Saturday, September 27, 2008
By Steven L. Taylor

One other thing I noticed last night in watching the post-debate discussions on CNN, MSNBC and Fox, is that I saw Biden on at least two different nets, and yet Palin was nowhere to be found.

It is curious that the McCain campaign clearly does not feel that it is in their interest to allow Palin to go out and fill the “attack dog” role that veeps are allegedly supposed to fulfill. They are, in essence, hampering themselves by removing what should be an asset (the running mate) from the field of play.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments/Trackbacks (7)|
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.

7 Responses to “Palin v. Biden”

  1. Talmadge East Says:

    This shouldn’t be a surprise after the atrocity that was the Couric interview.

  2. Ratoe Says:

    It is curious that the McCain campaign clearly does not feel that it is in their interest to allow Palin to go out and fill the “attack dog” role that veeps are allegedly supposed to fulfill.

    Steven, you know full well why Palin can’t be let loose–she hasn’t a clue about the basic issues the candidates were talking about.

    The only clip of Biden I saw was on Anderson Cooper and he basically dissected McCain’s answers on various issues, offering a rebuttal.

    Palin isn’t capable of doing that. The more free flowing dialogue that can happen on cable, furthermore, could put Palin in a pickle. One of the talking heads could actually ask her to defend one of McCain’s crazy statements–say, his stupid description of Pakistan as a “failed state” prior to Musharaff.

    Could you imagine Palin being asked to clarify what McCain meant by calling pre-Musharaff’s Pakistan a failed state? Given her fetish for propinquity, her response would likely be: “Well, Afghanistan was a failed state and since you can see Pakistan from Afghanistan, it must have been a failed state too.”

  3. Dr. Steven Taylor Says:

    Steven, you know full well why Palin can’t be let loose–she hasn’t a clue about the basic issues the candidates were talking about.

    Yes, yes I do. And yes, that is the case. (And no, I wasn’t surprised by her absence).

    (Let’s just say the post was understated on purpose).

  4. Ratoe Says:

    (Let’s just say the post was understated on purpose).

    I obviously think she’s an awful choice for VP, but the thing I find really striking is just *how* bad she is. Not simply the interviews, but also her speech at the convention, etc… seem shallow even by the standards of general political rhetoric.

    It seems almost impossible to me to understand even how she could have been elected governor of a state. I would think that anybody who daily read the front page of the Wall Street Journal, for instance, would be able to provide more coherent answers than Palin did.

    Early on in Bush’s term I had the opportunity to meet informally with his HUD sec (now Senator) Mel Martinez. Before he was appointed he was the head of the county government in Orange County, FL. Granted, Orange County has twice as many people as Alaska, but Martinez was extremely articulate on a whole host of subjects. We talked about his housing work–but also things as varied as Kyoto, Kosovo, public transit financing. I didn’t agree with his political perspective, but he as clearly someone who had been a serious public servant and recognized a world larger than himself.

    You could have easily thrown him into an interview with Couric or Gibson and he would be able to discuss a whole range of issues without coming off as a complete moron.

    I guess I am struggling with coming to terms with how it could be possible that Palin can be so clueless. There are all sorts of governors who are scoundrels, crooks, etc.., but are there any who, if you sat down with, could be as demonstrably bad as Palin?

    Maybe they don’t get the Wall Street Journal out in Juneau, but its really hard for me to believe anyone with her resume can be this bad.

  5. Li Says:

    I think you might be being just a bit too harsh on Palin. Palin has a reputation in Alaska of knowing her policy fairly well, and it has been suggested that the problem here is not that Palin doesn’t know what she is talking about–it’s that she doesn’t know McCain’s positions well vis-a-vis her own, and is treading incredibly carefully.

    I leave it to those who know her better, or who know politics better, to debate the virtues of that possibility. But with the incredible microscope she is still under, she can’t afford to give detailed explanations of HER positions that might commit McCain to something. Biden can get away with all his foot-in-mouth nonesense because he’s A. expected to gaffe at a high rate and B. not in any kind of spotlight, despite much greater accessability.

    In short, Palin can’t get away with going off-message the way Biden can, so she’s hedging like mad. I can at least see how it would be a factor.

    All that being said, her newness to the national scene is undeniably an issue, and it will be terribly interesting to watch how the VP debate plays out.

  6. Li Says:

    I should add, though, that I haven’t seen any of the Couric interview!

  7. Jackie Says:

    I saw the interview of Sarah with both Courtic and Gibson.
    She is so stupid it’s sad. Her forign policy experience is only the fact she lives across from Russia. Next she couldn’t answer Katie Couric’s question about the problem with the Economy today. She went to the UN and got turned down to meet several World Leaders as those who did meet her only talk about how good she looked. Those who protest to the way Sarah is treated never said a word when Hillary was treated worse. The President of Russia and even PM Putin are laughing so much about McCain who can’t remember and Sarah the dummy. It would serve the US right to put these to idiots in office it would be so easy for another county to walk in and just take over. Let’s hope China doesn’t ask for that 500 billion dollar loan the Bush Administration borrowed. Not to mention the big loan the US took from Russia. Henry Paulson needs the 700 billion dollars for RNC pay offs and for Henry’s business he started when get took office. Daddy Bush is making sure the bank he’s on overseas is getting some of that money. Again Republicans are playing the taxpayers for fools as they act like they don’t want the deal knowing he will get a nice cut of the money. Let’s see if the Democrats are smart enough to turn the table on them in the end.

blog advertising is good for you

Visitors Since 2/15/03

Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Politics



Powered by WordPress