The nattering nabobs of nonsense are busy parsing Sarah Palin's answers to Charlie Gibson's questions in the first segment of the ABC News interview and proclaiming that she isn't ready to be vice president, God forbid president of the United States.
"She wants to start a war with Russia!" and "She didn't know what the Bush Doctrine is!" they are sneering. Never mind that she never said that we should or would go to war with Russia.
Never mind that the Bush Doctrine, as summerized in a National Security Strategy statement released in 2002, consists of eight different principles on the Bush approach to foreign policy - champion aspirations for human dignity, strengthen alliances to defeat global terrorism and work to prevent attacks against the US and its friends, work with others to defuse regional conflicts, prevent the enemies of the US from threatening it, its allies and friends with weapons of mass destruction, ignite a new era of global economic growth through free markets and free trade, expand the circle of development by opening societies and building the infrastructure of democracy, and develop agendas for cooperative action with the other main centers of global power.
Critics of the Doctrine tend to overlook this and simply boil it down to mean that the U.S. can attack and invade any country which it deems to be a threat to our national security. This generalization forgoes accuracy for expediency, and not everyone interprets it in this manner.
No wonder, then that Palin asked Gibson, "In what way?" to try to force him to be more specific in his generic question to her about the Bush Doctrine. I doubt there are many outside of Bush's administration who are familiar with all eight points of the policy and could discuss it based on that knowledge. But Gibson refused to narrow down his question, and in a very condescending tone, he proceeded to "school" her on what the Bush Doctrine (in his view) meant.
Joe Biden, meanwhile, has said some very goofy things about foreign policy, and none of the nattering nabobs seem concerned. He gets a pass, but Palin gets broiled on the media grill.
What if Sarah Palin, instead of answering Charlie's question in her own words, had instead provided Gibson with direct Joe Biden quotes (changing only a few names) for her answers. We would have been treated to the following surrealistic scenario:
GIBSON: Can you look the country in the eye and say, "I have the experiece to be not just vice president but perhaps president of the United States?"
PALIN: Tim Pawlenty is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Let's get that straight, Charlie.
GIBSON: And you didn't say to yourself, "Am I experienced enough? Am I ready? Do I know enough about international affairs? Do I - will I feel comfortable enough on the national stage to do this?"
PALIN: He is qualified to be President of the United States of America, Charlie. He's easily qualified to be Vice President of the United States of America and, quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me."
GIBSON: Didn't that take some hubris?
PALIN: God love ya... What am I talking about?
GIBSON: Under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: I'm groping here...
GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.
PALIN: Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Russia.
Now that would have been an interview!
Not only would the media attack dogs and the Obama surrogates scream bloody murder, they would eviscerate John McCain for selecting such an obvious moron to be his running mate and such a loose cannon who could potentially become vice president of the United States, just a heartbeat away from being leader of the free world.
I rest my case.