It was bad enough that Ms.Barbie did not know what the Bush Doctrine represented... but even after Gibson spelled it out for her , Her response was that she would take unilateral action if the threat was imminent.
The Bush doctrine has nothing to do with imminence. It has to do with a threat that 'may' become real some day ... Even at the height of propaganda for the Iraq war Bush , Cheney did not suggest that a threat was imminent .... but still argued for unilateral Military action .. That is what makes the Bush Doctrine such a radioactive idea ..
Why did Gibson not press for an answer with a smart follow-up question? Did he feel sorry for her? Was he too worried that he would come across as beating up on her?
He asked her the question differently three times in a row to try to elicit a direct reply, but she answered each time with THE SAME response: "Charlie, we do not second guess Israel..." THREE TIMES! I posted a video of it here. There's only so much you can do if someone refuses to answer - and he did far better than I'd dared hope.
2. Not as important as her not knowing. He was worried too.
He was under just as much of a microscope as she was. The idea that that is just as important as her ignorance is just like the idea that we should be subject to continued smears and false outrage by the GOP.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.