Posted by Reid on September 13, 2008
“Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of ‘anticipatory self-defense.’ ” —New York Times, Sept. 12
I thought she answered it fine, and did not “hurt” herself in that interview. There is no consistent definition, and he was rude to be so condescending that she did not know what his definition was. This article from Mr. Krauthammer (who coined the phrase originally) talks about the 4 different definitions.
Which one did you think it was, or did you have another? My suspicion is that the left uses the phrase as a catch all for ALL THE WOES that Bush has cast upon his minions and it is a trap if you answer it using a different definition it is not an honest question.