorists should be treated no differently than terrorists themselves; the willingness to use a “coalition of the willing” if the United Nations does not address threats; and the one Gibson was talking about — the doctrine of preemptive war.
And the fellow who coined the phrase points out that the imperious Charlie Gibson with his stern recitation of the Bush Doctrine was, in fact, wrong.
Slightly more embarassing is the fact that Charlie Gibson himself once defined it just as Sarah Palin did on Thursday:
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.
“I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation,” Palin said in her first interview since being nominated as the GOP’s vice presidential candidate.
Gibson countered: “The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us.”
Charles Gibson is a political hack, under the guise of a journalist. It’s extremely repulsive.
there are four permutations of the bush doctrine, charlie is a hack.