Here’s what I know. As a child I read about Abe Lincoln’s cabin and the Founding Fathers’ vision for a nation made strong by freedom, not oppression—freedom of press, assembly, dissent. Two hundred and some years later, we’ve made progress, I think, overall—(too) slowly extending those rights first to land owners, then women, then blacks and other minorities, now gays…I grew up a liberal patriot, inspired by Woodrow Wilson’s vision of a League of Nations, later realized in the (too) weak United Nations. The vision: to extend our American freedoms and the best of other gov’ts around the world to all. To recognize that the world is a small world, and getting only more interconnected (historically, most people only ever traveled 50 miles outside of their town in their whole life, now we are connected, virtually and physically, as we like). Central to the UN is the notion that no country may be allowed to attack another country unprovoked, and that if they do such a rogue nation risks losing the support of their allies and the world community.
The Bush Doctrine: that, in an age of terrorism, unprovoked war is not only not criminal, it is necessary. Thu Iraq (remember the first Gulf War was supported by the world community; Saddam had invaded Kuwait, unprovoked, so even if we were interested in protecting our energy interests a bit more than protecting the poor Kuwaitees [it’s not like we’ve done the same for oil-less countries such as Tibet, Rwanda, Darfur…], it was a permissible and arguably noble action).
Last night, the first interview with Palin was finally granted. Most questions and answers were clearly rehearsed—she’d been more-or-less in lockdown/study hall for a week, preparing for her first press interview since she was nominated to be one 72-year-old heartbeat away from leading our country.
And so we turn our story over to this report from DiversityInc:
>>…the blogosphere was raging with commentaries after the first night of Sarah Palin’s interview with ABC News’ Charles Gibson. The anchor of ABC’s “World News With Charles Gibson” flew to Alaska to spend time with the governor in her territory. Gibson asked several questions Palin wasn’t able to answer without clarification–including what she thought of the Bush Doctrine.
“GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush–well, what do you–what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view.
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.”<< via DiversityInc.