Debatable VP Debate...From Guest Blogger Joe

^
^

^

(That's Really Joe)

Today's post is

Joe'stake on the Vice Presidential debate Thursday night. Always humorous and witty here's the debate according to Joe.

And don't forget to vote for him a humorbloggers.com!

The setting was the Washington University in St. Louis. The moderator was Gwen Ifill.
And, of course, the participants were Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. The questions were chosen by Ms. Ifill.

The debate was rather cut and dried, and very straight forward.. It was not expected to reveal too much as the positions have been pretty well defined over the last, what’s it been, 10 years of campaigning?

The main purpose was to see how Mr. Biden and Ms. Palin were able to handle questions put to them in a debate type forum as neither strayed from their party platform, nor significantly disagreed with their respective running mate. This format also is so structured it really doesn’t allow for much to happen anyway. Anyone hoping for a Bulgarian Death Match or anything resembling a grudge match ala WWWF was sorely disappointed.

Both combatants fared well. Ms. Palin looked relaxed, and answered all her questions smoothly all night. Mr. Biden was equally eloquent.

One thing I did note, Mr. Biden was very general when giving specifics.

That needs an explanation.

When he spoke of the bailout, his plan put forth was so generalized, it was as if he said nothing. The plan calls for oversight, looking out for Main St., helping the taxpayers, and not rewarding CEOs.

Could he possibly be more vague?

I did detect a couple differences in what was said, though, that I thought were rather important.

Climate change was discussed. Ms. Palin said we really are not positive whether the change is brought about by man or part of a cycle. She did stress that it is important to respect the environment, and mentioned something about man’s contribution through pollution which must be contained. I forgot the exact wording, but those were her sentiments. However, Mr. Biden, in a mixture of fear mongering, human guilt, and a sprinkling of questionable science, put forth that it was entirely man’s fault.

Biden did say something else that truly concerned me. When discussing the banking and subsequent subprime mortgage crisis he did mention that in order to keep people in their homes, banks should adjust interest (ok, I’m with you so far) and principle.

What? So, to just put it in perspective, buy a home for $300 k, lose a job or something, and the bank should reduce the price of the house? This should just about make it impossible for anyone to get a mortgage. What bank will loan money with that kind of risk? It’s one thing for a bank to make a little less money, but to lose money?

When discussing the crisis, Ms. Palin did put some of the responsibility on the homebuyer. While she said some lenders had predatory rates, she also suggested that if one can only afford a $100,000 house, then don’t buy a $300,000 one. What a concept to suggest that instead of government holding one’s hand, maybe taking a bit of personal responsibility and living within one’s means as our parents did.

And the third and final big difference I noted was concerning Iraq. Mr. Biden said Obama has a 16 month plan, while McCain has nothing. Ms. Palin stated that to put a 16 month plan in place is the same as waving a white flag of surrender. The Republican plan is to take as long as is necessary to gain victory and to shift responsibility over to the Iraqi people as they can assume such responsibility.

They both were more or less similar in energy. Both stressed that we need to be independent of foreign oil, but they disagreed on how to implement. The Republican plan is to drill while developing clean coal, nuclear, and whatever else is available, while the Democrats want clean coal and wind, I guess. Again, it wasn’t really clear how we are to provide energy until we become self sufficient. Mr. Biden pointed out that it takes 10 years to get our own oil (I don’t fully buy that) but gave no timetable for any alternative.

I would have to call the debate a draw, as both were able to get their points across fairly succinctly. The one problem with a format like this is each side makes a presentation, and really does not seem to develop an idea fully, nor have an opportunity to properly counter the other‘s points. Two minutes goes by very quickly.

Click here for the full transcript of the debate.
And click here for a great fact check site of the things that were said by both candidates.
Who's says they aren't fair and balanced???!?!?!?