Sep

14

In Palin’s Defense?

Filed Under Media Shitheadery, Political Shitheadery | Leave a Comment

The fact that Palin looked like a deer in headlights during an interview with Charles Gibson when he asked her about the Bush Doctrine hasn’t rattled her defenders … much. The Washington Post explained about the many versions of the doctrine. Charles Krauthammer, also of the Post, offers his version of the same story and excuse.

The defense is, that there are many versions of the Bush Doctrine. Or at least that there are many interpretations of what the Bush Doctrine is or could be. That Sarah Palin was simply confused about just which one Charlie Gibson was referring to when he asked her that question. That she, in fact, was calling him out on his lack of knowledge and what an unfair and vague question it was.

So, my question … If she was confused, why not ask for clarification? Why not say, “Geez Charlie, you ass, there’s a few ways I could go here. Could you clarify exactly which doctrine you want me to describe?”

What she did say was, “In what respect Charlie?” In a snide sort of way (my opinion). Not, “Which one Charlie?”

Then, Gibson asked her for her interpretation of the Bush Doctrine. There was her chance! Her chance to let Gibson know just which one she was going for.

Her answer? “His world view.”

His world view? Where did she get that. And I wonder why the folks defending her aren’t mentioning that response? Seems like a pretty important tid-bit. In fact, it’s right here in the interview.

Share/Save/Bookmark

this site hosted by:
Web Hosting By ICDSoft.com