Can you even read? I know that your bread and butter here is making something out of nothing but this is pretty thin even for you. You should consider surgery to remove your head from your ass.

PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against the American people, we have every right to defend our country.

The Bush doctrine is that if somebody mean and scary or somebody you don't like, or somebody that doesn't like you or somebody that has oil that you want is walking down the street, you don't wait for them to pull a gun and point it at your face (imminent danger). You just whack 'em.

That's the problem with Iraq. It's pretty clear the intelligence was cooked to make it look like imminent danger when it wasn't.

The most widely accepted modern standard for anticipatory self-defense was articulated by U.S. Secretary of State Daniel Webster in diplomatic correspondence with his British counterpart over the Caroline incident (often mischaracterized as the Caroline "case") and consisted of two prongs. One was that the need to use force in anticipatory self-defense must first rise to the level of being a necessity, and one that is instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation. The other requirement was that the action taken must be proportionate to the threat and not be excessive.

http://www.cdi.org/news/law/preemptive-war.cfm

No -- at least not to her current supporters. They are offering her what can best be described as "unconditional love". Won't matter what she says or does -- they'll LOVE HER ANYWAY.

All we can hope is that those who are truly undecided get a good, long look at her and don't like what they see, and that the youth vote finally turns out in the long-predicted massive numbers in November to support Obama.

Let's also hope that Obama's campaign has the sense to include clips from this interview in upcoming commercials (being sure to crop out Charlie Gibson so no complaints as with Katie Couric can be lodged!). Given McCain's age, voters have to wonder about the likelihood she'll ascend to the Oval Office sooner rather than later -- she may be the first V.Pres. candidate who DOES decide the election, and being unprepared and unworthy might actually hurt GOP chances this year.

... Sarah has clearly mastered foreign policy. It's clear to me that she is now worthy to occupy the top of the Republican ticket.

Isn't Sarah great! She is a true reformer who will clean up the problems enabled/created by the dude now at the bottom of the ticket.

She still got her (R) talking point on the air, "I will kill them, to keep you safe."

...so maybe I'm missing some subtlety here, but how does your comment:

"She tried to cover up and to get Gibson to give her more detail on what exactly he was asking, but to his credit, he saw the ploy and didn't go along."

Square with this:

"GIBSON: The Bush Doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a pre-emptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us."

?

...by the level of discourse here, especially from our erudite friend who posted the first comment and suggested that Alex is suffering from rectal-cranial inversion. How droll. Nice to see the commentarians remain as classy and well-spoken as ever.

To the issue, this is a BIG deal. She clearly had no idea what Gibson was talking about and she looked like a fool. The major underlying national defense policy of the last 8 years and she had no idea what it was? Are you KIDDING me? Palin is deeply, dangerously unqualified to be VP in the reality-based world. Let her go back to Alaska and preside over her church and her sparsely populated state. Maybe Joel Fleischmann can be her lieutenant governor.

You just don't get it. Good ole Charlie asks what sounds like a tough one-sentence question. Then Princess Sarah goes on with two paragraphs of high sounding platitudes that don't answer the question.

Charlie's response is ... a different question.

The right wing and the rubes who make up a majority of the electorate will watch this and go away saying, "I like her. She did pretty good(sic)."

Unless the Dems start hitting her and dishonorable John hard, we will watch McCain being sworn in in January. We cannot count on any part of the MSM to stand up for the truth. (BTW, thanks for nothing Carville. You look weirder every day.)

Yes, but you're forgetting that Gibson was just "picking" on her and that's not fair for the Big Bad Media to do that to her. After all, as the GOP wants you to keep believing, she's "just a woman." Let's wait until Putin picks on her. Is the GOP defense going to be that Putin was sexist? Oh, I forgot. Palin was only selected to win an election, not help run a government.

The "unintelligible" portion of Charlie Gibson's clarification was "enunciated." He said, "The Bush Doctine, enunciated in September 2002 before the Iraq War."

When I saw her fumble that question, I have to admit I was giddy. Here was a clear example that she just doesn't know what she's doing. But then I realized, no one is going to care.

Lipstick. Bristol. Bridges. Another Democratic defeat snatched from the jaws of victory. 4 more years.

What is it going to take for this country to wake up?

something more?

The problem is, 99% of America doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is. So they're not going to understand A) that she doesn't know, and B) why that's important.

I see that Charlie's not wearing the schoolmarm glasses he had on during the "debate".

Gotta look good for the hot hackey mam, I guess.

...a euphemism for "defend our country" the Palin way: it's called anticipatory retaliation.

So much for "Thou shalt not kill."

And "turning the other cheek."