Gibson is the one who proved his ignorance and shoddy research.
The Patriot Room sums it up well:
Gibson’s primary sin is trying to play gotcha by asking about a policy by its title, not by defining the elements of it (and referencing a policy “enunciated in September 2002″ is not defining it). Once he defined it (narrowing down the possible answers from 7 to 1) as preemptive strikes, she stated her agreement with the policy. The other sin is his arrogance and condescension playing smart ass and thinking that there was but one Bush Doctrine, that he knew what it was, and that this rube from Alaska didn’t.Update: Anne-Marie Slaughter is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. She was interviewed by Alan Johnson, for a book titled: “Global Politics After 9/11: The Democratiya Interviews.”
The exchange went as follows:
Johnson: What are the central differences, and what are the elements of continuity, if any exist, between ‘the Bush doctrine’ and the ‘grand strategy of forging a world of liberty under law’?
Slaughter: Tell me what you mean by ‘The Bush Doctrine’?
So a true foreign policy expert had exactly the same reaction as Gov Palin, go figure.
Thanx Rose of Sharon at FR.