Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

In the Cold Light of Morning: Veep Debate Not a Game Changer

I hate to use that cliché, but the question that really matters about last night’s vice presidential debate is: Did it arrest the drift toward Obama? The evidence from the early polling is that it didn’t. The polls showed that Biden won the debate, which is likely to reinforce the current direction of the campaign.

I offer my own views of the debate in my column today. I think Palin reassured her own supporters, but I don’t think that those who had doubts about her capacity to assume the presidency going in came away with huge reassurances. A CNN poll found that 87 percent of those surveyed thought Joe Biden had the qualifications to assume the presidency; only 42 percent said that of Palin.

Palin has been the center of the commentary because she looked better in this format than she did in the Katie Couric interviews. But Biden had a very hard job: to present Barack Obama’s case, stand up to Palin’s attacks on Obama and not look like a bully. He pulled that off, and his performance is probably being underrated in all the focus on Palin.

Bottom line: The GOP is relieved, but the trajectory of the election is still in Obama’s direction. Look for another big move from McCain.

Here are a few more findings from the instant polls:

CNN:

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. said 51 percent of those polled thought Biden did the best job, while 36 percent thought Palin did the best job....

Both candidates exceeded expectations -- 84 percent of the people polled said Palin did a better job than they expected, while 64 percent said Biden also exceeded expectations.

CBS:

Forty-six percent of these uncommitted viewers said Biden won the debate Thursday night, while 21 percent said Palin won. Thirty-three percent thought it was a tie.

Even a quarter of Republican uncommitted voters thought Biden won the debate...

Palin's rating improved after the debate on being knowledgeable on important issues - from 43 percent to 66 percent - but Biden still far outpaces her. After the debate, 98 percent thought he was knowledgeable.

Uncommitted voters' views of Palin's preparedness for the job of vice president also improved as a result of her debate performance - from 39 percent to 55 percent. But those numbers are still nowhere near the percentage that thinks Biden is prepared: 97 percent, up from 81 percent before the debate.

By E.J. Dionne  | October 3, 2008; 9:23 AM ET
Categories:  Dionne  | Tags:  E.J. Dionne  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The VP Debate: Sarah the Speedy
Next: The VP Debate: Biden's Distortions

Comments

I absolutely admire Joe Biden's graciousness and debating skill. It took nearly an act of God to pull off what he did last night. The fact that she didn't stare into the cameras saying "duh uh" is overshadowing Joe's major accomplishment which was to neutralize Ms. Palin without being a bully like their party is. Well done, Senator! Kudos!

Posted by: SYWanda | October 3, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Context is everything. Comparing Palin's debate performance, for which she was obviously well-coached and rehearsed, to her spontaneous remarks in the Couric interview--I think that gives us an idea how Palin would deal with a crisis.

Her attitude: I'll tell ya what I want ya to know, give us the power and we'll do what's best for ya. Truly, truly chilling. Wake up, folks.

Posted by: martymar123 | October 3, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

At times Joe was on fire - he sounded Presidential - he could step in tomorrow and be President and do a good job. Palin's cute as a button, fun to watch but, I didn't see any growth in her knowledge - not answering quesions, getting the general in Afghanistan's name wrong.
And I can't see her with her hand on the button to start world war III - she might just push it to see if it works or not!

Posted by: agapn9 | October 3, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

America's economy is in crisis. We've suffered 9 straight months of unemployment. People are losing their homes. Our troops are being killed every day in the Middle East. This is a time for serious discussion.
So how does the Republican candidate for VP respond? Silly, folksy language. Winking at the camera. Giggling like a teenage girl at inappropriate times. Refusing to answer the questions she was asked. Giving a "shout out" to an Elementary School!?! Sarah Palin's "performance" in the VP debate was painfully upresidential and unprofessional. She proved she did not belong on the same stage as Joe Biden. In times like this, America deserved much more than what Sarah Palin offered. Palin, as well as the entire Republican party, should be ashamed of themselves.

Posted by: jgarrisn | October 3, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

While Biden stumbled over words and phrases from time to time and seemed to struggle with avoiding any appearance of disrespect to Queen Mooseburger, he was factual, believable and completely sincere. One got the sense that here was a man that can be taken at his word and trusted.

Palin, on the other hand, came across like a Stepford wife spewing rehearsed lines and pointedly avoiding substantive responses (or any responses at all to the actual question asked by the moderator). In all, it was a contest between substance and style and the thing about style is that it grows old and boring quickly. What was at first spunky and pert soon became annoying and cumbersome.

Posted by: alanms | October 3, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

The time is now!
To remind Americans that Barack Hussein Obama is just another politician that will do or say whatever it takes to fulfill his political ambitions. Barack is calculated and methodical about hiding his true convictions and intentions, and uses deception to get elected.

The time is now!
For Americans to remember Barack Hussein Obama’s intimate 20 year relationship with the Priest of Hate, Jeremiah Wright, who blessed Barack and Michelle marriage and baptized both their daughters. AND, to remember the hideous videos of Jeremiah Wright’s congregation which included the Obamas, damning America with bombastic joy, after the Muslim’s criminal attack on America on 9/11.

The time is now!
For Americans to remember how Barack's Priest of Hate, Jeremiah Wright used his tax-exempt church to exercise a radical political agenda, and how he refers to Israel, as well as America, as a "racist" State. Barack's religious leader, Jeremiah Wright believes that the true 'Chosen People' are the blacks; and that black values are superior to middle-class American values.
 Indeed Barack's Priest of Hate, Jeremiah Wright is a black supremacist.

The time is now!
To remind Americans that Barack Hussein Obama wants to be president to implement Jeremiah Wright’s dream of a black supremacist society in America.

The time is now!
For Americans of all political parties to come together to preserve the future of the country we love and have always been proud of, by voting for a True American Patriot and War Hero who risked his life for our country:
John McCain for President of the United States of America.

Country First!
Americans for John McCain/Sarah Palin

Posted by: Manolete | October 3, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Palin failed to address the big question mark about her, so in that regard she lost the debate hands down. Everybody knows she can read a teleprompter or memorize a sound bite -- what we didn't know was whether she understood the issues behind those speeches and soundbites that she uses. After all, I can read a physics textbook, but that doesn't make me a physicist.

Once she started repeating her talking points -- and announced she wasn't even going to try to answer the actual questions put to her-- this debate was over.

Posted by: simpleton1 | October 3, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

I thought she laid the folksy act on pretty thick, and her accent seemed thicker than ever. I actually found it pretty excruciating to listen to for 90 minutes.

Other than the overly cutsy "dog gonnit" Joe Six Pack nonsense, she didn't do much differently than she did in her debates running for governor, which was answer different questions than she was asked when she didn't know the answer, and unleash a BS storm, laced with outright untruths and misrepresentations. Tragically, too many people in this country easily fall for that kind of thing.

Can't we just put her on a reality show where she belongs, instead of letting this actress hold high office? Then all the folks who like her can still watch her act every week, but we won't be governed by fools - again. I'm really sick of getting what they deserve.

Posted by: TeriB | October 3, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

It seems highly likely that Senator Obama will win this election. From my perspective, that is a good thing. However, I think there may well be unintended consequences from the choices that Obama and his campaign have made.

The administration that exists from 2009 through 2012 will have a difficult time dealing with the existing problems. While it is possible for such an administration to be popular, that is hardly a given. Sometimes as popularity wanes small offences that people chose to set aside during the election campaigns turn into resentment.

One such possibility is the combination of having painted Bill Clinton as a racist and then defining white people who oppose Obama as being nothing more than dumb racists.

Another possibility is the combination of having taken the position that when this suave and sophisticated Black Man got on the bus the White Woman should have gotten off of the bus; and now taking the position that for this White Woman from Alaska to even accept the nomination for Vice President is a moral offense.

And so, I wonder if the stage is being set for what some would call poetic justice. A 2012 election in which this beleaguered White Woman from Alaska not only becomes the first female President, but does so by unseating an incumbent President. Personally I hope not. Still, I will not be surprised if that happens.

Posted by: Provincial | October 3, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

She sounded better than any of her previous interviews, but of course it was
obvious she had cheat cards to read from like the television prompter at the
convention. And when she didn't have the answer on her cheat cards she would
say, "I may not answer the question you asked, but I wanted to mention
energy."

She giggled, winked at the camera and went back to her "sockermom",
"mavericks" and her "joe 6-pack" dialog that's getting a little old since
Americans are really worried about the economy and not silly references.

Curious to note that if Biden and Palen had their words / comments reversed
last night, the Republicans would say Biden was very rude to 'poor Sarah'
and unfair. It would have been nice to see the debate as equals and Biden
not have to walk on eggshells because she's a 'woman'. After all this is for
the same job whether you're a man or a woman..Oh yeah, does McCain's vote
against equal pay for women doing the same job affect what Sarah would get
as VP?
>

Posted by: ksmoneal | October 3, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

I think Palin said it all with "How long have I been at this? Five weeks?"

Yup. That's all.

Posted by: Ken_Isaacson | October 3, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

I thought it was hilarious when Ole Joe reassured the audience (though no one asked him) that obama would be president, not Joe.

His lead-in was that Joe would be right beside obama helping him decide on every decision that the president faces-- yet he denigrated the assumed power of second-in-chief Cheney!

Haha. Joe gave a lot away on that one! Now we know what he means when he refers to a 'Biden Administration" when he's on the stump.

Posted by: Whutzit2ya | October 3, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

palin will help mccain win -- americans twice elected george w bush, a jesus freak who's dumber than dirt -- palin's like george w bush

Posted by: herbert-de-turbot | October 3, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Now McCain can't drop her even if he wants to.

The fact that she didn't throw up all over herself makes her the winner.

But when it comes to substantive expertise - well, we all know who won that one.

Posted by: JRM2 | October 3, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

For almost eight years we have seen what happens when an administration, confronted with a situation, denies the facts of the situation and replaces them with their own spin. They act on the spin, not on the reality. It has resulted in multiple disasters for this country.

Last night, we saw a vice presidential candidate deny the questions put to her, and instead answer questions that were not asked -

the parallels are striking.

Posted by: wozzle | October 3, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: hclark1 | October 3, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I've seen the Sarah Palin act before. It's in the 1950's movie "A Face in the Crowd." The character Lonesome Rhodes, played by Andy Griffith, is a folksy, plain talking Arkansas guitar player who uses those qualities to become a television star. He then attempts to use his charm to influence the presidential election. He fails only when he accidentally reveals that his folksy ways conceal an underlying contempt for the American people. Once again, life imitates art.

Posted by: rasputing | October 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

All of the liberal poles support the democrats. How sad that the liberal media is so one sided for the democrats that most Americans are deceived by the liberal media or know exactly how one sided they are for the democrats. The liberal media keeps God out of their news just as they keep telling the American people the anti-God ways of the liberal democrats.
Surely if God could take a shepherd boy named David and make him king of Israel, He can surely can give her the wisdom and the ability to be vice president. People forget that a president has a cabinet with people to help rule that are given wisdom to them by God. Furthermore she was also raised up by God to speak out against abortion which is one of the greatest sins of the US. Many men in office had the opportunity to speak out against abortion but did not. A baby is made in the image of God and abortion is destroying that one made in the image of God. Just because the US laws says abortion is legal does not make it legal in the sight of God. The US is being judged by God for this sin of murdering innocent babies. I wonder how many people who are pro-choice would have wanted their mother to have aborted them. I would think not many yes to that question. Faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only hope for all people in regards to the judgment of sin that must be dealt with to be able to enter into Heaven. Aborted babies are issued directly into Heaven for they are not able to hear the gospel of the Jesus Christ but are covered by His shed blood on the cross. Because of God's mercy, grace and love for those created in His image, helpless aborted babies are saved into heaven.

Posted by: emailcrossmembercrossescom | October 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Manolete, go back to the cave you came from. People like to LIED to this country for last 8 years and got us the idiot like Bush/Cheney in the white house. Enough is enough, to qoute Sarah palin last night, "this country need someone fresh and new.." We need Obama. And to all the MORONS out their who keep using Obama's middle name "Hussein" to scare everyone, please keep your ignorance to yourself. People like YOU remind of Taliban and Al Queda, because they also use the same propoganda techniques to fuel fear and hatred amongst their people.. we need to move away from this politics of hatres and fear.. LETS LIBERATE AMERICA FIRST FROM ALL THIS PREACHERS OF HATE AND IGNORANCE!

Posted by: ObamaBiden09 | October 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Two words:

Legally Brunette!

Posted by: markthefig | October 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

I had a difficult time following Palin - but she definitely reflected the principles of her 'base', so she may increase their enthusiasm. Biden was a classic, old school Democrat, which is disheartening to me, but is probably helpful to Obama shoring up the older crowd of moderate Democrats. I predict that the end result will be a bump of 2-5 percentage points for McCain - making it more of a horse race again. It really depends on how much bad interview mojo Palin erased in this debate. Expect the mud-flinging to go into high gear starting mid-October.

Posted by: tweldy | October 3, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin unfortunatley running in the wrong election cycle. Had she and John McCain been running after President Clinton was in office, she may have a better shot. However- after 8 years of MESS that W has created for us, now is NOT the time for "you betchas" and "dog gone its". We are facing the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. Our boys are over seas dying in a war that should never have been started. We need those in office who can answer questions with a clear conscise GROWN UP answer rather than small town Wasilla Alaska twang. Not the time, not the place. If she wants to speak in those terms, then Wasilla Alaska is where she belongs. Go back home Govenor, and sit on your porch and scare Putin out of our airspace with a smile, a wink, and a You Betcha.

Posted by: pollypocketz | October 3, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

I see Sarah Palin as a remarkable woman. She has risen from being an Average American Girl to being a successful, well like, admired governor. If allowed to be herself instead of a script-filled, puppeted politician, I think she would be a lively, interesting, well like political figure.

It scares me to think of her as a heart beat away from being the President of the United States of America. She is still a green banana. In four years if she wants to take her flare and notoriety and hit the campaign trail as a candidate, I think she will do well. Let her compete against the best of the best (or at least those willing to want to be president) and prove herself on her own. Not Sarah, not now.

Posted by: marksez | October 3, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

why do you sound angry Manolete.Call Obama Hussein all you want but America is ready for the man and the polls show.Shift to the right all you want and all you will see are the backs of the progessives who are moving forward in a new century.Mccain chosed a woman who sounds scary and that smile ....scares a hell out of me.Mccain a good man made a mistake in trying to appeal to the right wing of the gop.The election is now Obama's to lose and Obama Hussein is America's next commander in chief.

Posted by: yezuz | October 3, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"All of the liberal poles support the democrats. How sad that the liberal media is so one sided for the democrats that most Americans are deceived by the liberal media or know exactly how one sided they are for the democrats."

Give it a rest, seriously. The liberal media is like bigfoot - a myth with evidence that surfaces from time to time which is shown to be utterly bogus.

Posted by: tweldy | October 3, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Palin, simply because she's a woman, can get away with the visceral appeal antics. Biden, as a male who above all else must avoid the taint of effeminacy, was restricted to rationality and responsiblility. But Palin's corn pone is an act. She's a calculating, ambitious--and if the reports of her vendetta against her sister's ex are true--ruthless politician who will do and say whatever she thinks she has to to win. Unfortunately, in Jerry Springer America there are quite a few who fall for her phony folksy. My visceral reaction to her--I hate her. I think she's a woman who wouldn't care if she destroyed the country as long as she was in power.

Posted by: aguy7 | October 3, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

If you are for Palin, you are for losing in November. McCain, and the republicans, are going down like the Titanic.

Posted by: Independent4tw | October 3, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Manolete, your comment all but lacked a resounding "white power" at the end, unbelievable.-- Those of us who actually watched the debate last night and didn't read the media filtered reports, can be assured that Palin did what she was probably coached to do and that was give unspecific, unsupported responses to questions that she wasn't asked, while at least partially ignoring the question at hand. The mere fact that there was no major gaffe on the part of Governor Palin does not rescue her. The idea that America, home of the brightest, kindest, most forward looking peoples, can, in a time of domestic, economic and foreign crisis, applaud an ignorant and casual politician is appalling.
I only hope we can select a team that doesn't go into every foreign meeting flailing two fists wildly; a team that will hold every individual in eyes of civil equality; a team that will stop patronizing the American people; a team that will lift up this country by the bootstraps and propel us into diplomacy, empathy, discovery and prosperity.

Posted by: equality | October 3, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

"All of the liberal poles support the democrats. How sad that the liberal media is so one sided for the democrats that most Americans are deceived by the liberal media or know exactly how one sided they are for the democrats. The liberal media keeps God out of their news just as they keep telling the American people the anti-God ways of the liberal democrats."


Hey emailcrossmembercrossescom:

Why do you think the media is liberal? Because the majority of the country is liberal. The conservatives could not even find a candidate to run in this election which is why you have McCain. Even Republicans realize that the conservative viewpoint does not work which is why they voted for McCain over the more conservative choices they had in the primary. All the media cares about is selling ads, and if their liberal bias offended viewers to the point that they no longer watched, they would change their slant to be more conservative over night. Like it or not, the overwhelming majority of this country does not share the views of the conservatives. This country is predominantly liberal. You might as well get used to it. This is the way it will be for a while, and "W" did nothing to help the conservative cause over the past eight years.

Posted by: ispy1009 | October 3, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

McCain and the Repubicans are going down like the Titanic with a very big big rock tied to it.

Posted by: marksez | October 3, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

I was undecided before the debate, and I am still undecided. The debate was without fire works, Watching Palin and Biden Practice is much more interesting.
http://www.watchdebate.com

Posted by: pastor123 | October 3, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

It was painful watching Biden retrain himself so as not to appear disrespectful of Palin. I condemn McCain for making a mockery of our American leadership. I don't fault Palin, she's bright and intelligent but not qualified for this type of a high level position. It's like bringing in a heart specialist to do brain surgery while exploiting the persons credentials as "Surgeon". This is much too important than to have to worry about "what you say".

Posted by: gopine | October 3, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

We all knew that Ms Palin would not produce sentences of complete gibberish in this debate. We'd have to send for the "Men in Black" if she couldn't memorize a few talking points in two weeks of coaching. But what kind of presidential ticket are we talking about when it gets a boost from a VP candidate that didn't actually vomit alphabet soup in her answers to debate questions? The cynical nature of her candidacy was beginning to dawn on the thinking electorate before the debate. That will not change. But those who wanted to see a ‘guy you could have a beer with’ in the Whitehouse in 2000 and 2004 and who now want a hockey mom a heart beat away will be pleased. The true hope for us all is that the number of thinking voters will outnumber the “What a cute smile she has” voters in November. In a country where 40% of the population believes that the Earth is only 5000 years-old that will always be a close run thing. Too bad.

Posted by: jocro | October 3, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

IT IT TIME NOW!
to bring our troops home.
IT IS TIME NOW !
to work on America's health care system.
IT IS TIME NOW!
to work on the economy
IT IS NOT TIME NOW!
for another 4 more years of BUSH!

AMERICA FOR OBAMA/BIDEN

Posted by: tkerbelle71 | October 3, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

She fakes folkiness better than she fakes competence or knowledge, but even somebody like me, a Brit whose ear isn't attuned to the US accent, can tell she's acting when she drops those 'g's and hams it up.

What continually amazes people abroad is not just that so many American voters fall for these obviously insincere acts, but the sheer lack of respect that the political class has for ordinary Americans' brains, when they think they can get away with putting up such crude phonies.

But it seems that no politician ever lost his seat through underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

Posted by: Bud0 | October 3, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Well put "equality."

We can do better than sling mud and falsehhoods.

We need to do better.

Once we all start listening and working together to solve our problems, America will get back on track.

Here's hoping the divisive, power-grabbing politics and policies of the past 8 years are ended with this election.

Another 30+ year registered independent, and veteran, voting democratic this November.

Posted by: patrioticvet | October 3, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

I can not beleive the soft ball response of the media to Palin's performance... Debates are about substance, not style.... facts, not acting. Has our society become so deluded that we believe style and substance are of equal value in leading a nation? It was like watching an NFL team play a high school football team. Biden's answers were competent, comprehensive and thorough without being overly complex. He answered every question directly. He didn't pander to idiots by trying to sound like a good 'ol boy. Palin on the other hand, came off as a condescending actress who wouldn't even take a chance at answering a question she hadn't had pre-scripted an answer for. Her speaking style and repetitive use of cliches was insulting to anyone who takes debates seriously... and her breadth of knowledge was clearly totally inadequate. The fact that after the debate all these pundits were cheering her, was like saying that the high school football team "won" because they had the guts to step on the field... even though they didn't score half as many points as the other side. That's ridiculous!

Posted by: we_the_people | October 3, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

To Pastor123 and all your odd friends...how in the Hell can you still be undecided? You make Hamlet look decicive. Please stop lying and stop posting, no one is interested in giving you cred for being thoughtful. If you don't know by now where you stand, please stand off to the side while the people of America get this done. Both sides are tired of your stupid waffling like you are in deep consideration and waiting for all the facts. At this point you just sound like a jerk who wants attention, because you're afraid that when you do take a stand, we'll all stop looking at you. Everyone I know who is 'Undecided' is pro-McCain, but they are afraid to say it because even they know how stupid they are.
Obama is a political animal like the rest, but to vote McCain is to REWARD the party who demolished our world influence and squandered American soldiers fighting a war they invented, and particularly it is a REWARD for the guy who sucked at W's teet more than any other. That is truly ignorant and despicable. Expecting different results from doing the same thing repeatedly is...never mind.
Do us all a favor and just don't vote. Then you won't have to decide.
Jerk.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | October 3, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

The difference between this debate and the Couric interviews? Palin was not consistently called out for dodging questions that she obviously had not prepared answers for.

Couric would repeat questions to force Palin to answer or demonstrate her lack of knowledge. During the debate, Palin dodged the questions that the moderator thought the American people should hear the answer to. What a Maverick! Dodging the questions of the American people, just like Bush and Cheney! She then proceeded to charmingly deliver slogan after slogan in vague support of McCain and Bush’s already proven to fail policies.

She also mentioned that she would be the point person on energy. Hmm, a leader on energy who doesnt believe that man’s actions are causing global warming, and whose only expertise is in oil…thats just what America needs.

Posted by: jesse4 | October 3, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

emailcrossmembercrossescom wrote (in part!)... "Faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only hope for all people in regards to the judgment of sin that must be dealt with to be able to enter into Heaven. Aborted babies are issued directly into Heaven for they are not able to hear the gospel of the Jesus Christ but are covered by His shed blood on the cross. Because of God's mercy, grace and love for those created in His image, helpless aborted babies are saved into heaven...."

The mentality represented by this drivel is symptomatic of most of what is wrong in America. They came with the Puritans and there has been madness in the brush arbor heartland since.

Americans, you had better waken quickly. One of these loonies could become vice president of our nation in 30 days.

We have suffered 8 years of hell under George W. Bush. And Bush appears as a Rhodes Scholar compared with Sarah Palin.

D. Grant Haynes


Posted by: dgh27 | October 3, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Well, shoot! The bar was so low for Ms. Palin - the fact that she didn't barf on Mr. Biden's shoes and strung several random nouns and verbs together - mad it look like she was the "winner" - at least to the "RNC Talking Heads"
She didn't answer any questions - she just talked, and talked, and talked ... right out of her "thick briefing/talking point books"!
I guess her foreign policy credentials are really sharp now - she can see Russia from her porch and she saw Mexico from her "study hall"!
Give Me A Break!

Posted by: tmcn2 | October 3, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Hey ispy1009,
Thanks for your reply. You say that most of the US is liberal. Liberal in this country means anti-God , pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro same sex marriage. I'd rather not get used to the liberal agenda of America but be separated from them in what they believe and do, but it is my prayer that the liberals will see their need for the love of God through faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ who can set them free them from their liberalism.

Posted by: emailcrossmembercrossescom | October 3, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Cute Sarah. She should seek career in cheap reality TVs after all this election season.

Posted by: thisworld | October 3, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

It just so happens this country was founded by liberals, I don't want to dumfound anyone but I'd have to say the ones going USA, USA..all the time probably would have been chanting King and country back then.
If God is going to be added to the mix we just have to look to the Mideast to see what damage 3 desert maniac religions can cause. If they can't learn to get along, the dogmatic fanatacism could spell the end of the human race.
It is clear Palin was chosen for her appeal as the highest office holder of the religious right and her views may be tolerant but I have no trust of the ones so avidly behind her choice. She is certainly not someone who has spent lots of time worrying about international affairs and others have picked her and thrown her into the spotlight like a startled deer. We can simpathize with her dilemma without any desire to attack her, though that is what they wanted us to do, it is just that the man or woman of mainstreet is not really well equipped to be President even if they can make it through a debate and prove they aren't totally fanatic.
Living in the fantasy that gov't is the problem while saying we must bail Wall Street out is self-contradictory as well as saying no taxes, which are needed to pay for the bailout or for our war we certainly can't surrender from.
Saying less gov't is still the solution when the non-regulatory gov't policy led to our financial crisis also makes no sense. These people are so mesmerized by their dogma that they cannot deal effectively with the real world until they chillout a little bit.

Posted by: cgillard | October 3, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

"Thanks for your reply. You say that most of the US is liberal. Liberal in this country means anti-God , pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro same sex marriage. I'd rather not get used to the liberal agenda of America but be separated from them in what they believe and do, but it is my prayer that the liberals will see their need for the love of God through faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ who can set them free them from their liberalism."

Thank you for proven a point. Liberal IS NOT what you think it is. Being liberal is being tolerant of other peoples choices. You choose to be an idiot and beleive that the world was created in seven days. I choose to ignore you because your comments mean as much to me as the facts you use to back up your theories, nothing.

A liberal is a person who lets people have the right to do what they want with their privacy. Our American fathers were liberals. The English Nobles were conservatives. Who was patriotic and who was not?

Posted by: Independent4tw | October 3, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I think our need to have energy independence was best addressed by Sarah during this particular debate. I don’t think the candidates have spoken enough about this concern that is reeking so much havoc on our economy. Our country is going to heck in a handbasket. The high cost of fuel has driven up the production and shipping cost of everything. Consumers have nothing left over after filling the tank and paying more for the necessities of life to spend on extras, save or invest. We need to get ourselves out from under our dpendency on foriegn oil. Families everywhere are wondering where else they can cut back to cover the cost of fueling up the family vehicle to get back and forth to work and take care of the necessities of life. There is no money left for relaxation and family fun. The stress level continues to rise. Most areas of the country have seen a sharp rise in their electric bill as power companies pass their increased production costs on to consumers. The price of a gallon of milk is almost as precious as a gallon of gas. The cost of every consumer product has risen sharply. Americans are stretched to the limit. Jobs are being lost, foreclosures are increasing at an alarming rate. Seems even the family pets are suffering the high cost of fuel as almost daily a sad new story is on TV about shelters being forced to euthanize record number of surrendered pets from those forced out of their homes due to foreclosure or they simply can’t afford to feed them anymore. The energy crisis in our country is far reaching and needs immediate attention. Our economy is in a sorry state of affairs directly related to the high cost of fuel. We have become so dependant on foreign oil that we have neglected to fully utilize such natural sources of energy such wind power & solar power. Along with modern technology such as plug in cars, hybrid cars, v2g technology ,and regenerative braking, technology we still seem to be floundering as a nation as to devising the best plan utilize all that is available to us and lift ourselves out of this mess we are in. We need to take o ur closest look at which candidates put our economy and energy crisis at the forefront of their agenda. I just bought a newly released book on Amazon.com called The Manhattan Project of 2009 by Jeff Wilson it is very interesting. He has been doing some interviews on talk radio etc.

Posted by: BeyondGreen | October 3, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

"1. When debating, you don't have to answer any questions that you don't want to or haven't prepared for.

2. If you don't have any substantive answers to your opponent, resort often to repeating talking points.

3. If repeatedly asked to answer the question, simply tell the moderator you don't want to answer the question--then continue to
talking points.

4. Appear as 'folksy' (read: vapid) as possible, because most of the voting public are threatened by intelligence.

5. Repeat the words 'Maverick' ,'Corruption', and 'Reform' as many times as possible--regardless of situational appropriateness."

-Royce Tenney

Posted by: Independent4tw | October 3, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse


AMERICA IS ABOUT TO MAKE A HISTORICAL DECISION ON ITS WAY OF LIFE

Numerous forces are at work, pressuring American voters into a decision in a time of stress.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/10/vote-critical-decision-in-dangerous.html

Not a time for knee-jerk reactions and emotions.

Posted by: JamesRaider | October 3, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Manolete:

I hope you know sniffing glue is bad for you. But you probably don't because KKK idiots are certainly not the smartest of the bunch. So keep on sniffing and eating your possum pie but please stop diddling your children...that is just sick.

Posted by: Godhimself1 | October 3, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Gov.Palin used the Elly Mae Clampett persona to speak to the same group of people as Rush Limbaugh and other conservative radio host. She knew they would accept the babble as the truth simply because it was not in response to a valid question. How could this be a K. Couric moment if she wasn't being put on the spot. She just could not keep up the facade and kept using experience as mayor governor and energy policy as a standby. She did not fool any of us, and I am certain SNL will once again prove us right.

Posted by: RobertG | October 3, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Another great column, as usual. Sarah Palin demonstrated yet again how woefully inadequate she is to be President or Vice President. Aside from her canned responses, she relied on "Gosh darn," flickering eyelashes, hockey moms and six-pack. She sounds as though she lives on another planet. Few lower 48 people play ice hockey, and we don't appreciate the way she talks. Her folksey language irrita ted me, as did her batting eyelashes and winking at people. That's not the way a person seeking this high office behaves. Her thinking (or lack thereof) is so scattered, and her logic is totally absent. I don't agree with those who say she did well simply because she didn't act a fool like she did with Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson. She still didn't know the answer to the questions. Get that woman back to Alaska, and soon!

Posted by: jaladner | October 3, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

I just remembered Gov Palin keeps talking about being an energy expert because of her oil tax refund policy in Alaska. I'm sure the oil companies worked with her out of concern to the citizens of Alaska. Hell Dick Cheney used the same type of logic when he drafted the GW energy policy and look what it meant to us.

Posted by: RobertG | October 3, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Didn't have any major issues with Palin before last night. Her VP acceptance speech was very poised but in the debate last night she really seemed to lack a lot of qualities that a national candidate needs to encompass.

Here's a Republican blog that really questions Palin's position on the ticket and suggests that she's hurting McCain.
http://www.greenfaucet.com/blogs/hanlons-pub

Also includes the Katie Couric video about the newspapers Palin reads.

Priceless.

Posted by: macebruce | October 3, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Sample write-up Palin might have got from her handlers.

Moderator:-Let’s talk about Iraq.
Palin: - In Alaska we have lot of Oil
Moderator: - What’s your priority once you elected?
Plain: I am a maverick hockey mom (winks)
Moderator: - Tell me about 5 good things John did in his political life.
Palin:- I’ll tell you ya….My family in Alaska is blah blah blah
Moderator :-
Palin: I don’t want to answer the way you want but I’ll answer another question I rehearsed.!!

Note : One the debate is over go and pick your infant baby immediately and face the camera. If your baby is not near by arrange a substitute. (Don’t worry it our public we have been playing tricks for last 8 years.) !!

End Result : Palin Won Big. She was confident, fluent and connected well with middle class.

Posted by: varghese_jinu | October 3, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Now, let's be fair... How can you expect Palin, a young governor, to be up to speed on everything? What matters is her judgment, integrity, and decisiveness. Obama has big gaps in his knowledge as well. But his judgment and integrity are abysmal, and that is unlikely to change, with or without Biden backing him up.

Posted by: petersuares | October 3, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

The knock out blow to McCain and Palin was provided by these two themselves to the Democrats on a virtual silver platter. However, the latter don't seem to even recognize it.
THE KEATING SIX: McCain obviously learned nothing for his experience with the Keating Six. Knowing that Sarah Palin was under investigation in Alaska, he, in brazen interference with official State of Alaska affairs, asked Palin to be his running mate. With his touted vast experience, McCain exhibiting absolutely no sense of propriety, reminiscent of the Keating affair, dared to inject national politics into the heart of an investigation being conducted by State of Alaska officials.
McCain has any knowledge, whatever, about Alaskan affairs. He hardly knew Palin. Yet, this is what this titan of experience has no compunction about doing to the State of Alaska and this country, which he claims, evidently false, to love so much.
There is a minor Iraqi connection. McCain has repeatedly stated that we should to defer to the forces “on the ground” before making any decision about Iraq. Yet, when it comes to Alaska and the authorities there, McCain forgets his own touted principles. Surely, the Alaskan authorities, having “boots on the ground” there, know more, by far, than does John McCain, about their own affairs. How is it that McCain could so easily do to Alaska, ignore their officials, what he is not willing to do to Iraqis? Does he love Iraq more than he loves Alaska except for Palin?
McCain went to Alaska and disrupted, interfered with and jeopardized an official State investigation. McCain’s assertion, that there is no substance to the investigation, serves to undermine the powers of the State of Alaska. We are talking aiding and abetting possibilities here. This is the decision-making and judgment of John McCain in action.
The U.S. Senate should investigate the actions of McCain and his staff in Alaskan affairs with a view, if warranted, to censure the Senator. This meddling by McCain in another State’s affairs should not be permitted to stand with impunity. Further, the appointing of a special prosecutor for the purpose of conducting this investigation would be the wisest thing the Senate could do.
The lesson to be learned from the Keating Six was lost upon John McCain. He never got it. It’s time someone reintroduce McCain and Palin to the facts of life. This is a country of laws and his using national political power to compromise and kill and official local State investigation is not acceptable now or never. Additionally, McCain’s personal political ambitions do not trump the interests and affairs of the State of Alaska or any other State for that matter.
Everyone needs to understand that if McCain became President, this is the mentality that he and Palin will bring to the Oval Office. The laws are for everyone except them. And, we will see further politicization of the justice system. Alberto Gonzales comes to mind.
TO THE SENATE OF THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, “IN THE NAME OF GOD DO YOUR DUTY”.

Posted by: vmonroe_valnesio | October 3, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

RobertG wrote "Gov.Palin used the Elly Mae Clampett persona to speak to the same group of people as Rush Limbaugh and other conservative radio host."

In the comments section of an article from a couple of weeks ago someone else summed it up perfectly. In reference to the McCain/Palin ticket they wrote simply: Magoo/Clampett '08

Posted by: Chip_M | October 3, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Dear emailcrossmembercrossescom,

Give your god a break...she is working overtime for you....relax, breathe, get your smile back.

Posted by: uliart | October 3, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Gov Palin looked more like a robot reciting talking points over an over again even when it’s not applicable to the question that was posed by the moderator. Thus far, Gov. Palin has not done anything to reverse the wide-spread doubts that the majority of Americans have. In other words, she has not overcome the leadership threshold and did change the overall dynamics of the campaign.

On the style bases, Palin appeared cartoonish and robotic. Her whole demeanor looked weird to me. She was as she’s participating in a spelling bee. And to top of that, it made me uncomfortable that she kept winking at the camera. That does not lent credibility.

I have also noticed that she started slipping as time went on; she slipped into her gibberish talk. At the end, Joe brought the whole debate to an end with such an aliquant, substantive, and right on point.

Posted by: JHigginss | October 3, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's explanation of the education policy of a McCain-Palin administration:

"Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You preferenced [sic] your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education and I'm glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and god bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right? I say, too, with education, America needs to be putting a lot more focus on that and our schools have got to be really ramped up in terms of the funding that they are deserving. Teachers needed to be paid more. I come from a house full of school teachers. My grandma was, my dad who is in the audience today, he's a schoolteacher, had been for many years. My brother, who I think is the best schoolteacher in the year, and here's a shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School"

Posted by: JohninDC2 | October 3, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Here’s an interesting exercise – go on-line and compare the transcript of a Kennedy-Nixon debate to last night’s Biden-Palin debate. What a lopsided difference. It sounds like the Republican side has become the dumb-side of the country.

Posted by: marksez | October 3, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Governor Palin is going to use the "there you go again" line and not give Reagan credit for it? And I thought it was Biden who is supposed to have the plagiarism issues.

Posted by: tsawyer_mv | October 3, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Guess what, the Republican side is the dumb-side of the country. Now we are waiting for McPulsive to drop his next shoe...what could it be? Grab a Navy plane off of a carrier deck in the Persian Gulf and bomb, bomb, bomb Iran? The sane part of America holds its collective breath!

Incidentally, Joe was terrific last night, like a pitcher going for a no-hitter, he got going early in the game and seemed to get stronger right up to the last out. A pleasure to know we still have intelligence and warmth somewhere in our government. A masterful 45 minutes (his half, not hers)

Posted by: sunnsea | October 3, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Plagiarism? Not only did Palin not give Reagan credit for "there you go again" she could not even say it right with the right phrasing that you would learn in Acting 101. But then again I don't recall Reagan ever giving John Winthrop, the leader of the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1630, credit for the "city upon a hill" quote....If Reagan knew where it came from and said so, he would have been called...you know...an "elitist", like that "elitist" JFK who actually used the quote first in 1961 and did give attribution to Winthrop. Now after 30 years of Reaganism culinating with our financial crash, we are no longer a "city upon a hill" but, like the Beatles said just a bunch of "fool(s) on the hill."

Posted by: sunnsea | October 3, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

When I hear Palin run on at the mouth, a line from the movie "As Good As It Gets" seems appropriate: "I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability."

Posted by: danatlanta | October 3, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Manolete:

Americans are saying to you and people like you that your racial and bigotry comments attitude against Barack Obama will not stand. They are telling you that your thoughts and ideas about other people belong in the slave era not in this modern age. Joyfully for those who will enjoy this moment and the future (sadly for you and people like you), there is absolutely nothing you can do about it - regardless of whether Obama wins or does not win in 30 or so days from now.

Posted by: midas20874 | October 3, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Palin pretty much won the election for McCain the other night.

I figure for the next two Presidential debates, John McCain could show up drunk, stoned-out-of-his-mind and dressed in a t-shirt, beach shorts and flip flops and he & Palin would still end up coming out ahead in November.

Yeah, Palin's answers were nothing you'd want to quote for some kind of PHD thesis. But her approach was first rate: She looked straight at the camera -- Biden, Ifill didn't exist. Biden was totally out-classed

Posted by: chris3 | October 3, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Grampa needs to go take a nap and Hacky Mam needs to go back to guarding Alaska from the Russians. THESE two dimwits are what America needs right now? what a joke!

Posted by: Hillary08 | October 3, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-and-couric-on-gotcha-journalism.html

Tuesday, September 30, 2008
McCain and Couric Spar on Gotcha Journalism

COURIC: Over the weekend, Gov. Palin, you said the U.S. should absolutely launch cross-border attacks from Afghanistan into Pakistan to, quote, "stop the terrorists from coming any further in." Now, that's almost the exact position that Barack Obama has taken and that you, Sen. McCain, have criticized as something you do not say out loud. So, Gov. Palin, are you two on the same page on this?

MCCAIN: Now, just a minute, Katie. I have to step in here. That's another example of the media's "gotcha journalism"...

COURIC: But, it was a question from a citizen. How is a citizen asking a candidate a question an example of what you call "gotcha journalism?"

MCCAIN: Because it was hard, Katie.

We don't want Gov. Palin to be asked questions, unless she is prepared for them. When she is prepared, as she will be before the debate, she sounds intelligent, knowledgeable and feisty. But when she has not been prepared, she sounds lost and incoherent.

We can't have people asking her questions before she has had time to be prepared with an answer.

COURIC: But, Sen. McCain, I have to say, you are 72-years old. Actuarial preditions show that if you were to be elected, Gov. Palin would have a 1 in 5 chance of actually becoming President. These are perilous times--unprecedented crises in financial markets, tensions across a wide range of critical foreign policy arenas. Shouldn't we have a Vice President, and a potential President, who actually understands these issues, beyond the preparation necessary for a debate?

Here is her response to a question on the economy, a critical issue, you would agree, Sen. McCain:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.


COURIC: That answer, Sen. McCain, as noted by Fareed Zakaria, is incoherent.

MCCAIN: Yes. (nodding his head, smiling).

COURIC: Well, isn't it actually important that a potential President actually comprehend issues? That is, beyond debate preparation?

MCCAIN: No, Katie. That's what I mean by "gotcha journalism". It's obvious from these prior interviews that Palin has little to no comprehension of fiscal policy and economics. For heaven's sake, she received a "D" in macroeconomics in college! And, as I've said in the past, I have little understanding of economic issues myself.

No, what's important, Katie, is that she sound like she understands the issues. In the debate. If she is sufficiently prepared, she can give an illusion of understanding the issues--even if she is only giving answers with the prepared and practiced spontaneity and content necessary to give that illusion force.

Given that the bar is set at the lowest standard imaginable, Katie, if she accompanies that performance with sufficient charm, we believe that media will follow, into focusing on the change from that low standard, and on those superficial entertainment values--you know, Katie, (McCain smiles through tight lips and squinting eyes and moves his hands up and down)--"She certainly appears to be more confident tonight; she appears more poised, coherent, humorous"--rather than her readiness to be President from an objective standard. After all, using the more important standard of Presdidential capability, she has already demonstrated that she is unprepared to be President.

So, Katie, we want them to focus on that difference, on her debate preparation, rather than on her actual well-demonstrated Presidential unreadiness. And that's what I mean by "gotcha journalism."

KATIE: But if I understand you correctly, Sen. McCain, you actually believe that it's not important that she understand the issues actually facing the nation...

MCCAIN: Right.(nodding)

COURIC: On which many people's very jobs, health and life will rely at this critical time...

MCCAIN: Yes.

COURIC: And that all that really matters is creating a standard so low that she actually is rewarded for her widely seen and repeatedly demonstrated lack of knowledge and understanding. That we would be using what is essentially a remedial standard for Presidential capability--rather than one of actual capability.

Sen. McCain, you seem to be actually suggesting that we should decide that she is ready for the Presidency, simply because, after preparation, she has improved. Even though just days earlier, time after time, she was unable to give coherent answers on these subjects.

No one can gain Presidential-level understanding in days. And in the office of the Presidency, with its intense crises and unforseeable events, she will not be prepared for each unpredictable day, as she was for the debate.

Yet you expect media to focus on these values, rather than actual readiness to be President. That's what you mean by "gotcha journalism"?

MCCAIN: Exactly. And they will. Katie, I would say to the media: Once again--we "gotcha" to lower the bar. We "gotcha" to set expectations far below those actually required for a President. We "gotcha" to focus on characteristics unrelated to Presidential capability, and to ignore her statements on these issues made only days earlier--as if a few days of debate preparation can erase a glaring and dangerous actual lack of knowledge and preparedness. Yes, indeed--we "gotcha". (smiles).

COURIC: How can you expect the media to fall for that?

MCCAIN: It worked for Bush.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-and-couric-on-gotcha-journalism.html

Posted by: robthewsoncamb | October 4, 2008 7:16 AM | Report abuse


I truly believed that Palin had an ear piece during the debate as Bush did during his. If you rewatch the tapes you'll see she stares straight, doesn't move, stops to think about the next word like she didn't hear it right, etc.... and her performance was too far off all of those from previous weeks. We all know she memorized speeches and spewed them out even when they had no relevance to the questions ..why was she allowed to do that? Point is, how can we be certain that she will is not wired or have any devices of use to her up there on the podium next time?

This is what I believe she likely had, just as Bush had:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/12/bush_wireless_coaching/


How can we be sure candidates are being screened properly?

Posted by: melauriec | October 4, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Gwen Ifill dropped the ball. This blogpost says it better than I could:

http://jeffrowan111.tblog.com/

Posted by: aquar1 | October 4, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Palin's debating skills of "TRICK AND SKIP ANSWERS" did nothing to garner increased support for McCain; and in many cases, only further cemented our choice for Obama. Her BS theatrics of 'folksy and cute' wink, wink doggon it [which has carried her through life to this point], along with her ability to MEMORIZE McCAIN TALKING POINTS with the ABILITY TO REGURGITATE THEM like a fast firing Gatling Gun left most of our electorate NO DOUBT that she is completely devoid of "original thought, wisdom, intellect, or knowledge". She is still the same empty vessel and the "identical" person the public saw several days ago being interviewed by the press where she SOLIDIFIED her IGNORANCE, INCOMPETENCE, TOTAL LACK OF CURIOSITY AND QUALIFICATION for VP, and most especially POTUS. She would absolutely put our country in ever-more increasingly perilous positions on all fronts, i.e. economy, wars, environmental policy, global reputation, etc.

I can only pray that our electorate is smart enough to see through the "charade" of Palin. We have had enough "FAKES, FRAUDS, AND OPPORTUNISTS" lead our country to the brink of disaster!

I say, "thanks, but no thanks for this bridge to another 'slick dick' [Cheney] VP".

Posted by: ObamasLady | October 4, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Palin directed her own debate, telling us and Gwen what she wanted to answer and what he had to tell us about herself, yeah right. Didn't she disregard the rules of the Debate ( got away with it, another Repub tactic).
Honestly do we really want a VP thats "only been in it for five weeks"!
Obama/Biden

Posted by: JACQUELINE1 | October 4, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Obama to give away our tax money--Larry Leff




By: Larry Leff October 01, 2008



Email to a friend Voice your opinion


For those of you who are not familiar with The Global Poverty Act, of which Barack Obama is the lead sponsor, it is a tax on Americans which will total $845 billion (this is 0.7 percent of the Gross National Product). I doubt you will ever hear this discussed in any debates.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, our current population is 305,154,108 with 111,162, 259 U.S. households. If G.P.A. is enacted, our cost will be $2,800 per person or $7,800 per household.
Here is a condensed explanation of the G.P.A. (along with some of the Millennium Development Goals. The entire provisions are accessible online by typing in Global Poverty Act 2007 into the Google search engine.):
G.P.A. directs the president to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people who live on less than $1 per day.
G.P.A. is required to incorporate specific and measurable goals and to consist of specified components, including: 1) continued investment or involvement in existing U.S. initiatives related to international poverty reduction and trade preference programs for developing countries; 2) improving the effectiveness of development assistance and making available additional overall United States assistance levels as appropriate; 3) enhancing and expanding debt relief as appropriate; 4) mobilizing and leveraging the participation of businesses and public-private partnerships; 5) coordinating the goal of poverty reduction with other internationally recognized Millennium Development Goals; and 6) integrating principles of sustainable development (this has a direct tie to the U.N. Agenda 21) and entrepreneurship into policies and programs.
Listed here are some of the Millennium Development Goals for you to ponder: 1) a "standing peace force," (a U.N. standing army-I wonder where the vast majority of soldiers will come from?); 2) A U.N. arms register of all small arms and light weapons (NRA members will love this one); 3) peace education (covering all levels from pre-school to university level); and 4) political control of the global economy. The goals also require implementation of all U.N. treaties that the United States has never ratified. These sound like more Big Brothers taking over at a global level-just a thought.
I do not believe it is the responsibility of American taxpayers to reduce world poverty. We have more than our share of poor and underprivileged in our own country that we cannot get out of poverty, how can we do it worldwide? None of this $845 billion is dedicated to the poor in the United States. America already gives enormous amounts of aid to impoverished countries whose leaders (dictators) probably never distribute the aid. Who do you think will disperse this money? Obama is about taxes, socialism and giving away our sovereignty. Obama is not a good choice for America.
Larry Leff
Chetek

Posted by: DrRevere | October 4, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama to give away our tax money--Larry Leff




By: Larry Leff October 01, 2008



Email to a friend Voice your opinion


For those of you who are not familiar with The Global Poverty Act, of which Barack Obama is the lead sponsor, it is a tax on Americans which will total $845 billion (this is 0.7 percent of the Gross National Product). I doubt you will ever hear this discussed in any debates.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, our current population is 305,154,108 with 111,162, 259 U.S. households. If G.P.A. is enacted, our cost will be $2,800 per person or $7,800 per household.
Here is a condensed explanation of the G.P.A. (along with some of the Millennium Development Goals. The entire provisions are accessible online by typing in Global Poverty Act 2007 into the Google search engine.):
G.P.A. directs the president to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people who live on less than $1 per day.
G.P.A. is required to incorporate specific and measurable goals and to consist of specified components, including: 1) continued investment or involvement in existing U.S. initiatives related to international poverty reduction and trade preference programs for developing countries; 2) improving the effectiveness of development assistance and making available additional overall United States assistance levels as appropriate; 3) enhancing and expanding debt relief as appropriate; 4) mobilizing and leveraging the participation of businesses and public-private partnerships; 5) coordinating the goal of poverty reduction with other internationally recognized Millennium Development Goals; and 6) integrating principles of sustainable development (this has a direct tie to the U.N. Agenda 21) and entrepreneurship into policies and programs.
Listed here are some of the Millennium Development Goals for you to ponder: 1) a "standing peace force," (a U.N. standing army-I wonder where the vast majority of soldiers will come from?); 2) A U.N. arms register of all small arms and light weapons (NRA members will love this one); 3) peace education (covering all levels from pre-school to university level); and 4) political control of the global economy. The goals also require implementation of all U.N. treaties that the United States has never ratified. These sound like more Big Brothers taking over at a global level-just a thought.
I do not believe it is the responsibility of American taxpayers to reduce world poverty. We have more than our share of poor and underprivileged in our own country that we cannot get out of poverty, how can we do it worldwide? None of this $845 billion is dedicated to the poor in the United States. America already gives enormous amounts of aid to impoverished countries whose leaders (dictators) probably never distribute the aid. Who do you think will disperse this money? Obama is about taxes, socialism and giving away our sovereignty. Obama is not a good choice for America.
Larry Leff
Chetek

Posted by: DrRevere | October 4, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was raised up by God to be nominated as the next vice president.
Surely if God could take a shepherd boy named David and make him king of Israel, He can surely can give her the wisdom and the ability to be vice president. People forget that a president has a cabinet with people to help rule that are given wisdom to them by God. Furthermore she was also raised up by God to speak out against abortion which is one of the greatest sins of the US. Many men in office had the opportunity to speak out against abortion but did not. A baby is made in the image of God and abortion is destroying that one made in the image of God. Just because the US laws says abortion is legal does not make it legal in the sight of God. The US is being judged by God for this sin of murdering innocent babies. I wonder how many people who are pro-choice would have wanted their mother to have aborted them. I would think not many yes to that question. Faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only hope for all people in regards to the judgment of sin that must be dealt with to be able to enter into Heaven. Aborted babies are issued directly into Heaven for they are not able to hear the gospel of the Jesus Christ but are covered by His shed blood on the cross. Because of God's mercy, grace and love for those created in His image, helpless aborted babies are saved into heaven.

Posted by: emailcrossmembercrossescom | October 4, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

EJ: I heard your participation the day after the VP debate on the Diane Rheems show. A caller gave Gov. Palin a bum rap based on this quote in the debate (Source: CNN), "And Maliki and Talabani also in working with us are knowing again that we are getting closer and closer to that point, that victory that's within sight."

I am disappointed that you not only missed the inaccuracy of the caller's critique, but agreed with it.

The caller basically accused (and you concurred) Palin of not knowing our friends from our allies (Maliki vs. the Taliban), or even knowing the name of the Taliban (thinking it was "Talabani".) But her quote clearly indicates she is referring to the two Iraqi leaders PM Maliki and President Talabani. Both are allies, and particularly so for Kurdish leader (not Iraqi President).

I am an Obama/Biden supporter, but find inaccurate swipes of Palin to be unhelpful. I hope you might correct this particular misstatement.

Thank you.

Posted by: conexos | October 5, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Sarah palin's non-answers during the v.p. debate are just like John McCain's campaign,hollow and confusing.Waste your vote on election day, if you so choose,but I'll put mine where it will do some good.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2008

Posted by: puredemo | October 6, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

E.J. Dionne has a gaffe on Palin on Talibani

http://online.wsj.com/article/best_of_the_web_today.html#printMode

A hilarious example of press bias against Palin occurred last FridayI on "The Diane Rehm Show," a production of Washington's WAMU-FM. The exchange between hostess Rehm, caller Tom of Norwich, Vt., and Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne begins at about 46:10 of the "10:00 News Roundup":

Tom: I just wonder why not more has been made of the statement by Palin during the debate last night that "Maliki and the Talabani"--this is a quote from the transcript--"also in working with us are knowing again that we are getting closer and closer to the point of victory." The Talibani obviously are our absolute enemy and have been since 9/11; Maliki, our central ally in Iraq. This to me is a tremendous blunder, revealing a very superficial familiarity with these sorts of terms.

Rehm: Thanks for calling, Tom. . . . E.J.?

Dionne: I think that "superficial" is absolutely the right word for the knowledge or the lack of knowledge Palin showed yesterday. I'm glad the caller raised that one, and I suspect there is going to be a scouring of that transcript for exactly that sort of gaffe. That has echoes of some of the stuff she said to Katie Couric.

If you look at the debate transcript, however, you will see that the reference is not to "the Talabani" but to Talabani--as in Jalal Talabani, the president of Iraq.

Posted by: michael0987620011 | October 6, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Like the commenters above, I'm waiting for E.J. to acknowledge the glaring error he made on the Diane Rehm show. Taranto had a lot of fun with this on best of the web.

Makes E. J. look either disingenuous, or, a bit like what he accuses Palin of being - well, I won't say stupid, but ...

Got something to tell us, E.J.? Your credibility is sinking fast.

Posted by: chris991 | October 7, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company