Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 10:20:11 AM
From: Bridge Player	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541957

Re: Bush Doctrine. And here is a further clip from a different source. Since it is a partial clip, the link is also shown for those wishing to read the entire piece. This article if dated January 31, 2003. ================================================================= If nothing else, the Bush Doctrine, articulated by the president over the past eighteen months in a series of speeches and encapsulated in the new National Security Strategy paper released in September, represents a reversal of course from Clinton-era policies in regard to the uses of U.S. power and, especially, military force. So perhaps it is no surprise that many Americans--and others in the rest of the world as well--are struggling to keep up with the changes. Indeed, it often appears that many in the administration cannot keep up with the president. But in fact the Bush Doctrine represents a return to the first principles of American security strategy. The Bush Doctrine also represents the realities of international politics in the post-cold-war, sole-superpower world. Further, the combination of these two factors--America's universal political principles and unprecedented global power and influence--make the Bush Doctrine a whole greater than the sum of its parts; it is likely to remain the basis for U.S. security strategy for decades to come. aei.org

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 10:27:27 AM
From: NAG1	Respond to of 541957

BB, Krauthammer got it wrong at least in this regard. <<Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. And at least she didn't pretend to know -->> I don't know what Krauthammer was watching but she did pretend to know, hoping that a follow up question wouldn't come and then she tried to bluff her way through it. Again, someone spinning the whole thing to take the attention off the fact that Palin is a lightweight on foreign policy. Neal

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 10:42:19 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541957

first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan Aha. Maybe my recollection wasn't dotty after all.

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 11:53:41 AM
From: KonKilo	Respond to of 541957

Charlie Gibson's Gaffe Shorter Krauthammer: "Don't forget my own personal versions of the Bush doctrine, not to mention the "spread democracy" doctrine that opportunistically followed the "invade looking for MWD" doctrine. Also, Charlie Gibson is a disdainist." [‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard.]

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 12:16:47 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541957

I thought about posting that yesterday just to be a bit provocative. :) Palin most definitely did try to pretend to know what it was. She tried a long bs answer to it. I even posted yesterday that I would have respected her more had she said, I don't know how it's defined, explain and I'll tell you. Admitting you don't know something is a strength. If Gibson didn't know, it's ok with me. He isn't trying to be VP. She should have been able to explain it to HIM. Obviously Krauthammer could have. Those glasses keep getting brought up. They're reading glasses for heaven's sake. He is using a written guide for that interview, and he has them positioned so that he can glance down, read his notes, and then look up and see her clearly. I know a LOT of choir members who use them to see the music and then glance over them to the director. He isn't being disdainful. Palin has no indepth grasp of the politics of the last eight years. It's very obvious. Her interest was her family, her town, and then the state. Whether the Peter Principle is now in effect is what we are trying to ascertain. I for one am not out to GET Palin. But question her abilities and her readiness-- and by that, McCain's choice of her? Absolutely.

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 1:14:03 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 541957

BP; 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 idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world Whether they want it or not. And we wonder why people around the world increasingly think less and less of America. steve

To: Bridge Player who wrote (84100)	9/13/2008 3:54:36 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541957

>>Here is some more information about the Bush Doctrine.<< BP - More opinion than information, it seems. I'm amused by the idea that Gibson got it wrong because he quoted the "third in a series" of Bush Doctrines. It's amusing because of the way the Bush Administration has morphed its rationalizations for its policies over the years. In the run-up to the Iraq war, when one argument wasn't working, they'd try another one the next week. And another after that. If I had been asked about the Bush Doctrine, I'd have chosen the one Gibson spoke of. I think it's the most significant policy statement they have made. It is the policy most often referred to as the Bush Doctrine. And it has had the most catastrophic effect on our country, as well as our standing with the rest of the world, of all the Bush policies. In any case, Krauthammer may take offense at Gibson's "sneering" at Palin, as I did at Giuliani's during his speech at the RNC, but the fact remains that the Celebrity Governor for all the world looked as if she didn't have the first clue to what Gibson meant when he asked her if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine. It doesn't matter how "mean" or condescending Charles Gibson is. It matters whether or not a person who could be President knows something about what's been going on at a national level for the past eight years. - Allen