I thought Palin did just fine. I'm reading the NatPost running commentary - what has happened to Diane Francis, it's like she lights her hair on fire when Palin is mentioned. I used to enjoy her columns, not so much anymore. Anyway, thats off topic - good job Sarah Palin.

Sara's back in the ball game and tonight she hit another home run. This, despite the fact that old Joe did a very fine job. Now, watch as the lefties in the MSM and elsewhere again go apoplectic, right through the roof and into orbit.

Palin put the haters in their place. She schooled Biden, kept him on the defensive most of the night, and connected with people who actually like America the way it is meant to be. She's the only good thing about McCain's pathetic campaign.

Diane Francis and Margaret Wente have gone off the deep end lately. What happened? Barbara Kay, Christie Blatchford, and Rosie DiManno will have to carry the torch.

Kate,
She kicked Joe's butt, he missed HER statement that Obama opposed Energy Independence. The US Embassy been built in Jerusalem seemed to catch Joe by surprise (me too)

Joe looked bad in his camera shot, old and squinting. Makeup FU

Funny thing on CNN. They had a focus group and when the group were asked if the debate had changed anyone’s mind, hands went up for Obama.. The Moderator asked an elderly Lady why she was now voting for Obama. She said the Man (Joe) was just terrible and that the Lady was better & smarter.. CNN cut the interview when they realized the lady was confused.. I suspect some PA (Production Assistant)is in trouble.

Thank you Kate for the link. I did not watch the debate so I enjoyed reading the transcript. I was reminded that what Sarah Palin reflects is the old fashioned idea that hard work and free enterprise really is the best way for the most people to get ahead... I think thats why she connects with so many people. She will be mocked and ridiculed by the chattering class that wants to talk and philosophize (ad nauseum) but she will be embraced by that element of the electorate that recognizes that nothing in life is free, everything has a cost and personal responsibility is necessary if the Western World is to prosper and survive. Good on her!

Watched fox's post-debate coverage. It looks like Biden made about one falsehood/mistake/gaffe every two minutes (i'm being serious, he made lots of them) the final tally probably won't be known until tomorrow.

My fave: when he was talking about the balkan crisis he was trying to impress by listing off the various opposing sides he called Bosnians "Bosniaks" - it's in the transcript even. a classic example of a guy who cannot run herd over his tongue.

excellent question by question analysis over at hugh hewitt:

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog

Do you get the sense that after this election,

the media is going to wake up with one nasty hangover, flip up the sheets to find Obama next to them in bed, and regret drinking the spiked election punch?

As for Ifill's conduct I not so sure it was as even-handed as you think Kate. apparently she cut off debate at opportune times for Biden and praised his service/experience at others - but the coup 'd grace is that she let Biden begin AND end the debate.

The U.S. has Sarah Palin and we have....Elizabeth May. Yippeeeee!

Biff,that was kool-aid ,not punch. Joe is probably screeching at his handlers." Didn't anyone notice that the 'little woman'had balls under her skirt,OMG,Obama's people will be so mad,damn you John McCain".

Bosniac/Bosniak was not a gaffe, I heard the term fairly often while I was there. I don't remember if it's used to refer to all Bosnians or only muslim Bosnians. Although we call them Croatians and Serbians, the other ethnic groups refer to themselves as Croats and Serbs.

I think Sarah Palin is a classy, likable lady but this: "We need to make sure that we demand from the federal government strict oversight of those entities in charge of our investments and our savings" is just plain pandering to the Statists.

Yeah, like I truly want and need even more government meddling in te financial decisions of private citizens.

Is that what they call tough in Scranton, PA.? Post debate I think Joe Biden has a new nickname.

Moose. For obvious reasons.

"Moose. For obvious reasons."

Sarah "hunts" moose. Biden was just roadkill tonight.
The MSM is what got shot by Palin tonight. Very well done.

Well, according to the CNN post game show I watched a minute ago, Palin did okay for a soccer mom but is not VP material. quel surprise, eh. Last night Fox gave a more balanced opinion but I'm sure the Dems wouldn't be watching that.

From the snippets I saw she came across as a real and honest person who wants to clean up the crap in Washington but I guess that is not what some people want.

btw, almost every time I surfed over to the US debate Biden was speaking. Was it my bad luck or was the air time balanced?

The term "Bosniac" is used to refer to Bosnian Muslims. It started coming into more general use during IFOR/SFOR days.

It would be a gaffe to use this term to describe Bosnian Croats or Bosnian Serbs though.

I can't say for sure because I was flipping back and forth, but Biden often asked and was granted opportunities to go outside the format and rebuff the last thing Palin said. It would have been interesting to see Ifill's response if Palin had asked for the same courtesy (which she should have).

when you think of it Alaska is surrounded by socialists

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080925/palin_interview_080925/20080925?s_name=uselection2008&no_ads=

It felt to me like Biden got more talk time also. I can't be certain, and maybe it was a result of the format and length of answers, but it seemed like Biden got first word and last word on many questions. Ifill would return to him for his rebuttals and then move on to the next question without Palin getting a chance to call him on his lies.

Just loved how Joe boy showed his overly white pearlies when he was being out-done by Palin and feeling a bit uncomfortable.

Trust CNN to trot out a "poll" that shows Biden won the debate 51% to Palin's 36%. They don't say who conducted the poll, how many people were polled nor what the specific questions were. Quite predictable for CNN.

daryl...you perceived correctly.
Follow the links that Kate provides. You will find the whole debate script.Even if you don't have time to RTWT, a quick scroll thru indicates Biden spoke more, had longer uninterrupted messages and went off topic more.
Palin mastered the message by not rambling, more facts, more substance.

[deleted - whoever is attempting to impersonate a well known commentor here - and I'm pretty sure I know who you are - can just stop, already. - ED]

Sarah Baracuda ate Joe Biden's lunch on live TV last night. She came across as a "real" person who is serious about what she says, Biden looked like a politician.

As far as I understand her record, she DOES mean what she says. Biden's record I know a lot beter, and he clearly will say any damn thing at all and means none of it.

Joe Biden is out for Joe Biden, first, last and always. From what I saw last night, Sarah Palin is a pissed-off hockey mom with Washington big game hunting on her mind. I'd vote for her in a heart beat, whereas I'd sooner drink draino than vote for that plastic banana Joe Biden.

In contrast, our "leaders" debate was a friggin' FARCE. Harper looked like a bear dropped into a cage of weasels. I though Dion was going to cry when Harper said the Green Shaft was a tax increase. The best shot Taliban Jack could come up with was to insult Harper's SWEATER?!!! Man, he hurled that beauty and I felt the thud when it bounced off Harper's armor.

What that whole thing came off like to me, admittedly biased as I am toward the CPC, was one reasonable man fending off four unreasonable nut cases who were trying to pick a fist fight with him in a bar. Layton particularly gave the impression of a stupid thug looking for a fight.

Bottom line, I think those people are not normal and I don't want them anywhere near government. If that's the best this country can do for leaders, we are truly f-ed.

Wow ET, surprising take from you. You didn't like the Palin girlie?

How did you like our fearless leaders? Did that look like a cage of rats attacking a cat or what?

Joe Biden's 14 Lies

1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

Biden won under a couple of criteria. If you wanted to hear Democrat talking points, he said 'em, Palin didn't.

If you wanted to get the most unrefuted lies out there, Biden won hands down.

As I stated before, you haven't seen the real SP yet. She let the MSM show her as an airhead that wouldn't be suitable as VP candidate. As of last night the common folks are starting to see that there is actually something underneath that hair that is worth listening to. The MSM is going for the "gotcha" moments and SP is going to be talking to the American people from her heart, something that the MSM lost a long time age. Now she has the ball and watch her run with it. She had Biden at the handshake and "can I call you Joe moment". Who would of knew she knew so much about all this complicated policies. The people who she ran against from the town "Mayor" to the "Reps" and "Dems" in Alaska warned them, "DO NOT UNDERESTEMATE HER". Didn't have to listen, "she is just common folk". Now its McCain's turn.

Harper cleaned up on the debate. He must go into a room at night and practice slamming lefties in cage matches. Used to watch Calgary Stampede Wrestling as a kid and see that Archie Goldie AKA "THE STOMPER" take on four Midgets, or for the political correct "Short People". Of course the would put the run on him, good for the crowd draw but very little substance. Lets hope that the people see through the MSM reporting and put Harper in with a majority.

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WON THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?...

BIDEN
28% 109,435
PALIN
70% 271,913
NEITHER
2% 6,728

Total Votes: 388,076

And from the gang over at LGF

LGF Poll

Who won?
752 8.6% Joe Biden
7,995 91.4% Sarah Palin

If the numbers are to be believed, it would appear that Sarah would be dubbed the "Palinator". A 70% rating would be the debate equivalent of a hidin' for Biden.

As for McCain making an absolutely stunning choice for a running mate, I believe he had the Democratic team 'dead to rights'.

With four weeks to run SP and JM have more than enough time to make a solid case for their candidacy. The coronation of Obama is far from assured.

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion
2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden(Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)
Knecht Rupprecht Division
Hans Corps
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

Merle, were those midgets Koreans or Indians like we used to see when I was a kid? Remember Sky-Low-Low and Little Beaver? Don't hink the Korean ones had names.

It was a long time ago. We was raised in a 3 room living/3 bedroom house/9 boys. Had a battery run 12" TV that was turned on for stampede wrestling and moms show called payton place. Never had much time for TV. It was great.

"She schooled Biden"

Please. She "schooled" no one. She, like Obama, is a talented and polished lightweight.

I'm a pessimist. I feared the VP debates because I thought if Governor Palin delivered anything less than a stellar performance, she would forever be the scapegoat for the Republican loss which appears to be looming. I thought that was an enormous amount of pressure to bear and I didn't know how she would hold up. However, she did better than well and I was vastly relieved. It wasn't just how the outcome would affect her, but how it would affect any woman who might find herself in a similar spot in the future. The media have done their best to present her as an airhead and a laughingstock. I would be saddened if a woman of her substance could be dismissed in this way, but if she had wavered in the debate, I fear this might have happened. She might be weak on foreign policy and she might have a few religious views I don't share, but I'm delighted that she not only survived but also prevailed. On a broader perspective, it means that young woman might have other roles to aspire to than vapid starlets or condescending intellectuals. Please, let there be more than Brittney and Mallick to represent women.

wonder what this is all about . . .

"FBI Raids Obama Friend's Home

Andrea Billups

Washington Times

October 3, 2008

The FBI on Wednesday raided the county offices of a former Illinois state senator who is a poker-playing buddy of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama.

According to Chicago authorities, the FBI visited the offices in Joliet, Ill., of Will County executive Larry Walsh, a longtime friend of Mr. Obama's, and his chief of staff Matt Ryan.

Mr. Walsh, who served in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2005, was endorsed by Mr. Obama in his county executive election bid. With the support of some of Mr. Obama's U.S. Senate volunteers, he easily defeated incumbent Republican Joseph Mikan.

Will County auditor Steve Weber confirmed that his office had been asked by the FBI to assist in an investigation, but he did not elaborate on the specifics.

Two FBI agents out of Chicago reportedly spent more than an hour in the Will County offices on Wednesday morning."

I think she did darn well considering that she is a relative rookie next to Joe Biden, who has been at this game for decades. She was clearly a bit nervous, understandably so, which made her performance all the more impressive.

Listening to and reading the negative or lukewarm comments about her underscores why politics is such a mess.

We may *talk* about wanting a fresh face in politics, but in the end we always side with the slick career politicians.

Name one case where a perfectly competent and capable rookie, who lacks the slickness (and often sleaziness) of career politicians, has been given a fair shake by the electorate? Name one. You can't.

So to a large degree we bring on the mess ourselves.

My hat off to Palin, I doubt any of her critics could have done better than she did.

I'm sure most of you have looked over the MSM on debate option and its obvious they were not watching the same debate as I was. Its so ridiculously slanted its almost laughable if it went so said. Biden is the same old crony career politician that makes Washington look bad internationally. Sara is so fresh and mainstream that the MSM just can not deal with it because she does not fit their old crony mold. I suspect that Obama is going to win this election and although financially thats a disaster I do suspect that the world opinion of the US in general will be improved and that probably a good thing because Bush was a mistake and if the GOP would have picked McCain in 2000 the US today would have been in a much better position than they find themselves in now. Yah I'm getting off topic, I think she is a fresh new face who would do a lot for the US and its really sad and a big lose for the country that after Nov 4rth see will probably not be herd from again.

I think that Sarah (may I call you Sally) won the debate. I was expecting a train wreck based on the what I had heard third hand about recent interviews.

I also thought that Joe did pretty good too.

It looks like McCain-Palin are directly targeting the American people and bypassing MSM and media polls. This may work because I think that a lot more Americans realize the where MSM is coming from and I think they are seeing the manipulation of polls. The election of McCain-Palin would probably destroy MSM as currently run - a good thing.

Re Canada's election debate.
"I think those people are not normal and I don't want them anywhere near government. If that's the best this country can do for leaders, we are truly f-ed."

"A" Freakin MEN, Phantom
What a joke!

Dion hardly bothered attending and was un-intelligible and insignificant to what passed for debate.
What is more shocking is that anyone can take Layton and May seriously.
They are raving communist lunatics, with NO self awareness, that would destroy our economy immediately if elected.

A lot of Canada, and specifically the people that reside in the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor, Winnipeg and Vancouver city centres conduct their lives in a fantasy realm of sophomoric politically correct Disney Oprahisms founded on "Little Guy is always noble and right, and everything powerful, large or American is wrong and evil".

Canada is "F''d.

Stefi, May and Jack acted like crazed rabid sewer rats, disgraceful uncivilized debaters.
Watching Jack Layton "strike a pose" is as deep as his waters run.
His schtick shouldn't pass for political debate in freakin Uganda.

During a hockey fight Canadians openly BOO the third man in and hate an unfair fight.
How can the "Monkey In The Middle", four against 1 formated round table be advisable, unless you're an ABC lefty CBC employee, trying to hang on to your $100M year Boom Mike Holder job.

Do you think the entire crew from the show lives in Jack's neighbourhood.
He bragged 5000 artist live in his riding.
I can attest to that; probably more!
They obviously picked the format, set the seating arrangement, chose the camera shots, twisted the feedback knobs and did the makeup and lighting.

The last words (yelled over the moderator's closing comments) at Canada's political leaders debate , were intended to be a swipe at America.
Who would have believed a year ago that anybody could get into an official political debate sponsored by our taxes that was any crazier than Taliban Jack.
May is astoundingly, crazier.

The last guy wondering towards the cameras on the set by himself, as they shut down the lights, was Jack Layton, totally oblivious to the fact that everyone left.

I believe that Harper has never been in Majority "terror- tory".
The polls are artificially manipulated and used to scare Liberals into getting out of their cars and voting for a disfunctional, morally broke party of grifters, who's only purpose serves to keep the MSM/Arts/Bureaucrats gravy train on track.
Harper will win with a few more guys on his team but no majority.

Canada could use a Sarah Palin, she kicks ass.

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WON THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?...

BIDEN
28% 118,953
PALIN
70% 294,430
NEITHER
2% 7,360

Total Votes: 420,743

Given the numbers I would put this in "whup ass" territory for debate.

Sarah Palin came across as confident, astute, and made a connection with the viewer. The clear conclusion is you can be a glitzy glam queen and still have some hockey mom street smarts.

Like Gordie Howe, she knows when to lift her elbows digging for the puck in the corner.

The puck is in the net for the Republicans on debate night.

Further to my comment above, I think Mark Steyn sums it up well with this comment he made after the debate:

"American politics, in a way, is about the art of faking authenticity in the Biden school. And it doesn’t really quite know how to handle someone who is authentically authentic, which is what Governor Palin is."

ET
Gord Tulk: Bosniaks are Bosnian Muslims. Anyone who's done any reading about the Balkan Wars would know this.

ET you sound like a know it all condescending schoolteacher. I enjoy and agree with most of what you have to say but ease up in your criticisms of others, a simple explanation like JJM @ 6:40 would be sufficient.

With respect to the VP debate, I give the win to Palin; but, I admire Joe Biden for regularly referring to himself in the third person, that's the kind of guy Indiana Homez can relate to:)

Shaidle has a good vid up with some reaction the the VP debate.
Watch the whole thing.Coombes gets a good whippin'.

fivefeetoffury.com

Comparing two debates - I know now, what are the basis of anti-Americanism in Canada. They are as simple as inferiority complex. Where in U.S. debate focus is on 'middle class', in Canada 'low income people' that matters. Then, I turned on the radio and a caller supported one of the politicians, because "he was for the little guy".
I think you can easily win elections in Canada with the slogan: "We are the party of low expectations and low self-esteem".

...while she performed better than people expected, she left a trail of mindless, ill-thought statements that will be continued to parsed and debated. And on Tuesday, none of this will be remembered.

Wow ET, surprising take from you. You didn't like the Palin girlie?

Surprisingly objective... and accurate. Palin has a talent for making one forget what the question was. When she HAS to answer a question, well, like here for instance...

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=jBt0r9Exv2I&feature=user

Don't even ask what newspapers she reads.

After last night, I expect am increase in Palinmania at public speeches and an equal but opposite reaction of Palin Derangement Syndrome by the elites and MSM.

I am part way through the Youtube of the debate. SP just has an appeal that no amount of money, finishing school or education can buy.

Just a quick note. Broadcast only numbers were 40 million last night. This does not include any of the cable networks.

I don't think all those people tuned in to see Joe Biden!!

In the Canadian debate the person who let me down the most was Steve Paikin. Mr. Harper was not allowed to finish a sentence by the pack of jackals nipping at his heels. For staying cool, calm and the most prime ministerial Mr. Harper wins hands down.

Mr. Layton had the most energy but was on steroids. Mr. Dion was better than expected but clearly couldn't lead a horse to water. Ms. May is a one issue candidate who came across as nasty. Mr. Duceppe mailed it in.

Lousy format and poorly moderated. Compare that to the clarity of the VP debate.

Sarah Rocks!

Obama WIN!

" And it doesn’t really quite know how to handle someone who is authentically authentic, which is what Governor Palin is."

No kidding. When Joe was comparing blue collar roots with Palin, it made you wonder why he bothered. I mean talk about looking out of touch.

But I guess Joe won because he got more outright lies into the record. 22 at last count.

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTVhMThlNjRkZGFlMmUwOWFkNDZkZjk0MzBiY2JiYmY=

I was only able to catch bits of the US VP debate.

When Sarah talked she was "looking straight at me, in the eye."

Winner. Right there.

Everytime Biden smiled?

The wife had to get in front of the TV and keep solid objects out of my reach.

I only saw the last half hour.
Peggy Noonan is nuts.
ET is closest to my view.
All comments about Palin "eating Biden" for lunch are laughably off base.
She did well, in relation to the low expectations and for a rookie up against a 35-year insider of insiders.

Two huge boners:
- More money for school teachers [no Sarah, competition for public schools via vouchers.]

- Populist demagoguery about greed and corruption on Wall Street [yes, Sarah, but the source of this meldown is marxist governance, in the form of Fannie-Freddie: "To each according to need". A RIGHT to own a house.]

That said, I really love the woman and fervently wish we had more of her ilk in government.

Comparing two debates - I know now, what are the basis of anti-Americanism in Canada. They are as simple as inferiority complex. Where in U.S. debate focus is on 'middle class', in Canada 'low income people' that matters. Then, I turned on the radio and a caller supported one of the politicians, because "he was for the little guy".
I think you can easily win elections in Canada with the slogan: "We are the party of low expectations and low self-esteem".
Posted by: xiat at October 3, 2008 12:32 PM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

xiat -- that is an incredibly astute insight, one that never dawned on me before. But as I read your post, it was immediately self-evidently true to me. The debates indeed made it starkly clear: Biden/Palin were constantly referencing the middle class in terms of economic policy. The Canadian politicians (Harper excepted) were more concerned about grants to starving artists.

I believe the U.S. economy is as large and successful as it is (current financial crisis notwithstanding), is that U.S. economic policy has generally encouraged and developed an investor class, which typically is a subset of the middle class.

Canada has a strong economy as well, but per capita is much smaller than the U.S. economy, and we have much lower productivity that our southern counterpart. I think your statement drives at a main reason for this difference: Canadian economic policy is much more re-distributionist in nature (i.e. aimed at the lower class). Canada does not encourage enough development of an investor class to drive investment in small and medium sized businesses.

That's my take on it. xiat - I think you're onto something.

I hope that the people who are referencing that we have a low standard of people running are not referring to PMSH. If you take the last 2 debates and look at who can handle themselves it was diffidently PMSH. With the 4 lefties coming at him on a constant barrage of crap, he answered sternly, without raising his voice to be heard, intelligently, with credibility, with authority and with class. What more could you want from a leader.

"We are the party of low expectations and low self-esteem".

About ten years ago one of the newpapers had a business insert with a cover story about a booming stock market. It was titled: "Are You Rich Yet?"
Many, many people wrote angry letters, thought it was insensitive and...well, I don't exactly know what they thought, but somehow it offended them.

manny

"...while she performed better than people expected, she left a trail of mindless, ill-thought statements that will be continued to parsed and debated. And on Tuesday, none of this will be remembered.

Wow ET, surprising take from you. You didn't like the Palin girlie?

Surprisingly objective... and accurate. Palin has a talent for making one forget what the question was. When she HAS to answer a question, well, like here for instance..."

Whats your point? This is politics.

"Harper will win with a few more guys on his team but no majority."

richfisher

You may be correct, I think a Harper in a minority will be able to act as a majority, that has been his plan in this election. Some say majority some say minority but in the end the Liberals will have to side with the Dippers and Bloc or abstain from voting on bills again. that is a lose lose situation. Bringing down the government in two years of less will be a lose lose lose situation for the Liberals; therefore, the Liberals may be better off with a Harper majority so the pressure will be off and the Liberals can rebuild.

All of that being said, I don't think it would have mattered who the Liberal leader was this time around, Stffi employed the only strategy available to the Liberals short of agreeing with the Conservatives on most issues which would have been worse politically.

Whats your point? This is politics.

Palin is an empty headed non-entity who is unsuited for high political office.

How did you like our fearless leaders? Did that look like a cage of rats attacking a cat or what?

Four chihuahuas yapping at the big dog.

FRAUD! Hey- that posting by 'ET' at 9:15 wasn't by me - the real ET. I haven't posted a thing on this thread. I didnt' watch any of the debates.
I did NOT write:

"Gord Tulk: Bosniaks are Bosnian Muslims. Anyone who's done any reading about the Balkan Wars would know this.

At any rate, I think Palin failed to impress, and while she performed better than people expected, she left a trail of mindless, ill-thought statements that will be continued to parsed and debated. And on Tuesday, none of this will be remembered."

I would appreciate that whoever wrote the above, should remember a basic ethical creed of blogging. Don't assume someone else's name and try to make readers think that you are someone else who posts on the blog. That's unethical.

I also happen to like Sarah Palin and I would never have written the above post.

Good on you ET

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/

The after debate celebration pictures. Hey CNN... the Dems. party looks a little...empty.

"Name one case where a perfectly competent and capable rookie, who lacks the slickness (and often sleaziness) of career politicians, has been given a fair shake by the electorate? Name one. You can't."-TJ

Ralph Klein when he started out.

Thanks ET, for a minute there you had me worried.

Didn't sound like ET to me at all.  Glad I didn't take the bait.  ;-)

Garth

P.S.: Right of centre: You're correct — although I don't expect Ralph's feat to be repeated until, oh, say, the heat-death of the Universe.  But the spirit of TJ's point remains, methinks.

Palin is totally awesome, an asset to the ticket, and really, really competent to be vice president.

So let her free. Take her out of Cheney's undisclosed location and let her campaign. Let her do media interviews. Let her do town hall meetings. Take her out of tightly-scripted environments, shed the McCain chaperon (which is a bit creepy and quite a bit sexist), and "let Palin be Palin".

I'm sure she'll just do great. Because really, all that Palin awesomeness shouldn't be limited to the single vice-presidential debate. It should be unleashed on the country! If not, Republicans will be deprived of a potent weapon in this final weeks of the campaign.

What Palin offers, almost regardless of herself, is a chisel, a hammer, a means to chink away at the monolithic imperium that is the Washington political structure.

And therefore, to act as this chisel, she shouldn't be 'one of them'; she shouldn't be able to give the party line. She should, instead, be genuinely puzzled at times; she shouldn't know the slick answer to everything. Indeed, she should admit that she doesn't know - and that the slick answer supplied by the bureaucrats may be 'real' only in that Washington monolith. But not outside of it.

We have the same problem here. We've set up, via the Liberal regime, an Ottawa-Montreal monolith, based around one and only one particular view of What Is Right - Big Government Socialism. That's actually a Quebec doctrine, stemming from the post WWII years of centralist Rulership.

It doesn't work anymore. It doesn't acknowledge reality - which is that Canada is too large, and ecologically and economically diverse, to be run by a centralist govt with an Ottawa-Montreal perspective.

Dion and Layton and Duceppe - that's their perspective. Harper is the only one who acknowledges reality...and it's not easy getting any structural changes to enable that new reality when you have a majority House, a patronage Liberal Senate, a Liberal civil service made up of two decades of appointments, a similar judiciary, and a sycophantic Liberal MSM.

I quite agree with the chisel concept. It's going to take a lot of hammer and chisel work to par down the bureaucracy of government. Same with PMSH, he is got a lot of chiseling to do.

"Don't even ask what newspapers she reads."

Manny, that means what, exactly? Given what we know about newspapers, why would anyone of average intelligence or above read one? Do you have so little regard for your time that you feel compelled to waste it thus? Tell us, what papers do you read.

"Palin is an empty headed non-entity who is unsuited for high political office."

So, she's doesn't (yet)have her diploma of U.S. Vice-Presidency, huh. I guess being awarded her Governorship cum laude by the electorate doesn't say much.

The statement, Manny, makes you a bigot. How do you feel about that?

"Palin is an empty headed non-entity who is unsuited for high political office."

This from a guy whose candidate can name only one accomplishment, a bill, requested by President Bush that was written by Lugar and that was passed utterly without controversy by voice vote to qualify him for high office.

Palin ran as a reformer, threw out a corrupt administration in Alaska and got a pipeline aggreement with Canada that the US really needs and that the previous corrupt gov couldn't get done, probably having to do with waiting for the highest bidder to grease his palm...

Who has more accomplishments?

Whew.Thank you. I thought ET had gone of the deep end!! Didn't sound like her at all. So manny. Just what do you not like about Pallin? That she is literate,and can get right to the core of the question and answer it in laymans terms? That the ordinary "trailer trash" can understand? Or was it that Biden showed just what a Washington insider,ie. a%%hole he is?
He never did answer one question,just swerved around them. I guess a fresh,straight talking,new face scares the crap out of you lefties.

Actually she had a far more difficult task than Biden last night. Remember, George Bush is deeply unpopular with much of middle America and the large number of independent voters that both sides need to win. Palin had the unenviable task of defending those policies that needed defending while still keeping the ticket at a distance from Bush. The fact that she was able to do this so successfully alone makes this something of a masterpiece. Biden was completely unable to make any of the failures of the previous eight years stick to her and by implication her ticket in any significant way.

Manny's reaction is clinically interesting and illustrative. The oil companies, who had the state government in their pockets for half a century in Alaska, found out just how tough and determined she can be when she handed the pipeline contract through bidding to Trans Canada. Despite her brief career, Alaska is littered with politically dead trolls like Manny who underestimated this lady. Manny's reaction, by the way is very similar to that of the Washington so-called intelligentsia a generation ago to a similar outsider, that time a Democrat. His name was LBJ, and he tromped all over them. Do I have to remind anyone of Andrew Jackson or Abraham Lincoln? All of America's greatest leaders have always come from outside the Beltway, and they always spoke a simple language that the intelligentsia despised.

As I have watched Governor Palin for the last few years, in awe and admiration,( Alaska is right next door to the Yukon) I was not at all surprised to see Sarah 'school' Biden. She has done a lot of teaching up in Alaska, to the delight of Alaskans! Governor Palin has mopped the floor with some of the sleazy politicians and the lucrative relationships they had enjoyed with special interests groups. Governor Palin is astute, intelligent and JUST. She does not curry favor with crooks and fools; she is real and she is truly on the side of the people she has signed up to work for...the msm is way behind Governor Palin...she did a bit of 'teaching' last night, I don't think the media kiddies liked the new classroom rules. I hope the media all drop out or quit so the Governor can teach a new batch of people who are willing to learn.

American people are furious with their government, Governor Palin is their 'Help on the Way'. I hope the people take the trouble to save themselves by rejecting the 'agenda man' the big 0 and his bidden buddy.

Here in Canada, in the the 'free for all' (it was not a debate!); PMSH was put in a classroom of preschoolers last night and another 'kid' was running the show! It was chaos! There was no political debate in Canada; PMSH was the only adult in the room and the kid in charge was hopped up with the 'power' he felt he was exerting over the only adult in the room. The rest of the class were off their Ritalin - I was embarrassed for the mini minds that set up our 'show'.

At least it should have left no doubt in any adult voters minds: vote Conservative or for a hyper kid.

I was qiit imprussed weth Sarah Palin, that is a womanz who shuld leed, a modrn womanz. Govrmint ov the peeple four theze peeple.

Mississauga Matt :

It would have been interesting to see Ifill's response if Palin had asked for the same courtesy (which she should have).

Your absolutely right, she could have with an attention-grabbing result. She was as smart as a fox in this case not doing the obvious. Look at all the posters that noticed Biden’s behavior & treatment compared to her. I think she wanted it this way. An encore of subjective attacks conducted by the press, showing unequivocally the bias they display without seam or tear in the opprobrium rained on her by them at every turn.
She rolled over both Joe , the media, right to the American people that has left the personality cult of the media in apoplexy, as the visible water carriers of Obama Messiah.

JMO

Nice that y'all can quote poll numbers from LGF and Drudge, two whacked-out right-wing smear sites, to 'prove' that Palin won last night, but out in the real world the general consensus is that she failed miserably.

Really guys - mop the flop sweat off your brows and get real. I know that McCain could have selected a ham sandwich as his running mate and you'd all go to the mats defending it.

But come on. Don't you have any sense of integrity at all? Do you not take the any of the crises the world is facing seriously?

Must you keep up this childish, pathetic charade forever?

I don't know about "flop sweat", but I know a little desperation and fear when I see it.

"but out in the real world the general consensus is that she failed miserably."

Whatever. What color is the sky in that "real world" of yours anyway?

"Don't even ask what newspapers she reads."

I believe Governor Palin uses the NY Times... it is much better for wrapping fish guts in. The Tor Star on the other hand bleeds red all over everything.

What I thought was telling about the VP debate was the following.

In a pre-debate interview with a former opposing candidate in the Alaska govenor race, he was asked what Palin had to do to win the debate. This man(forgot his name)said that what Palin had to do was look into the camera at the voters and connect with them He went on to say that when she did that in Alaska nothing else mattered-not facts, not attacks, not anything. He said if she did that it din't matter what the other side dis.

AND
that is exactly what she did.

Horny Toad

Couric: When it comes to establishing your world view, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read, to stay informed, and to understand the world?

Palin: I've read most of them, again, with a great appreciation of the press, for the media...

Couric: But what ones specifically, I'm curious...

Palin: Umm, all of them, any of them, that have, er, uhmm, been in front of me over all these years...

Couric: Can you name a few?

No, she couldn't. Not one paper. Nor could she cite one Supreme court case. Not one. She thinks because Alaska is in geographical proximity to Russia, she has in depth knowledge of geo-politics. She thinks she owes her gubanatorial success to a laying on of hands by her African witch finder general. She believes she is a expert on energy issues because Alaska has a lot of oil and natural gas. Gives your heads a shake, sdm.

Aw, Tim

Conservative commentators like Charles Krauthammer aren't in your real world, huh? Mainstream polls of CBS and CNN aren't the 'real word' for you, right?

Nope! It's Drudge and fellow racists at LGF for you all the way, right? That's the real world for you!

How's life in the bunker, guys?

manny - you don't read newspapers and magazines to be informed. Don't you know that? You have to read articles in journals, and books - written, not by journalists, but by experts in the field.

So- stop harping on reading 'newspapers and magazines'. They aren't a source of knowledge. Maybe you get your 'information' from them, but that's your problem.

Cite one supreme court case about what? Why is that a criterion?

What African witch finder general?

You know, manny, it's easy to fling insults and opinions around. How about stopping the insults and substantiating your opinions?

David Brooks, The Palin Rebound

By the end of her opening answers, it was clear she would meet the test. She spoke with that calm, measured poise that marked her convention speech, not the panicked meanderings of her subsequent interviews...

By the end of the debate, most Republicans were not crouching behind the couch, but standing on it. The race has not been transformed, but few could have expected as vibrant and tactically clever a performance as the one Sarah Palin turned in Thursday night...

Krauthammer? I think he came around on Palin. Do you have a link? I saw him interviewed after this debate and I think you are as confused as Biden apparently was. He started his interview as the "resident Palin skeptic", but then praised her performance.

Here, you can read about Biden's multiple mis-statement of facts here.

Oh yeah, and if you want to read about Obama's ties to terrorist Ayers, you can go to Saturday's (lowest circulation day) New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Here is a gem:
“[Ayers is ]a guy who lives in my neighborhood” and “somebody who worked on education issues in Chicago that I know.”"

Well, it turns out that Ayers hosted the party where Obama launched his political carreer.

"Their paths have crossed sporadically since then, at a coffee Mr. Ayers hosted for Mr. Obama’s first run for office,"

BTW, the above quote was cut and paste from the story earlier, it is now gone. It was edited down the memory hole by Obama's enablers. Gee, evidence that Obama is a serial liar deleted from the NYT? Who would have thunk it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=EsvJBgQp3V4&feature=related

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=p4R-DuIffwE&feature=related

Try extricating your small, dead mind from your arse, ET, and exercise a bit of curiosity about the world.

Cite one supreme court case about what? Why is that a criterion?

It demonstrates that she is an ignoramus.

She's also a liar. She claimed to have read "all of them" (newspapers and magazines), yet couldn't name one.
She adheres to a truly bizarre set of superstitious nonsense. She's as deep as a birdbath. She definitely does not belong one geriatric, melanomic heartbeat away from the presidency.

Hey Tim

Does Fox news exist in your 'real world', too? They had Biden at 68, Palin at 31 their poll.

Those far-left libtards at Fox!

manny - you still aren't substantiating your opinions. They remain - just your personal, deeply felt, yet unsubstantiated opinions.

No, you don't go to the MSM or YouTube for facts, manny. They are presenting opinions as well.

I can cite supreme court cases in both the US and Canada. Does that mean that I am NOT an ignoramus, manny? After all, you seem to think I am pretty despicable. And, might I suggest that you stop with the insults. I'm too old for talk like that.

Why does naming a newspaper mean that one is 'knowledgeable'? I can name lots of newspapers and I bet you can too. Should you therefore be defined as 'knowledgeable'?

You still haven't replied to my question about witch doctors - and don't present me with unsubstantiated nonsense from YouTube. Now, you are into 'bizarre superstitious nonsense'. Please explain. Factually. I'm not interested in your personal opinions. Just the facts.

There's a difference between facts and opinions. All you provide here are your personal opinions. No facts. No logic. No reasoning. That's a pretty weak presentation - what you are doing is called 'sophistry'.

ET, Sarah Palin in her own words, caught in her own lies, demonstrating her profound ignorance, is there for all to see. That is fact, not opinion, whether the venue is You Tube, or anywhere else. Now I wouldn't call your inability to remove your partisan blinders despicable. Pathetic, yes, but not despicable.

I think when all this sorts out Obama better have at least a 20% poll margin if he thinks about winning this election.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=kj-on3kfWuE&feature=related

That's Palin's witch hunter pastor praying over her and laying hands on her and preaching about witchcraft, ET. That's fact. It's also very bizarre.

Didn't see the video, but it can't be any worse than Rev. Wright. Course, Obama only attended the church for 20 years, was married there, had his kids baptized there, and yet, was unable to see the hatred against America - notably white American that was spewed there. It was only after the Rev. repeated his diatribe at the Press function, for all the world to see that suddenly Mr. Amnesia threw his spiritual mentor under the bus. Guess Rev. Wright's rung on the ladder had already been used and stepping all over him was politically expedient rather than standing by his spiritual elder. NOBAMA

Hey Tim

Check out Krauthammer's requiem on the debate in today's Washington Post, essentially accepting that Obama will be the next President.

Hey ET-

Sorry to disturb the fun you're having trying out your old "you're not presenting facts, only opinions" gambit on Manny. I know you believe it's an unanswerable joust in every argument, no matter how untrue it is. But I think you'll find that most sensible adults simply tire of you repeating the same statement over and over again in lieu of argument, and walk away bored to death.

Interesting tactic you utilize: bore your opponent into walking away.

Fact is, though, for most of us, a person who could conceivably sit in the most powerful office in the world, and who does not know the rationale behind the war her country's engaged in at the present time (the Bush doctrine), is unqualified to sit in that office.

For you or me not to know what the Bush doctine is? No problem. For a person who could one day be the Commander-in-Chief not to know it? Problem.

Many people's alarm bells were set off by her not knowing more than one Supreme Court judgement. Hey, maybe she just couldn't think of it at the time. Okay.

But this, added onto her ignorance of the Bush Doctrine? Problem.

She couldn't think of a single newspaper or magazine by which she keeps abreast of world events? Well, maybe she didn't want to give an indelicate or partisan answer. But couldn't she have been a bit quicker on her feet and come up with something better than the nonsensical - and preposterous - reply she gave? Don't we want someone a little more mentally on the ball than that?

Or maybe she simply doesn't read newspapers, or can't remember the names of the ones she does read...? In any case, bizarre.

Again, this is a gaffe which alone might attract little attention. But along with her Bush Doctrine ignorance, and the Supreme Court question, it forms a pattern which really isn't pretty.

You can deny this. But what you are denying is facts - the facts of her repeatedly saying things which point to a dangerous deficience in knowledge. In denying this you're affriming that facts, and the truth, are of no importance to you. You're showing that you can't be trusted.

Manny and real you two are a bunch of arrogant pricks.

What you completely fail to understand is that Palin is shaking up the political establishment a bit *and that is a good thing*. Freedom loving people like that. It's healthy. We're enjoying watching her do it.

You think you are so high and mighty why don't you try running for President, and then we can all make fun of your lack of knowledge? Can I do the first interview, please? How much do you want to bet I could completely stump you on the *very first question*??? Come on, place your bet you little know-it-alls.

well, real, if you are tired of my arguments, then why are you bothering to respond?

You are the one who is ignorant of the 'Bush Doctrine'. There are four - got that - four meanings of this phrase. The Bush doctrine can mean unilateral war, or the 'either-or' alliance, or pre-emptive war, or, dealing with fascism by enabling democracy. So, real, which one was meant by Gibson? And you? Hmmm?

I cannot for the life of me think that knowing, on the spur of the moment, one Supreme Court decision, to be of any relevance. Understanding the varied reasons for and against a decision are far more important. What was the reason for such a trivial question? To find out her partisan preferences.

I don't think that giving the names of newspapers she reads has any relevance to 'being qualified'. That's a silly question and was obviously asked to ferret out partisanship - ie - does she read a leftist or rightist MSM?

It certainly wasn't an attempt to explore her sources of knowledge, because newspapers don't provide knowledge. Palin refused to supply an answer because she refused to be diverted into the real agenda of the question.

Am I denying facts? No. I'm just pointing out to you that your facts are irrelevant facts. Does naming one's dog 'Kyoto' (fact) mean that the owner of that dog understands climate change? Nope.

Come now, Et

The overarching meaning and purpose and meaning of the phrase 'Bush Doctrine' - especially as it refers to the conflict America has been in for the last 5 years - is the premise that The Us has the right to take pre-emptive action towards threats they perceive from other countries.

Everybody knows it. You know it. Far from shuffling through the umpteen 'meanings' of the phrase, Palin stuttered "what do you mean, Charlie...his worldview...?" She had no clue and you're showing you have no intellectual integrity by your mealy-mouthed attempts to insist otherwise.

It's wonderful that you don't think knowing a 'single Supreme Court case' or being unable to name a single newspaper reflects badly on Palin's abilities. Apparently, though, Palin herself disagrees, since she readily provided the names of several publications in her later Fox interview of this week.

Obviously, she - or more likely the handlers who fed her the names of the publications trying to cancel out the debacle of her Couric interview - disagree with you. So you can knock off your gyrating hackery trying to defend her ignorance. She's already de facto confessed it by trying to walk it back.

Do you really have no intellectual integrity at all? Many Republican and conservative commnetators have readily admitted they are disenchanted with Palin's unfitness for office. Yet you're out here spinning like crazy, trying to defend an ignorance you would attack if a Democrat was spouting it, an ignorance which Palin and her handlers have realized is damaging which is why she was out there trying to repair it, saying in effect, "hey, look I can name newspapers after all". You are a showcase of dishonest partisan hackery.

And in your final comment about dogs named Kyoto you slide from dishonesty into ineffectual incoherence. I suppose that's only to be expected from one who has spent so much time and energy in denying reality.

"The overarching meaning and purpose and meaning of the phrase 'Bush Doctrine' - especially as it refers to the conflict America has been in for the last 5 years - is the premise that The Us has the right to take pre-emptive action towards threats they perceive from other countries."

Cite your sources please. Because my own personal understanding of the "Bush Doctrine" is the democratization of basket-case ME nations. It is intellectually lazy to cite "everybody knows it" as support for your position. It is, in fact, a fallacy.

Frankly the original interview question was poorly worded, and likely deliberately to to create a gotcha moment. And, frankly, Palin's answer was equally covered in weak sauce, and she should have handled the uncertainty better (uncertainty caused, I'd add, by the interviewer).

However, I strongly suspect had the question been more robustly and honestly presented (i.e. what is your view on President Bush's doctrine of military preemption of threats to the nation?), a more interesting discussion would have ensued. Perhaps it would have been a discussion that would have further elucidated the viewers. Instead, we get an exchange that has provided much grist for the blogging mill, but has done little to enhance the national debate south of the 49th.

So real@12:137 I can ask you a few questions then in front of 10 million people and see how you do?

Obviously you seem to have the answers to everything so no chance I could stump you right? Wouldn't happen right? C'mon. Let's have a go at it?

My father reads the news every day, reads the Economist, has two Ph.D's, sharp as a tack, and you know what? I bet he couldn't explain what the 'Bush Doctrine' is.

I sure as hell couldn't. In fact most of the engineers I know couldn't, but you know what, they would probably do a fine job of running the country.

Oh but wait, we're bumbling uneducated fools in your eyes so no matter.

Do you get the point yet? Probably not, because you are running on pure emotion driven by a burning dislike of Palin (and more likely what she stands for).

Personally I enjoy seeing her on the scene. She's a breath of fresh air. The fact that she can't explain the so-called Bush Doctrine is a positive in my mind. Means she's an outsider, not part of the entrenched political class.

No, real. You are wrong. And don't try to 'argumentum ad populam' (everybody knows it). That's a fallacious strategy of argumentation.

There are FOUR, at least four, meanings to the phrase 'Bush doctrine'. You can read up on it, since I'm sure you don't believe me - on Krauthammer's column in the Washington Post, Sept 13/08, called 'Charlie Gibson's Gaffe'.

It doesn't mean 'pre-emptive war; that's the third meaning. The first, coined by Krauthammer prior to 9/11, was unilateralism.

The second, was the 'Either-Or' doctrine of either you fight against terrorism or support it. No neutrality.

The third one, in 2002, was the pre-emptive war.
The fourth one - is the enabling of democracy.

OK?

As for naming a single newspaper - do you seriously suggest that IF she had named 'NY Times' or 'Washington Times' that such a statement is a criterion of being VP? Boy, you sure have some strange criteria, don't you!

Same with the Supreme Court decision. I could name a few; that doesn't make me, in any way, suitable to be VP. Same with you.

Your assertion that I have no intellectual integrity is spurious and meaningless. I stand by my points that naming a newspaper or a SC decision is not a criterion to be VP of the USA. You claim that both are requirements for the position. That's you. I have different, and I think, much higher standards for evaluating someone's suitablility to be VP.

Equally, that there are FOUR, not one, meanings of the phrase 'Bush doctrine'. The fact that you don't know this - is your inadequacy in knowledge.

I strongly approve of Palin. Why? Because she's able to confront a rigid, monolithic governing structure -as was the Republican governance in Alaska - and open that structure to democracy. I hope that she'll be able to do the same in Washington.

Barack Obama and Biden are both embedded in that monolithic frozen imperium - and Obama, in particular, is a narcissistic oligarch with strong anti-democratic tendencies. I reject both.

And one other thing real, in all likelihood the question on the Bush Doctrine was a trap from multiple angles.

If she had answered in the way you, with your profound knowledge of everything in the universe, felt she should have, then your response would have been "You see, she knows the Bush doctrine, so we'll just get more of Bush's policies".

It's pretty clear at this point that no matter what she would have said you would be here rambling on about her ignorance.

Anyway, I'm still waiting for you to take me up on my offer to ask you a few questions and see how you do.

You seem to think she's a complete and utter idiot, and by logical inference you are not an idiot since you are the one making said claim, so let's see how you do on the hot seat shall we?

Hey Et

The fact of the matter is that Palin couldn't give a coherent answer to "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?" I'm presuming you don't think she'd have any serious quibbles with any one of the definitions Krauthammer provides (I was aware of them before). Yet Palin's response was: "In what sense?...you mean his worldview?" She didn't ask "the third meaning of the doctrine? The fourth?" So even by your own insistence that the term has multiple meanings she failed to answer the question. Yeah, we're taking about his "worldview", Sarah.

As I stated clearly in my post, any of the gaffes she made isn't disturbing by themselves - it's the pattern they form which is troubling. You try and state I believe that her inability to name a newspaper alone is a disqualifier. Why you do this when the evidendce is here in the thread that I specifically did not state this is puzzling. Are you trying to mislead people by misrepresenting my views?

Not a very honest debating tactic. If you're confident in your case, why do you have to lie to try and make a false defence of it?

It's kind of a drag that I even have to say this but it doesn't matter whether you or I can name a SC decision. We're not running for VP of the most powerful country in the world. I don't care that you or anyone else knows anything about performing dental procedures. But I would expect a dentist who's going to operate on my teeth to know such things.

The fact that it's A-okay with you that Palin is ignorant in this case - along with all the other ones that have been cited - shows that your commitment is not to the common good, but to your narrow partisan interests. You have an irrational need to defend whatever your poltical side does, and you do it dishonestly as well, as has been shown here. You've shown not only that you have no intellectual integrity but that you are also a liar.

The saddest part though: your delusion that you can win an argument by misrepresenting my views, a lie which is easily disproven by anyone reading this thread.

real - you wrote:

"The overarching meaning and purpose and meaning of the phrase 'Bush Doctrine' - especially as it refers to the conflict America has been in for the last 5 years - is the premise that The Us has the right to take pre-emptive action towards threats they perceive from other countries."

You said nothing about the other three meanings. So, I'm afraid that I don't accept your come-by-late assertion that, ah, you knew about the others perfectly well. I go by what you wrote.
Oh, and they aren't numbered, so, Palin couldn't say - do you mean numbers 1,2,3 or 4? She was right to ask Gibson what he meant.

No, there isn't any evidence in this thread that you consider that her inability to name a newspaper is unimportant. Nor did I say that you said that naming a newspaper ALONE was a key criterion. I said that your actually considering both of these (newspaper and SC case) as criterion of VP selection is, in my view, trivial. If you don't consider them important - then why did you keep referring to them?

"She couldn't think of a single newspaper or magazine by which she keeps abreast of world events?" Hey, real, you don't get indepth information from newspapers or magazines. I bet you don't know that.

You state that "Palin is ignorant in this case" (about newspapers and SC cases) shows that you place a great deal of focus on these two as criteria for being VP. I don't.

Oh gosh, I'm irrational, have no intellectual integrity, am uncommitted to the common good and only to narrow partisan interests --and I'm a liar? Oh, gosh and golly, real - maybe I should go out and drown myself.

Oh wait - that would only be if I accepted your perception of me. And, real, I'm sorry to disappoint you. But I don't accept what you say about me. So there. Enjoy your Platonic Cave.

real:

She can be up to speed on the Supreme Court decisions in very short order -- in a few hours or days at most. At this juncture, it really is irrelevant.
She's not a lawyer. She's new to the federal scene. Were McCain to die a week after being inaugerated, she would, in due course, have to make an appointment. She will have no difficulty winnowing down the proposed list.

Honestly, were I assessing a candidate from the opposition I would not consider his/her failure to summon up Supreme Court decisions very important.

And being now a total non-reader of newspapers and magazines, I wouldn't give her failure to name the correct newspapers (the liberal "papers of record") any weight either.

Get it, real, Couric's was a gotcha interview. She knew what her job was: not to provide a balanced view of the candidate -- her strenghts AND weaknesses -- but only to position her as a hick from the sticks, a denizen of fly-over country.

Finally, always remember you're getting a edited product here. Unless you were there for the duration of the meeting, you really can't have a full understanding of what occurred. A skilled editor can make anyone look like an idiot.

BTW, what newspapers and books does Obama read?
And think about this: over a 12 year academic career, Obama didn't write a single scholarly book or article. However, he did take money from his university as funding for a scholarly work on race relations, but wrote a personal biography -- before he accomplished anything!

Finally, MSM is now the "war room" of the Dem party and therefore their interviews ought to be taken with a pound of salt.

ET

You seem reaonably literate, so I'm sure you realize that when I said pre-emption is the "overarching" meaning of the Bush Doctrine, it implies that there are other meanings of the Doctrine.

I can't imagine that you believe the fact that I didn't explicitly name those other meanings means I wasn't aware of them, when the term "overarching" means that I was aware ofthem.

The fact is, this is merely another of your misrepresentations. It's sad that you continue to make them, and sadder that without them, you have no arguments at all.

The rest of your post is filled with word parsings and unconvincing mental gymnastics that I gather you're proud of, since they're inthe service of your irrational loyalty to your party above country and above all common good. But your attempts to dance around and play word games isn't as impressive as you seem to feel. You really should try to put your abilities into service of the truth, instead of expending so much energy lying, and misrepresenting others' views trying to score a false 'victory' which exists only in your own mind.

Because the sad thing is, "ET", even if one isn't offended by lying on a moral level (as you obviously are not), it simply isn't practical in the contest of debate. After all,why should anyone consider your views seriously when it's obvious you don't care anything at all about maintaining a connection to objective reality?

Real your arguments have become boring, tiresome and utterly nonsensical.

Just face it, you have lost this debate, and you are spinning your wheels.

When you find the courage to let me ask you a few candidate-style questions, so we can all see how smart you are, just let me know.

I suspect I'll be waiting a long time.

Wow! I guess even Charlie Gibson didn't even know there were four "Bush Doctrines". It showed. BTW,has anyone heard Obama's answer to this question? Oh, wait! He didn't actually get any gotcha questions, did he? Has he ever?

Also, I don't know who said that our debate was like dropping a bear into a cage full of weasels but it was right on the money!