The one on the left is at 6:10pm.
A good place NOT to put your hand. (Yes, these chairs rock.)
Watching the debate from the back of the room.
I'd have to give the debate to Biden, easily. While Palin did have some moments, not saying something completely wrong is not my standard for a debate. Most of the time she avoided the questions by ignoring them and reciting something she'd studied with her trainers. She talked in vague generalities that didn't make much sense, though she did have some specifics - like how Obama voted X times to raise taxes - that also didn't make any sense.
Meanwhile Biden clearly knew what he was talking about and a few times, very politely, but firmly called her on her nonsense. This was particularly the case when he finally got tired of her talking about how she and McCain were mavericks. He went on to list a series of things - like the war, health care, subprime loans, etc. - where McCain was not a maverick. He wasn't a maverick, Biden told us, on anything of importance. I did wonder about his saying that the VP only presided over the Senate when there was a tie vote. The Constitution says the VP is the President of the Senate, but only votes on a tie. He might have explained this when he said that "the only authority the VP has in the legislature is the vote." So I think he meant that otherwise the presiding is basically ceremonial and the VP has no power over the agenda or anything else, except to vote when there is a tie.
I did catch a little of the debate on video. At UAA the audience was not asked to remain silent during the debate. Listen to the difference in the kind of answers they give to the question about whether they would agree with Cheney's interpretation of the role of the vice president as not simply under the executive, but also as part of the legislative branch.
It might be easier to figure out what Palin said if you read it. Here's the best I could do transcribing it with the laughter blocking out a couple of words in two places:
Well our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the Vice President and we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the President’s agenda in that position. Yeah. So. And I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility there and we’ll do what we have to do to administer very corporately the plan ????. It is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my pick as VP with McCain not only as a Governor, but early on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, and as a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to good use in the ????.
I'm sorry, but if a graduate student had turned in a test with an answer like this to the question, I would have had to mark it a D or an F. It doesn't answer the question, it rambles. If this was a strategy to not say something wrong - "Sarah, if you aren't sure, if it isn't one of the questions we prepped you on, just go back to something you do know. There's no need to answer the question" - it worked. She was like a doll. You pull the string in back and it answers what it's programmed to answer, not the question you asked.
In her response to the question about Cheney's VP model, she never mentioned Cheney (she did say ‘him’) and never discussed Cheney’s interpretation of the Vice Presidency as partly a member of the legislative branch. She just gave us platitudes and then her resume.
What did she say?
Here are the key points - if you are trying to understand content.
- Our Founding Fathers were wise and allowed much flexibility for the Vice President
- We’ll do what’s best for American people
- tapping into that position
- ushering in an agenda
------that is supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda
[Whatever that means] - Yeah, I agree with him
- that we have a lot of flexibility - We’ll administer very corporately the plan
[what plan?]
[Now she starts talking about her qualifications] - I was picked for McCain’s VP running mate because of
-being Governor
-being Mayor
-being an oil and gas regulator
-being a business owner
Even if we say the VP isn't that important, Palin's performance raises serious questions about McCain's decision making abilities.
Perhaps, Joe Sixpack, who Palin mentioned in the debate, might think, "Wow, there's someone just like me." But when Joe Sixpack breaks a leg, he doesn't drive down to the Palin house to get his leg fixed. He goes to a hospital where there are doctors who have spent years and years studying medicine. Why would he want a someone with as little training for the job as himself to be in a position to be called on to run one of the most important countries in the world? To make decisions about health care, global warming, banking, foreign policy, etc.?
I grew up thinking that anyone could grow up to be whatever they wanted in America, but there are limits to it. You can be whatever you want to be, but you also have to be ready and prepared for it. A political science major with a JD and internships all over the globe and a nanny if needed-- that is preparation and readiness. A journalism degree and dragging her kids all over the place? That is a harried mother. Journalists are not trained to make decisions on issues; they are trained to make a popular product by numbing it down enough for busy people to read and digest quickly and increase readership or listenership, that causes businesses to by ad copy.
ReplyDeleteWell for a moment I thought I saw some kind of comedy. Those laughs in the background really reminds me to Married With Children, Friends and such sitcoms. On many classes we learn how to answer a question properly.
ReplyDeleteI don't really want to complain about her however I have to admit that with my knowledge Biden looks million times more ready for the job and his mentality is also better. The reasons I am not complaining about her answers are that I am not American and Hungarians are generally bad at diplomacy.
I think too, Steve, that we need to look at who runs other countries. Much of the time, we read that they spent a fair amount of time at America's top universities or top universities from around the world. Look who the leaders, not just in politics but in banking and education and other departments and ministries are and from where they come. Do we think that "Joseph Champagne" is going to take advice from a VP with a journalism degree on what to do with the economy? (What was her GPA, btw?) I can't imagine anyone who has real power and the grooming to be in the dizzying circles they are in giving her much attention other than "figure head."
ReplyDeleteRopi, you may comment on her answers if you like. If you have any faults, it's that you might be too direct, but you give straight answers! You study everything in depth and you are probably one of the reasons your teachers like their jobs and go to work every day.
How much experience would be adequate for the job? Obama basicly won his Senate seat because the other two in the race couldn't keep their pants up and he's spent more time campaigning than voting on Bills.
ReplyDeleteObama has never run a state, a town, or even an animal shelter. He is more UN-qualified than Palin. Oh yeah, he says he's run a campaign with 25,000 employees. HA!
Alaska has a $10-11 BILLION budget. What's Obama's campaign? He he, he has others runnng that so when he gets the questionable campaign donation he can play stupid.
Obama will lose, and it could be a landslide...
Thank you Anonymus II.
ReplyDeleteAction Jackson - This blog tries to keep grounded and focused. This post was about the debate, but your comment doesn't discuss the debate. You start with a good question - How much experience would be adequate for the job? Though you'd have to somehow tie that into the debate.
ReplyDeleteBut you don't even address the question your pose, instead you simply repeat anti-Obama propaganda. What do Obama's opponents have to do with his qualifications?
While the McCain campaign has focused on executive experience, there are many other factors important to being a good president, they'd rather not talk about. George W. Bush had much more time as governor than does Sarah Palin, but that didn't make him a good president.
Why not just say, "I'm for McCain and logic and reason isn't part of my decision making."?
Or, "I prefer McCain and it doesn't matter to me whether Palin is qualified."
Or perhaps you have another reason for supporting McCain.
I suspect that would be more accurate than what you've posted. And I'd respect you for being honest about your voting decision even if I disagreed. But your comment shows no respect for the people who participate in this blog. It is more like spray painting graffiti on my blog and I'm tempted to just rub it out.
great analysis. listening to palin for me is just like listening to george w. i get this weird contact high, feel really strange and embarrassed and start to lose my bearings a little.
ReplyDeletei liked your talking doll analogy. reminds me of an interview with a talking ken doll i read a long time back. i can't recall it exactly but it went something like:
Q. ken, don't you feel that your party-boy-gung-ho-devil-may-care persona is masking deep-rooted insecurity and feelings of inadequacy?
[pull the string]
A. let's go get the food for the party!
College students always think they are very wise. Give 'm 20 years, and they'll realize they weren't as clever as they thought.
ReplyDeleteAlso, they think they're being thoughtful; chances are, they're parroting professors' opinions.
Geez, you must be really wise to be able to characterize all college students in 34 words.
ReplyDeleteAnd what about the people who don't go to college? Do they always think they are very dumb? Who are they parroting? Do they change after 20 years too?
If they had cheered Palin, would you have posted the same comment? Just curious.
Steve,
ReplyDeleteI love your Blog on the VP debates! And the grade of D or F for Sarah's answer. Great! Dianne