I’m watching it now.
Your comments?
(Packing 95% done. What a relief.)
*Update:* Without commenting on anything else, may I just thank Senator Biden for being the first politician I have yet to hear acknowledge on the national stage that Iran’s phony not-legimately-elected President, Ahmadinejad, does not control Iran’s foreign policy? Nor does he control their defense policy? Nor does he control anything else important? I have been noting this and trying to tell people for years (see here, for example), and for the record, it makes me crazy every time I hear anyone from the left who tries to tell me he’s a “legitimately elected leader” (besides not legitimately elected, he leads almost no one in Iran) or on the Right who rant about his being a “dictator” (What a bunch of crap. This is the dictator of Iran).
Thanks for at least bringing it up, Senator Joe. I predict it’ll be forgotten just like every other effort to educate people on this gets ignored.
*Update 2:* On the other hand, Senator Biden said that Dick Cheney’s been possibly the most dangerous Vice President in our history. Oh please. Yeah, he’s the new Aaron Burr, right? Yeesh.
*Update 3:* I have to say that both were very very good. On balance, Palin wins simply because she just made everyone who said she was a shallow idiot look like fools. Yes she gave some flubbed answers early on in her first time in the national media spotlight, but she also got asked questions she shouldn’t have been expected to have deep answers on. She is obviously a leader of substance.
*Update 4:* Oh, but can I just say that the other woman in the room who made her critics look lke fools was Gwen Ifill? There were many on the right fulminating that she was be “in the tank” for Obama and therefore would try to make Biden look great and Palin look bad, because she has a book coming out that profiles prominent black politicians of the last 40 years and it includes Senator Obama? Yeesh, how could she not feature Obama prominently in any such book? She showed herself to be a truly excellent moderator with great questions.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 46 comments }
Their description of the tax policies was a crashing bore since I know full well that neither of them will do what they’re promising in the campaigns (remember "read my lips: no new taxes")?
Biden’s claim that climate change is entirely man-made marks him in my book as a true believer and complete idiot and I don’t think either of them articulated anything resembling an actual energy policy.
 Still listening… back later.
Ahmanijehad does have some a considerable amouint of control, and was obviously not fairly elected. “Dictator” is an imperfect description, but a serviceable one. He can be overridden by the clerics, but does make a lot of decisions and set a lot of policy.
Iran’s government is a weird pastiche of competing elements. Some of the clerics have what amounts to private armies funded by the government.
As for Ifill, no one says she can’t write a book praising Obama and release it on Inuaguration Day. It’s just a gross conflict of interest to then moderate a VP debate, and that would be equally as true if she were writing a book praising McCain.
Foreign policy is set by Supreme Leader (i.e. Fuhrer) Khameni. Ahmadinejad’s only responsibility is executing the foreign policy set by the Fuhrer, and to act as an apologist for the Fuhrer’s policies.
As for Ifill: Writing a book that profiles all the major black politicians of the last 50 years including a significant section on the first black politician to be nominated by either major party for President doesn’t strike me as being a "conflict of interest" and it never did. Show me that it’s a partisan book and I’m interested, but there’s been precious little such evidence that I’ve seen except that she works for PBS and might possibly be black.
The impression I got was that a lot of Palin’s answers were scripted responses that did not always address the question that was asked. Biden’s answeres seemed to be more responsive to the questions. Palin seems to be very folksy in her style. Biden was more formal, but when he talked about being a single parent, he showed he was human.
My impression was this debate will not make much difference in the race. The only thing I see is that conservatives will stop calling for Palin to get off the ticket.
Dean, you miss the entire principle behind the right’s objection to Ifill. It doesn’t matter that after the fact she may have conducted herself properly. What if it had gone the other way? What would you have done then?
Michelle Malkin is right. A moderator, by definition, is supposed to be impartial. Ifill has demonstrated she isn’t. There’s nothing wrong with her being in the tank for Obama, but that position should have disqualified her from serving as moderator in this debate.
You talk about Ifill making her detractors looking foolish; you’re looking pretty foolish yourself for not grasping this simple objection.
Moderators are supposed to be impartial, Ifill has shown herself to not be impartial, ipso facto she should not have served as moderator.
It’s as academic as 1+1=2.
Mikeca found Palin’s answers to be scripted and Biden to be far more responsive.
Next he’s gonna knock us all over and tell us the sun will rise in the east come morning.
And, I’m sorry, but conservatives have never been calling for Palin to get off the ticket. And I sincerely doubt any "conservatives" you’ve been talking to are actually all that conservative.
You’re so far down Obama’s shorts I’m wondering if Michelle Obama isn’t getting a little jealous.
Kevin,
evidence that she’s in the tank?
Dean,
on balance I think if we award the first debate to Obama for simply appearing presidential, then the second debate has to go to Palin for appearing vice-presidential. As with the first debate, both candidates did well. We’ll see on Monday who "really" won as the polls shift or don’t.
Kevin: "What if it had gone the other way" was already answered, by Ifill and her publisher. You guys are all going after something that "looks" bad, based on nothing at all except a "maybe" that everyone who knows and works with this woman and worked with her on the book said was bullshit.
"You wrote a book mentioning this person, therefore, you have no objectivity" is not a principal I can buy into. It looks to me like crybaby conservatives just looking for a reason to be offended. It doesn’t look as bad as the attacks on Palin from the left, but it still looks ridiculous from my vantage point.
I think you guys could at least have the class to admit that Ifill did a great job. Can you at least do that, while standing by your principal that writing a book that mentions a politician disqualifies you from being a debate moderator that involves that politician?
By the way, I agree with Kevin: who are these conservatives asking for Palin to be removed from the ticket?
I also agree with Zach about Obama winning the first debate based purely on looking credible, and the same is true for Palin this time around.
I haven’t heard any conservatives asking for Palin to be removed from the ticket either but I have heard several liberals claiming that conservatives are saying that.
As far as Iran is concerned, it has always been run by an Ayatollah. My concern is that "Imadinnerjacket" is repeating what they are telling him to say (like "erase Israel from the planet"). If that’s what he’s doing then he is both believable and scary.
Hilariously all the ‘left leaning’ people I’ve heard have spent this evening making fun of Palin, saying she’s stupid, etc.
I don’t hang around enough ‘right leaning’ people to know if they’re saying the same about Biden.
Mostly I just want everyone I talk with to shut up about it. :p
Elisha Feger’s last blog post..Awesome dice bags
there is a thouhgtful, principled conservative revolt underway. See culture11.com and The American Conservative magazine (notable names: Bacevich, Larison). Arguing that Palin should resign is just the tip of the iceberg.
George Will lost tonight, big time.
Gwen Ifill did just wonderful.Â
Sarah Palin hit all the high notes and then some.
Joe Biden was a sound loop most of the evening.
Â
Well, George Will did say Palin was unqualified. But George Will has always been that way; being pissy and pessimistic is his "thing," he was that way almost all the way through the Reagan administration and the first Bush administration, and continued right that way through all 8 years of Clinton. He hasn’t called for Governor Palin to be dropped from the ticket that I’m aware of, though.
As for The American Conservative:Â well, they may be principled, but they’re also about as far out on the fringe as Newsmax. Farther, I’d say. Isolationist in the extreme, and lots of weirdness in their ranks; it’s basically Pat Buchanan’s baby, and while Buchanan may be charming and interesting at times, he’s clearly a little nuts.
Is that all Ad Hominem? Perhaps. I think that The American Conservative represents a very similar fringe as the Ron Paulites, or what Code Pink represents to the Democrats. Â
I know nothing about culture11.com. I do expect groups on the right-wing fringe to become more powerful if we see an Obama administration though, because they’ll be part of those forces allied against "the common enemy" just like so much of the left has done so against the incompetent/evil genius Bush regime.
ok, my debate analysis is up at city of brass here:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2008/10/biden-and-palin.html
in a nutshell, palin didnt lose, but biden didnt win.
Geez, mikeca, do you even exist, or are you nothing but a javascript spewing Democrat talking points?
Sheesh how lame.
Good for Sarah, she should put to rest the meme that she is an embarrassment to the ticket. Of course people like mikeca will always think that, but they think that about EVERY conservative, so it should be no surprise that they see Sarah that way.
I don’t think this will sway many votes though, although it may help to stop McCain’s bleeding. We’ll see what the polls say.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..A rare breed in Hollywood?
Geez, mikeca, do you even exist, or are you nothing but a javascript spewing Democrat talking points?
Oh, I’m very real. I just have a different view of things than you do. No idea what the Democratic talking points are suppose to be.
Here is some discussion of the early polling results on the debate:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/whats_a_win_vp_debate_edition.php
I watched some of this just now off the DVR. At first I thought it was pretty even. But the more I watched, the more I got the impression Biden was on a mission to get those scripted talking points out, making him look like he was too dense to answer the question. Palin’s answers, on the other hand, showed she could think on her feet, and I am very relieved she is not the second coming of Harriet Myers that I had feared her to be.
Inv A. DeSoda’s last blog post..The Assassination Smear 2
Dean – two things. First I thought the "most dangerous VP in history" line was idiotic, at best. Now, if Ifill were not an Obama partisan, she might at least have questioned that ridiculous rhetoric.
Second, as far as Ilfin being in the tank, I think I’ve read that she was giddy as a schoolgirl doing commentary for the DNC, but a total downer doing commentary for the RNC. I vaguely recall watching at least part of the RNC where she was one of the analysts and they were all, as usual, horribly unobjective. One example can be found HERE
I’ve also seen comments about the debate that suggest she often deferred the final word to Biden. That could be confirmed, certainly.Â
actually I fully agree that Cheney is the most dangerous VP in history. His argument, that he represents a Branch of Government Sole, apart from both legislative and executive, yet also belonging to each as necessity permits, is constitutionally bogus, and has serious consequences.
I also generated word clouds for Biden and Palin
:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2008/10/word-clouds-for-biden-and-pali.html
"By the way, I agree with Kevin: who are these conservatives asking for Palin to be removed from the ticket?"
Gosh, they must not exist because such a thing could only be a giant media conspiracy, which seems to be the explanation for everything around here.
Meanwhile, there was a lot of hubub about this issue starting from an editorial written by Kath… oh well, I guess she’s just a figment of my imagination, so why bother…
Bad’s last blog post..Ghost Haunts Dumbells, Say Dumbells
Aziz: Cheney does belong to both branches.
In the Legislative branch he presides over the Senate (and votes in the case of ties). In the Executive branch, he has whatever powers the President delegates to him.
jodyneel’s last blog post..McCain, the Bailout, and my disgust
I agree that Palin did fine and since the most important thing for her is that she beat everyone’s expectations, the boost to her was greater. I think to really put everyone’s fears to rest, though, she needs to do some more interviews with give-and-take. I was personally disappointed that the format didn’t allow much of that for this debate, because it’s more exciting with both of these VP candidates to see them given enough rope to hang themselves with.
I said in the first Prez debate that McCain won on points, but Obama won on style.
In this debate I think it’s a bit harder to make such disntinctions. Biden was the one who did better than I expected, he managed to say the most ludicrous things with such an earnest straight face, but people no doubt believed him. (Excuse me, but exactly WHEN did the US and France kick Hezbollah out of Lebanon?)
Palin, on the other hand, did manage to come off as folksly and down home, but she didn’t really come off, to me, as "Sarah Barracuda" which is what she needed to do. She really needed to take her attacks on Obama, which were very effective in her convention speech, and ratchet them up to the next level, but she didn’t.
I don’t usually trust overnight polls. We’ll see what the RCP averages show on Monday, that’s when I think any impact of the debate will actually show up.
Palin seemed to me to be attempting to do what Reagan did, which was reach through the camera and attempt to engage the American public directly. In some cases I think that was effective, in some it seemed contrived. The question is how that worked with swing voters and "Reagan Democrats".
I will say this is much more like the Palin I was hoping to see than her last two interviews. I’d like to see more of this Sarah Palin, and maybe a bit more of her Barracuda side.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..But I thought they were just here to work?
I agree with cosmicconservative about Biden’s Lebanon gaffe. And when did Obama ever say anything about sending the UN in to fill the power vacuum? I think Biden tends to make things up as he goes along. I’ll also bet you won’t hear about this from the MSM..
Thanks for doing the word cloud Aziz. The interesting thing to me is that Iraq is nowhere to be found in either of them! (Or, if it is there, it must be very small.)
Probably the clearest sign yet of success.Â
Elizabeth, the VP’s legislative duties include casting a tie breaking vote in the Senate. Only that. Nothing more. that doenst make him/her part of the legislative, its actually an Executive branch *check and balance* upon the legislative.
The RCP polls are biased in their methodology, picking and choosing mccain-favirable polls inconsistently. Pollster.com and fivetheirtyeight.com are far more rigorous.
Choey:
I won’t even go into Biden’s incoherent discussions of Constitutional Law, both in this debate and generally. Sometimes I think he really has no clue about how the Constitution actually works.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..But I thought they were just here to work?
Aziz:
If you think the VP’s "only legislative duties" include casting a deciding vote in a tie”, it’s not Elizabeth who needs a Civics lesson.
The Vice President also is responsible for the Electoral College process.
The Vice President also "presides" over any federal impeachment, EXCEPT for the impeachment of a President. (Interestingly, the Constitution leaves open whether a VP presides over his OWN impeachment, but in practice, such a thing would never be allowed.)
Oh yeah, and there’s that whole “presides over the Senate thing.” Although in practice the VP tends to delegate this to a high ranking Senator of the same party, OFFICIALLY it is the VP who “runs” the Senate.
In fact, it is probably quite accurate to say that the US Constitution actually DEFINES more legislative duties for the VP than it DEFINES executive ones.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..But I thought they were just here to work?
MSM coverage of Biden’s statement about Lebanon:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122300704799501601.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/711540.html
A lot of smaller news organizations or blogs at large news organizations had mentions. I’m not sure what the definition of MSM actually is so I don’t know if they count. A ton of independent bloggers have mentioned it too obviously.
Factcheck.org didn’t mention it, although they did mention all kinds of other mistakes/erroneous statements by both candidates. Neither did CNN or Fox News for whatever it’s worth.
Bad: Oh, can you try to be a little less transparently partisan, please? Accusing me of attacking the media for a “conspiracy” right after I ream conservatives for their overheated attacks on Gwen Ifill is just genius, man.
Katherine whatsername is undoubtedly a fine writer, but she does not represent "conservatives calling for Palin to be dropped," she represents herself, writing for a fine old conservative publication that’s been very supportive of Palin and still is. Attempting to turn her into a movement of conservatives who want Palin dropped isn’t a media conspiracy (there rarely are any such conspiracies, although they do happen), it’s just partisan hackery parading around as insightful commentary, not unlike the "concerned commenters" who run around the blogosphere claiming to be people who used to like McCain but now don’t like him anymore who actually work for the Obama campaign (which has been documented by the way, and so qualifies as a legitimate "conspiracy" even though I hate that word).
the EC duty and the impeachment duty are still in the capacity as an executive. I was referring to th enormal duties of a veep as related to governing, since the context of Cheney’s claim is that he’s involved as a legislative branch official in the normal functioning of congress. He isn’t, aside form casting a tie-breaker, and that again is in his capacity as an executive branch official – at the risk of repeating myself, all the veep’s duties are a check an dbalance from executive branch upon the legislative. If Cheney was a legislative branch official then how could he serve as a check and balance upon that branch? A branch can’t check and balance itself. Thats the whole reason we HAVE constitutional checks and balances.
also, we are having a discussion of facts and interpretations here. Kindly abstain from the commentary about who needs a civics lesson, etc. Theres no need to drag this discussion into the muck. Extend some benefit of the doubt and you’ll get respect in return.
Aziz,
I think you have me mixed up with jodyneel. I may or may not need a civics lesson, but I haven’t said anything about the Veep’s responsibilities in this thread.
Elizabeth:
I’m the one who suggested Aziz needed the Civics lesson. After his last post, I think he just reinforced that view.
"capacity as an executive"? Are you kidding me? Do you think that because he is making a decision that automatically makes him part of the executive branch of government? What a riot Aziz.
So, every time the SCOTUS makes a ruling, they are acting as Executive Branch proxies.
Man, sometimes I just have to laugh…. and laugh…
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..But I thought they were just here to work?
 Extend some benefit of the doubt and you’ll get respect in return.
You know Aziz, I understand that you are typically outnumbered here, but you don’t extend this same benefit to others as generously as you think you do.Â
In fact, it is probably quite accurate to say that the US Constitution actually DEFINES more legislative duties for the VP than it DEFINES executive ones.
No, it defines executive duties for the veep alone. All those duties – including votes in the Senate – are executive branch functions – again, checks and balances upon the legislative.
Otherwise, you might as swell argue that when the President vetoes a bill, he is performing a legislative function too. Is the president part of the legislative branch? obviously not.
The President also has the power to summon Congress, and adjourn it (though I don’t think any president has ever excercized that latter power; I could be wrong). Further, the President is *obligated* to report to Congress (which in modern times is formalized by the SOTU speech, but of course presidential "reporting" to Congress occurs year-round via briefings and whatnot). Again, all of these are Executive branch functions, in some cases a check and balance upon legislative from the Executive, in others a check and balance upon the Executive from the Legislative. Again, if you argue that the Veeps limited duties make him part of the Lege, then the same logic applies to the president.
Incidentally, Al Gore presided over the electoral vote count in 2000, in his capacity as Vice president. I found it moving when a delegation of Representatives went to him to try and make a petition to stop the formal confirmation. He refused outright and carried on with his duty, sealing the results of the election in George Bush’s favor. It was a bittersweet moment for him, but also an honorable one, and it’s really a high point of our political system. If you google about it you’ll see what I mean.
Aziz (you mean me, not Elizabeth)
Again, In Article I, the President of the Senate is a specified office for Congress and "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States". When the VP is otherwise engaged, the office is filled by the President Pro Tempore.
For you to simultaneously believe that a) presiding over the Senate / breaking ties is an Executive power and b) that a single person can wear only 1 hat, you should also believe that Robert Byrd is a member of the Executive Branch as he fulfills that same duty by virtue of being President Pro Tempore.
Also FYI – breaking a tie vote is not a check on Legislative power. With a tie, nothing happens so there is nothing to check.
Really, it’s as easy as "one man/office, two hats".
jodyneel’s last blog post..McCain, the Bailout, and my disgust
Paul, I’m only human. If I dont extend that courtesy, call me on it, te way I called CC on it. Thats only fair.
Regarding the Constitutional definition of the role of the Vice President, Glenn Reynolds has written on this topic. To quote from an article abstract by Professor Reynolds ("Is Dick Cheney Unconstitutional?")…
The President is not legislative, and she or he cannot be involved in debate on the floor. The VP, on the other hand, has the Constitutional position to use the rules of the Senate to control debate.
In fact, according to Professor Reynolds, the VP’s budget was a Senate expense up until Spiro Agnew.
… the VP’s legislative duties include casting a tie breaking vote in the Senate. Only that. Nothing more. that doenst make him/her part of the legislative, its actually an Executive branch *check and balance* upon the legislative. … aziz
Aziz,
Seriously, you need to get back on the learning curve, because you are so very incorrect.
"Constitutional Law Scholar" Biden’s Article I Gaffe
During a recent policy kerfuffle, Vice President Dick Cheney’s office briefly argued that the Vice President is really a legislative official, and hence not subject to some obligations of the Executive branch. Though Cheney’s office quickly shifted its argument to less controversial statutory grounds, it turns out that the Vice Presidency’s legislative character is, in fact, quite significant.
Glenn Reynolds University of Tennessee College of Law
Joe Biden’s constitutional flubs.
And, yes, the VP’s legislative duties are in Article I. But that cuts precisely against the point that Biden was trying to make. Here’s what Biden said : "Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that. . . . The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he’s part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive and look where it has gotten us. It has been very dangerous."
This is wrong on multiple levels at once. Article I — which deals with the legislative, not the Executive branch, says: "The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided." The Vice President presides over the Senate by right, whenever he/she wants to, regardless of whether there’s a tie vote.
Glenn Reynolds
Dean, the book is called "The Age of Obama" and will be released on Inauguaration Day. Estimates are she will make an extra $400K if he wins.
It’s a very clear conflict of interest.
Biden made numerous factual misstatements, some of which demonsrate his ignorance of the job (such as not knowing the VP is always President of the Senate) and some which he knows aren’t true ( McCain did not vote for that tax increase), and several statements that were deliberately misleading (such as arguing McCain was for deregulating FNMA and Freddie Mac, when in fact it was Democrats like Barney Frank who were demanding they back the subprime loans that have gotten us in this mess).
Of course, the press has said very little about this because they so badly want Obama to win.
Also, Ahmadinejad does in fact set policy, and is actually in conflict with the Ayatollahs over some policies. He is considerably more than just a hand puppet.
The book is in fact entitled:
The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama
That there is a clear conflict of interest with not anyone having read the (unpublished) book seems a very shaky, subjective opinion.
McKiernan:
The APPEARANCE of conflict of interest is generally considered to be enough to recuse people from participating in events with that appearance. And if you don’t think there is an appearance of conflict of interest here… well, I don’t know what to think about that.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Palin says Obama ?palling around? with terrorists
She showed herself to be a truly excellent moderator with great questions.
I especially liked when she’d point out that "neither of you answered my question". Tee hee.
This as what I expected, two VPs finding ways to work their running mate’s sales pitches into the questions they answered. Palin did well since she had time to prepare answers and Biden didn’t let loose and remarkable gaffes.
Yeah, he’s the new Aaron Burr, right? Yeesh.
Well, not quite; Arron Burr only shot his enemies under the supervision of a formal duel. Cheney shot his friend in the face under the influence of al-kee-hol. What’s more dangerous is debatable. :)
Comments on this entry are closed.