News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



The Veep Debate

by: Pam Spaulding

Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 22:43:33 PM EDT


The full transcript is here.

I'll add to this post as I collect my thoughts about the debate, but first, I have to post Joe Biden's big clip - he eviscerates the "Maverick" brand:


Biden: Can I respond to that? Look, let's talk about the maverick John McCain is.  And again I love him, he's been a maverick on some issues but he's been no maverick on things that a matter people's lives.  He voted four out of five times for George Bush's budget which put us half a trillion in debt this year and over three trillion in debt since he got there.  He has not been a maverick in providing healthcare for people.  He voted against including another 3.6 million children in coverage of an existing health care plan in the United States Senate.  He's not been a maverick when it comes to education.  He has not supported tax cuts and significant changes for people being able to send their kids to college, he's not been a maverick on the war, not been a maverick on virtually anything that generally affects the things people really talk about around the kitchen table.  Can we get mom's MRI?  Can we send Mary back to school next semester.  We can't make it.  How will we heat the house this winter?  He even voted against what they call LIHEAP, for assistance for people with oil prices going through the roof in the winter.  So a maverick he is not, on the important critical  issues that affect people at the kitchen table.
If you're going to hand out the "least effective" award for debate participants, it easily goes to Gwen Ifill. Apparently intimidated by the right wing thrashing over her forthcoming book and her perceived inability to be objective, she let Sarah Palin off the hook over and over, with no follow up, and even worse, allowing the Alaska governor to simply change the topic in order to read out her talking points.

Case in point, a question about bankruptcy bill turned into a robotic regurgitation of Palin's "drill, baby, drill" talking points.  

BIDEN: Gwen, what we should be doing now -- and Barack Obama and I support it -- we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.

That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under. But John McCain, as I understand it -- I'm not sure of this, but I believe John McCain and the governor don't support that.

There are ways to help people now. And there -- ways that we're offering are not being supported by -- by the Bush administration nor do I believe by John McCain and Gov. Palin.

...PALIN: We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries, some who do not like America -- they certainly don't have our best interests at heart -- instead of those dollars circulating here, creating tens of thousands of jobs and allowing domestic supplies of energy to be tapped into and start flowing into these very, very hungry markets.

Energy independence is the key to this nation's future, to our economic future, and to our national security. So when we talk about energy plans, it's not just about who got a tax break and who didn't. And we're not giving oil companies tax breaks, but it's about a heck of a lot more than that.

Energy independence is the key to America's future.

It was this kind of corralling of Ifill that made it possible for Palin to do passably well in presentation, even if she avoided answering questions.

A CNN poll asked "Who Did the Best Job In the Debate?" It came out 52% Biden, 36% Palin. I guess the multiple winks into the camera didn't charm too many people.

A CBS poll found that 46% called it for Joe Biden, 21% for Sarah Palin, with 33% thought it was a draw. 98% after the debate saw [Biden] as knowledgeable (79% before the debate).

One of the more interesting questions came up early on -- the rights of same-sex couples to marry. See the answers below the fold.

Pam Spaulding :: The Veep Debate
While Joe Biden declared that he didn't support same-sex marriage, he gave impassioned support for legal recognition of gay and lesbian couples and boxed Palin in on the issue.

IFILL: The next round of -- pardon me, the next round of questions starts with you, Sen. Biden. Do you support, as they do in Alaska, granting same-sex benefits to couples?

BIDEN: Absolutely. Do I support granting same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple.

The fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted -- same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et cetera. That's only fair.

It's what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do.

IFILL: Governor, would you support expanding that beyond Alaska to the rest of the nation?

PALIN: Well, not if it goes closer and closer towards redefining the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. And unfortunately that's sometimes where those steps lead.

But I also want to clarify, if there's any kind of suggestion at all from my answer that I would be anything but tolerant of adults in America choosing their partners, choosing relationships that they deem best for themselves, you know, I am tolerant and I have a very diverse family and group of friends and even within that group you would see some who may not agree with me on this issue, some very dear friends who don't agree with me on this issue.

But in that tolerance also, no one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed, negotiated between parties.

But I will tell Americans straight up that I don't support defining marriage as anything but between one man and one woman, and I think through nuances we can go round and round about what that actually means.

But I'm being as straight up with Americans as I can in my non- support for anything but a traditional definition of marriage.

IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage?

BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.

The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference.

IFILL: Is that what your said?

PALIN: Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not.

IFILL: Wonderful. You agree. On that note, let's move to foreign policy.

Here again, Ifill missed an opportunity to confirm with Palin whether Biden was putting words in her mouth. Palin clearly didn't object with her silence, so the fundies are going to have a field day on this one (as will the LCRs, so it will be a double whammy).

I'm surprised at folks who are getting riled up in the comments about Biden's answer -- the position is that we deserve all the rights and responsibilities of marriage but not "marriage."

Tactically speaking, this is the position that makes the most sense politically at this time. I don't like it, but the affirmation on national television of our relationships as equal (but separate) frames the debate nicely -- Obama and Biden know that this matter will ultimately be decided by SCOTUS, no matter what they say. This is why his answer beautifully boxed Palin in.

It begs the question -- what part of legal recognition, outside of "marriage," does Palin disagree with?

One of the more moving moments that clearly connected with those rating the debate on CNN didn't come from the aw-shucks, faux folksy Palin, but from Joe Biden:


Look, I understand what it's like to be a single parent. When my wife and daughter died and my two sons were gravely injured, I understand what it's like as a parent to wonder what it's like if your kid's going to make it.

I understand what it's like to sit around the kitchen table with a father who says, "I've got to leave, champ, because there's no jobs here. I got to head down to Wilmington. And when we get enough money, honey, we'll bring you down."

I understand what it's like. I'm much better off than almost all Americans now. I get a good salary with the United States Senate. I live in a beautiful house that's my total investment that I have. So I -- I am much better off now.

But the notion that somehow, because I'm a man, I don't know what it's like to raise two kids alone, I don't know what it's like to have a child you're not sure is going to -- is going to make it -- I understand.

I understand, as well as, with all due respect, the governor or anybody else, what it's like for those people sitting around that kitchen table. And guess what? They're looking for help. They're looking for help. They're not looking for more of the same.

We should all be frightened by Sarah Palin's assertion that the VP should have even more power.
PALIN: No, no. Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are.
When the debate was over, my ears and eyes were immediately assaulted by the bleating Pat Buchanan on MSNBC, who was practically having an orgasm over Palin's performance. I can't wait for a clip of that to surface. He thought she was good enough to turn things around for McCain (!). Sorry, Pat, Bible Spice, unless she goes back under wraps, will wreck again in a future interview or town hall. Everyone knows it.
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The Veep Debate | 73 comments
WHAT NEWS!!!
They said at end of Cover it LIVE that "PAM HAD NEWS!'

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


not news
just snagged the clip of Biden destroying "Maverick"

[ Parent ]
K
.....any more Maverick wine and I will float out of here!

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


[ Parent ]
CNN HAS VIDEO UP...of Same Sex answers!


It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


...and they have FULL TRANSCRIPT too!


It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


[ Parent ]
that's the only video up..
Biden said definitely that he and obama do not support civil marriage.  What part of unequal / under of the bus isn't in that comment?

Gee, where and how soon can I pick up my hospital visitation license?  

Not impressed folks.  I definitely expect more...like hey, equality...what's so hard to understand about that?  Our to be leaders don't understand apparently.


[ Parent ]
no news on this front
That has been all of the Dem candidates' position on marriage except Gravel and Kucinich. None of them have been ready to "go there". I thought Biden was brilliant in boxing Palin in on this one, because now she's going to have to answer to the fundies.


[ Parent ]
RE no news on this front.
  I don't think either candidate wanted to go into the LGBT rights issue.  But it did appear to me that Joe Biden was ready for it.  Call it a slip if you want but as it says in the transcript,
We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do.

 When listening to this debate this jumped out at me.  I think Joe Biden does believe that SSM should be legal nationwide. He has lived in the Northeast where civil unions and in Mass. where SSM is legal has seen it doesn't cause all the doom and gloom the right claim.  

 Sure it could have led into a debate that we all have been wanting to see.  I believe Joe Biden would have torn Palin up one side and down the other.  I think this is an area were Palin had no talking points.

 Than again we do know Barack Obama is for the complete repeal of DOMA and with the prospect of larger majority in both senate and house, I would not give up on Obama/Biden.  

 But as you say, the dance McCain/Palin will have to do between the fundies and LCRs is going to be fun to watch because right now they need them both.  Is that popcorn I hear popping?  

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


[ Parent ]
My only complaint
is that Biden, like Obama, conflated civl and religious marriage.  I don't think that is at all necessary, and it make our jobs here at the state level just that much harder.  And of course it pisses me off because you know that they know full well where the real dividing line lies.

That aside, I loved how he boxed "I chose to be straight" Palin in.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.


[ Parent ]
I thought Biden was brilliant in boxing Palin in on this one, because now she's going to have to answer to the fundies.
That shouldn't be difficult for a "maverick" like Palin!

[ Parent ]
It's a simple fact
In the current social climate, a politician who openly supports our right to marry will not be elected president. However, Obama and Biden are still the candidates that will make it possible to take the fight further.

I am the lizard queen!

[ Parent ]
Nope. Facts are the things backed by data.
Fact is, we don't know that.

There is no polling on it, and while I'm not sure that's a wrong use of limited resources, all we know for a fact is that no politician who believes s/he has a chance to be elected President is willing to go first.

So you're entitled to the opinion that these guys are the best we got this time around, but not to the 'fact' that their choice of pandering is necessary.

They may believe what they're saying, they may not, but regardless their decision to pander creates facts--it doesn't flow from them.

But wait, there's more!


[ Parent ]
Actually,
there are facts to support this.  I don't have the numbers in front of me but the marriage issue, while improving every year, still polls nationally under 50% approval.  ENDA and DADT poll much better, which is why the dems have taken a more progressive stance with those two issues.

[ Parent ]
"still under 50%"
is still greater public approval than for maintaining the occupation of Iraq -- and one way or another, a pro-Iraq-war (at least most of the time), pro-aggressive-war candidate will be elected.

[ Parent ]
that simple fact...
..."a politician who openly supports our right to marry will not be elected president." Just about sums up all that's wrong with this country, doesn't it. No job? No problem. No health insurance? No problem. Kids dead in Iraq? No problem. Gays marrying? Problem. So I say: People who vote McCain/Palin get everything they deserve.


There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right. -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

[ Parent ]
yeah, but
The problem is that, of course, just like the Wall Street, these people also pull down us with them.

[ Parent ]
Civil Unions
I wonder if Obama and Biden would be willing to consider giving the term "marriage" back to the churches and call everything covered by law "civil union."  

I would support both heterosexual and homosexual unions being considered "civil unions" for the purpose of rights and privileges under the law and letting the religions own the term "marriage."


[ Parent ]
That is essentially
the position that Biden took tonight. He specifically said leave gay marriage for the churches to do or not do as they see fit, implying it wasn't the government's purview.

Here's what I find about compromise--
don't do it if it hurts inside,
'cause either way you're screwed,
eventually you'll find
you may as well feel good;
you may as well have some pride

--Indigo Girls


[ Parent ]
Back to the churches?
The churches never owned it in the first place.  Marriage has always been a secular contract, certainly since before christianity even existed.

On that point--that the definition of marriage should be up to the "faiths" to define--Biden's answer was offensive.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto


[ Parent ]
Even using the "giving back" terminology...
...is cooperating with one of the central lies of the heterosexual-supremacist domination of civil marriage laws.

[ Parent ]
Sadly
Since she didn't completely melt down and f*** it up, the right will say that the interviews were edited to discredit her.

This is bad folks.

She gained back about 1,000,000 votes tonight.

Question:  What does an atheist do when they fall to the floor and start "speaking in tongues"?

Answer: Get a CAT scan.


No, she didn't gain 1,000,000 votes back,
  She did how ever give the republicans a spark of life.  But McCain is still on top of the ticket and don't forget that.  Also I can bet that we will see no more interviews of Palin.

 So I ask you this, what is the difference between Bush/Cheney and McCain/Palin besides Palin has tits?  

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


[ Parent ]
Reverse brain placement :0)
Our current il Presidente is not too bright, while Cheney is (never mind that he's evil). The Presidential candidate McCain has the brains, while Gov. Palin doesn't.

[ Parent ]
But McCain
is starting to show signs of implosion.

We've still got a few more weeks and a few more debates. People like Bill Clinton are stepping up and speaking.

Remember, this ultimately isn't about Sarah Palin- it's about Barack Obama. She's what McCain wants everyone to focus on- but she demonstrated her very limitted scope of experience and ideas last night.

Now, you watch Obama SPRINT THE REST OF THE WAY.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners

Click here for DADT photobook


[ Parent ]
Reactions to the debate
Washington Post, Chris Cillizza: “The Fix”:  Biden is on point: In each of the first three questions he banged on McCain. Keep your eye on the fruit...  LINK

First Read (Domenico Montanaro): Biden is hitting his stride on foreign policy. His nuance and directness on this subject is what made him so good in those Democratic primary debates. LINK

TIME: [Donna] Shalala on Biden’s health care answer: “Nailed it.” Women in this room erupted in cheers.  Who knew there were so many Democratic CEOs? LINK

CNN (Candy Crowley): "How long have I been at this? Five Weeks?" I'm not sure that's the greatest line for Palin to be using. LINK

ABC News (Rick Klein):  Palin is falling into meaningless platitudes: "Change is coming." "We're going to learn from the mistakes of this and other administrations." LINK

Washington Post (Chris Cillizza): It's a hard argument for Palin to make: we need change, we need new faces, we need John McCain? LINK

TIME: John McCain “knows how to win a war.” Has anyone told her he was in Vietnam? LINK

TIME: Sarah Palin boldly vows to not answer the moderator's questions. LINK

Politico (Jonathan Martin): The Palin response to Biden's Bush-bashing: Too much looking backwards. She acknowledges that there have been "huge blunders throughout this administration as there have in every administration." LINK

Politico (Jonathan Martin): Now we know why Palin is trying to stick to her message and avoid the questions and conversation at hand.  That climate change answer was rushed and uncertain, more like the Palin we saw with Katie Couric than the Palin of the first 30 minutes tonight. LINK

TNR (Michael Crowley): A pre-emptive strike from someone who clearly plans to spend the night dodging: "I may not answer the questions the way that either you or the moderator want to hear..." LINK

Washington Post  Fact Check: Palin “Flatly False” on Biden Attack. Sarah Palin just asserted that Sen. Joseph Biden backed John McCain's military policies until this presidential race. That is flatly false. Biden was an outspoken opponent of President Bush's troop increases in Iraq as soon as Bush announced them after the 2006 elections. As Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, he led the most heated hearings before the troops were actually deployedLINK

New York Times:  Gov. Sarah Palin boasted that Mr. McCain “sounded that warning bell” about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, echoing some of Mr. McCain’s recent comments in which he portrayed himself as being on the vanguard in warning about the impending financial crisis.

But the legislation was introduced more than 16 months earlier and the debate over the issue had been going on for some time. He also only added his name after an oversight agency issued a lengthy report condemning practices at Fannie Mae. LINK

Washington Post Fact Checker (Michael Dobbs): Sarah Palin repeated John McCain's claim that Barack Obama voted to increase taxes for every American earning more than $42,000 a year. This is a considerable stretch. LINK

USA Today Fact Check on Palin Claim that Obama Voted 94 Times to Increase Taxes:  The facts: Non-partisan Factcheck.org called that count, which has been cited before by Republicans, "inflated and misleading." Examining the 94 votes at issue, Factcheck.org found that 23 were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all; they were against proposed tax cuts. The 94 tally includes two, three and even four votes on the same measure.  LINK

New York Times Fact Checker: Ms. Palin castigated Mr. Obama’s health care plan as one that would be mandate a “universal government-run” system in which health care is “taken over” by the federal government. This is inaccurate on several levels. LINK

USA Today Fact Check on Palin Health Care Attack: The claim: Palin said Barack Obama wants a "universal, government-run program" and "health care being taken over by the feds." The facts: Obama's health-care plan does not call for a government takeover. In fact, it isn't even universal. It would only cover all children. Obama's plan would give Americans the opportunity to have government health insurance, but they also could pick a private plan. LINK

Washington Post Fact Checker: Palin Attack on Obama Iraq Record. Sarah Palin oversimplified Obama's vote to stop funding U.S. troops in Iraq. Obama was one of 14 senators who voted against the bill on the grounds that it did not set a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Obama made clear that he was in favor of funding the troops, but could not agree to an indefinite extension of the war. The previous month, most Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill (supported by Obama) that linked funding of the troops to the establishment of a timeline for withdrawal. McCain missed that vote.  LINK

Washington Post Fact Checker (Jonathan Weisman): Gov. Sarah Palin was erroneous when she claimed U.S. troop levels in Iraq are now at "pre-surge" levels. LINK

Washington Post Fact Checker (Jonathan Weisman): Palin repeated a standard line offered by the McCain campaign--that Obama has not admitted the "surge" of additional troops in Iraq worked. But in a September interview with Bill O'Reilly of Fox News, Obama said "the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated. . . I've already said it's succeeded beyond our wildest dreams." Obama has not, however, retracted his opposition to the surge, and he has said political reconciliation still needs to take place in Iraq. LINK


Kudos
Joe Biden turned in what is arguably the best performance of this entire campaign, Republican or Democrat, primary or general election.  His answers were nuanced but accessible, and his demeanor was authoritative but passive.  We have plenty of reasons to be very, very proud of our Democratic vice-presidential candidate this evening; I've already had a handful of friends ask why nobody noticed this man while he was running for president himself.

Sarah Palin managed to seem passably competent, and that's all that Republicans really could have hoped for after two disastrous interviews with two of the biggest softball journalists in the game.  We'd heard from several of her former political opponents that her debating has been seen as her greatest strength, and I think we saw why tonight.  Despite being outgunned by Sen. Biden when it came to the nuts and bolts of policy knowledge and all-out wonkery, she managed to stay in the game for the entire debate.  As the next few days pass by, I think we may see a stop to the hemorrhaging support that has been escaping the McCain-Palin campaign for the last week or so, but that's only because Gov. Palin managed to prove (at least to some extent) that she's not completely unable to keep up with the boys.

With all that said, it looks like both campaigns are going to walk away with some of the evening's rewards.  Did Sen. Biden 'win' tonight?  Absolutely.  But in the end, Gov. Palin did better than expected, and that means that she managed not to take two steps back.  After two weeks of campaign disasters and fleeting support, Republicans will surely be relieved.

This was damn good television folks.

"Why Martha!  Your Sunday chapel dress!"


[ Parent ]
I agree
with this assessment. The thing that really burned me during all the punditry on all networks afterwards (I was flipping like crazy,) besides the idiot responses from Holy Joe and Ferraro, was that the bar had been set so incredibly low for Palin that all she had to do was not break down crying for it to be deemed "successful."
In any other race, with any other candidates, it would be clearly seen that Biden wiped the floor with her, that she didn't even answer half the questions, never offered specifics, gave answers so overloaded with meaningless folksy epigrams that she could have been reading the bumper of my father's car, and seemed frightened through the entire thing. (On my HD set, as her un-makeup-clad neck began to redden with anxiety, it looked like she was breaking out in hives.) Epic fail, if only the world hadn't been expecting a full blown choke-up. It's really not fair.
I agree it was great television, everyone here was screaming, yelling, hooting, and hollering at the TV as if it were the superbowl.

____________________

Donate to Carmen's Place


[ Parent ]
What p*ssed me off
There should have been a question about charging raped women for their rape kit

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


You can't blame Ifill for Biden's waffling
his answer was full of shit - neither of them can handle gay rights

Biden wasn't waffling
He was articulating the position all of the top-tier Dems have held all primary season long. I'm surprised at folks who are getting riled up at his answer -- the position is that we deserve all the rights and responsibilities of marriage but not "marriage."

Tactically speaking, this is the position that makes the most sense politically at this time. I don't like it, but the affirmation on national television of our relationships as equal (but separate) frames the debate nicely -- Obama and Biden know that this matter will ultimately be decided by SCOTUS, no matter what they say. This is why his answer beautifully boxed Palin in. So what part of legal recognition, outside of "marriage," does she disagree with? That's the logical followup that Ifill punted on.


[ Parent ]
Palin expresses contempt
For the east coast, for the academics, for the intellegensia, for finance, and for facts.

Yes, some people on Wall Street exploited the loosening of regulations that Palin/Bush/McCain continue to champion for the insurance indistry to make healthcare insurance more profitable(does anyone remember that the current financial disaster has to do with an insurance company, AIG?)

But the major trigger was foreign nations and national banks holding American debt and dumping just enough of it on the market at Singapore every morning to drive down the dollar and the value of American stocks, causing a run.

The other major cause was "print and spend" econmics where the US borrowed essentially mortgaging every US asset down to the bottles of white-out at the Justice Department and borrowing both credit and assets to use as the cover for additional currency issues.

Yes, there were bucaneers and privateers in industry; but, Governor, there are more of the same waiting to pillage the public while providing no services in healthcare insurance carriers as well.

And great, Alericans will get to deduct the first 5000 that they spend on their healthcare premiums....provided that they can scrounge the 5000.

And even I do not make enough to benefit from the McCain/Palin tax cuts....only those whose greed and recklessness that the Senator and Governor  relentlessly condemn will benefit...so just how seriously do you suppose the financial corsairs take McCain/Palin's disapprobation when they are promising them Christmas early at the same time?


I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


Yes but in all fairness
those you list whom she has contempt for have a greater amount for her...

I hope what was said about the healthcare/insurance issues was not lost on the audiences and will be taken apart in "follow up" media stories.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners

Click here for DADT photobook


[ Parent ]
It was no contest
It was a wipeout.

I just got home from the watching party in DC on Capitol Hill with WIN (Women's Information Network). It gave me, who has always supported women candidates, an odd feeling to be there cheering on a man against a woman, along with a room packed full of women. But anyway, what really matters are the policies and what they'll do to the country.

Biden got off some great zingers. Palin embarrassed herself by ripping off old cliché lines from Reagan's debates that fell flat. On CNN the uncommitted Ohio voters leaned strongly in favor of Biden, which I took as a hopeful sign. They frequently zoomed his approval level up to 100%, while Palin's levels hovered around 50%. Consistently, men favored Palin, while women favored Biden by big margins. Leave looks and sexual attraction aside, please (even if heterosexual men are voting with their dicks this year)-- Biden stressed fairness and common sense, Democratic values that women voters are known to favor, while Palin stressed authoritarianism and dogmatism, Republican values favored more by men voters.

I felt hope when Biden began to speak in favor of rights for same-sex couples; at first I thought he sounded like he was taking a strong stand. But that collapsed quickly as soon as Palin uttered a few stale, smarmy platitudes like "some of my best friends are gay." They wound up saying "Look how we agree, we're both against gay marriage!" Rats.

Best line of the evening: "Cheney probably has been the most dangerous vice president we've had in American history." Oh, SNAP! That brought him the biggest cheers of the evening at my watching party.

I like how you said he "eviscerated" the ridiculous "maverick" claims. High time someone called McSame on that! That was my favorite part of the whole debate.

Here's what I find about compromise--
don't do it if it hurts inside,
'cause either way you're screwed,
eventually you'll find
you may as well feel good;
you may as well have some pride

--Indigo Girls


CNN: After Debate, 53% Still Believe Palin Unqualified


Biden was supreme on taxation and deregulation
That part of the debate was to be savored. All Palin had to offer on taxation was the same old Republican talking points that haven't evolved a bit since Reagan. Meanwhile Biden hammered home the truth about Obama's and McCain's taxation and health care plans, citing hard facts about how Obama will help the middle class and small business owners, while McCain will help only the fat cats and screw the little people. Palin had no answer at all to that! She was just lost and out of her depth.

She disgraced herself on the issue of deregulation, since it's the clear culprit in the current financial crisis. Again, Biden made clear Obama's prescient warnings about it 2 years ago, and Palin was utterly dumbfounded. She didn't skip a beat, though, and said I'm not going to answer Biden on deregulation, I'm going to keep on my lame Republican talking points about taxes. In other words, she was PWNED before the eyes of the whole nation.

Here's what I find about compromise--
don't do it if it hurts inside,
'cause either way you're screwed,
eventually you'll find
you may as well feel good;
you may as well have some pride

--Indigo Girls


CBS: Biden Won 2-1, Moved Almost Twice as Many Uncommitted


With Palin's accent
It sounded like she said:

"There have been huge Blenders in the war. There have been huge Blenders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration."

Don't you wish!

Here's what I find about compromise--
don't do it if it hurts inside,
'cause either way you're screwed,
eventually you'll find
you may as well feel good;
you may as well have some pride

--Indigo Girls


So that's what it was
Hardball just showed a clip of Palin from the debate. I finally figured out what she reminded me of - a TV news anchor.

She was talking to the camera, just like a newsreader. Not trying to throw asparagus, but it was bugging me the whole debate.


indeed!
didn't she do that, in a past life?  she was a sportscaster.

I spent the entire time waiting for her to do the pew-pew! Tina Fey affect.


[ Parent ]
Not impressed
Sorry, but I don't share the enthusiasm for Biden's performance tonight. What is so difficult about the Democrats finally reframing this debate as: We don't believe in discriminating against any Americans?!! I felt like we got thrown under the bus once again. Sorry, but can't help but cringe when "my" candidate says he doesn't support my right to marry.

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right. -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Agree, but...
There are a couple of things to be happy about.

First off, Biden did do the reframing.  He answered the question strongly--without disclaimers--when it was asked.  "Treated equally under the constitution" is the reframing.  (It was disappointing to see him give the disclaimer a moment later, but it wasn't delivered from a defensive crouch at the outset.)

Secondly, that strong of an answer had to be prepared and discussed within the campaign and ready.  They chose to play offense and draw a contrast with Palin, with Republicans, on gay rights.  That is light years ahead of what we had last time around.  Next cycle, we'll be ready and able to demand a Democratic candidate who openly supports marriage equality.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto


[ Parent ]
I see your point...
... and with regard to Kerry, you're absolutely right. I just feel the Dems are fighting a losing strategy year after year, trying to appease the fundies who will never vote for them.

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right. -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

[ Parent ]
The Statesman vs. The Spokesmodel
The mugging to the camera and folksy-overload, and CONSTANTLY saying Maverick....just was tacky and icky.

The Conservatives may be tickled she didn't repeat a Couric interview moment, but that wasn't what tonight's debate was about, it's to look like you could handle being president at a moment's notice.

I noticed a PRE-DECIDED talking point praising Palin looking in the camera, and saying Biden didn't from three talking heads including Pat Buchanan. It just wasn't true, Biden looked directly at the camera most of the time.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


Some McCain trainer must have tasered all the hand movements from Palin
In all her disasterous interviews she punctuates her speeches with hand gestures, which made her look even MORE STUPID...those were ALL gone tonight.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


WTF happened to Gwen Ifill?
She was stuttering and failing. Did someone get to her?

I think Biden did great.

I think Palin is as scary as it gets, and just as disrespectful of her host as McSame tends to be.

And her bag of tricks ran out & she gained nothing.

But... what the hell happened to Gwen Ifill? Geez...


GOP scare tactic
It worked, and Ifill completely wussed out.

[ Parent ]
"Hey, she didn't stink up the joint"
by Paul Reiser

Funniest column name so far...ROFLMQAO!
  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

ENJOY

from HuffPo

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


Re: the gay marriage thing
There's a part of me that was wondering if Biden's commentary was really calling for the replacement of all government sponsored marriages with civil unions, and then leaving the notion of 'marriage' as an entirely religious concept.  

I'd be fine with that, honestly--it is equality under the law, and it gets rid of the presence of quasireligious authority in our government.  And it sidesteps the stupid semantic debate with conservatives.  


Marriage, though,
was never an entirely religious concept.  It's always been social.

[ Parent ]
But the thing is
they CAN'T go back and remove "marriage" from atheists like me!.

I'm not okay with that- not even slightly. I have to declare a religion in order to be "married"?

NO. I AM married. I am also an atheist, married for 8 days more than the Obamas, as a matter of fact. We were married by a black southern Baptist minister in a Baltimore restaurant and it is just as legal as that of Michelle and Barack!

And I will support and argue for full and unconditional nationwide SSM until it is so.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners

Click here for DADT photobook


[ Parent ]
On the gay rights issue...
I have never felt, as a gay man, that my desired right to marry should trump any religious organization's freedom to refuse to participate in my marriage.  I would simply find a church that would support me if religious blessing of my union were at all important to me. It is not, especially since most organized religions refuse to marry me not because I am gay but because they already see me as condemned to hell for "practicing a gay lifestyle." Why would I demand their blessing or even want it?

I see an ideal in practice in Europe where the governments of many countries only concern themselves with the civil aspect of the union that provides the rights of marriage to any couple, gay or non-gay.  If that couple then wants to go and have a religious ceremony, that is secondary in the state's view and perfectly separate from the granting of the rights of marriage.  If our country truly practiced separation of church and state, this debate would not be an issue for us here, other than one of semantics about the word "marriage."  I could care less what someone calls the union with my partner as long as all of the same rights are afforded to us. Besides, with the rights guaranteed and in hand, you also have the right to call your partnership whatever you want when you refer to yourself.  Gay and lesbian people have been doing this for decades around the office watercooler.

I think Biden did a fine job of delineating how we are truly thrown under the bus by the denial of basic civil rights of committed partnership.  An issue of semantics over what we call our unions is far less important to me than having equal rights.

It may be interesting to point out how we have to pick our fights relating to semantics.  Palin used the word "tolerance" when referencing gay and lesbian Americans.  Some of us could make a point that having tolerance is akin to being able to hold one's nose when something in the room is malodorous.  "Accepting" could be a much more palatable term. Do we want to split hairs over her use of terms like tolerant, tolerable, tolerance, or should we condemn her for not being 100% comfortable and accepting of us?  She too has a right to her opinion.  Perhaps she really means that she tolerates being in the same room with us rather than the more magnanimous interpretation of the term.

Overall, I think this debate was excellent in that Biden was able to clarify multiple differences between the two tickets.  Palin did not crash and burn, but she didn't convince me by rambling on, by changing the subject and by repeating the talking points she had been given.  

Ron Hudson


That's the thing
There ARE churches who will marry gay and lesbian couples.

The fact that governments won't recognize these marriages doesn't mean that these churches won't continue to perform them.

As for tolerance, isn't that big of Sarah Palin? She can shove her tolerance up her ass. I don't want it. I just want to be EQUAL UNDER THE LAW.

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.


[ Parent ]
Civil marriage
Not only is it the practice in Europe, it's the practice in the United States and always has been.  

Do you know of any gay man, anywhere, who believes he should be able to force a particular religious organization to participate in his wedding?  Your first paragraph is pure straw man.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto


[ Parent ]
I could care less what terms Palin uses,
..how comfortable she is with me, her personal opinion of me, or what fake pleasantries she spouts on the campaign trail.
What does matter: Her actual record on LGBT issues in Alaska, which is entirely negative except for one issue on which her hand was forced. It's bad enough that we have to swallow patronizing words from the Dems who are only grudgingly better on our issues. I'm not about to start giving credit to a woman who routinely attempts to deny LGBT taxpayers and then makes nice to beef up her compassionate conservative hockey mom image.
She is an elected official. Her rights to her personal opinion were never in question, and that opinion is beyond irrelevant when compared to her executive actions. It's a desperate, grasping, poll-driven change in the dialogue right-wing candidates are willing to have for votes, which we don't need to validate as a sign of progress. We have a prettier date to the prom.

____________________

Donate to Carmen's Place


[ Parent ]
NUCULAR!
Where the f**k do these idiots who can't pronounce the simple word NUCLEAR come from?

We've had eight years with Bush who can't pronounce the word. Now, along comes Sarah Palin.

THE WORD IS NUCLEAR!

Palin said "nucular" about a dozen times.

Biden pronounced it correctly.

How can we trust someone with nuclear weapons when she can't even pronounce the word correctly?

ARRRRRRGH!


When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.


To all my same-sex legally married peeps:
It must be absolutely MADDENING for you to hear the candidates constantly bleating "Marriage is betweeen a man & a woman".  When are they going to suck it up and admit that this is no longer the law of the land?  Thousands of same-sex couples are legally married in this country and it's like they're pretending it's not happening.  Why can't they at least acknowledge that this issue is evolving?

'Cuz the hicks in Wasilla and Scranton
would have a stroke.

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.


[ Parent ]
Would that be a bad thing?


watashi no yomeiri wa doko desu ka

[ Parent ]
Gotta give credit where credit is due
Sarah turned out to be quite a quick study.  Less than a week ago, she would have thought the Gaza strip was a place for snow machine races.  

Props to her tutors!


Having watched the clip and reading the transcript,
  Joe Biden has found a great way to walk the tight line between the YES and NO answers on same-sex marriage. We all know that nowhere in the Constitution does it say Same-Sex couples can't Marry, the same with the Massachusetts and Californias Constitutions.
BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.  Bolding mine.

 He said,'left to faith and people who practice their faiths' which tells me if your religion doesn't want to recognize same-sex marriage so be it. Maybe I am reading to much into this, but I also believe he feels government deny people their civil rights.

 I am just like all the rest of you, I wish he would just come out and say he believes same-sex marriage should be legal and be done with it.  But one thing is for sure, Obama and Biden are better than McCain and Bible Spice.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


Biden's a lawyer
And the legal profession (other than the crazies from the Liberty U) supports SSM by a higher margin. Here in NJ, even Catholic lawyers realize and support SSM. Can't be that different in DE.

[ Parent ]
the answer is ZERO
the qustion is

How many interviews with a journalist will Palin have before nov 4th?

Obviously a Hannity infomercial doesn't count as a journalist.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


Faux News, a love fest for Palin,
Below Screne,  Biden We support Same Sex Couples.

Below Screne,  Palin Marriage should be defined as a man and a woman.

So much for fair and balanced, And Fred Thompson is saying Biden was lying his ass off.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


quote from Daily Dish
Alex Massie:

Palin is reading off cue-cards that, one assumes, have complete answers written out. Not, of course, the answers to the questions she is being asked but, indubitably, answers nonetheless.
  http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


Who gives a damn.

It's Clone Wars round two.

Paleolithic Palin vs. the Senator from Bank of America who voted for DOMA.

Nor matter who wins, we lose, and that's a fact.  

The looter rich much prefer working with Democrats like Obama and the Clintons - they're greedier, they fool more people and they're able to get away with a lot more than Republicans.  


Excellent Article....
Pam, I just wanted to whole-heartedly agree with you and your assessment of the debate.  I also completely agree that we, as LGBT Americans, do not need to quibble regarding the use of the term "marriage."  

Obama/Biden clearly support civil rights for LGBT Americans, and we will be one step closer to full equality.  I sincerely hope the Presidential election turns out favorably (Obama/Biden,) and we take a step in the right direction.

Thank you for your work.


Palin is not inclusive
But in that tolerance also, no one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed, negotiated between parties.

There is another difference. Biden talks of gay rights aspect of it as if he were talking of two humans in a relationship. Palin describes it as a business arrangement between to corporations.

The major kick here though is that there are already "contracts" to be signed and negotiated between parties, that grant some, but not all, of the rights of marriage. A will, Medical POA, etc... but that is the problem. The expense and time of jumping through 6000 hoops to get a close approximation of marriage, and one which can be overturned simply in court.

watashi no yomeiri wa doko desu ka


IFILL was AWFUL!!!

She totally let Palin do and say anything she wanted to. In a way, I am glad to know it was because she was pressured to do so by the Right...but it still was dismal. 

No one is even mentioning the fact that Palin does not know the difference between our three branches of government, or that her job will be to RUN the SENATE when she is VP.

I vote PAM for the next moderator! 



It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


I vote Pam
for President.

watashi no yomeiri wa doko desu ka

[ Parent ]
Gwen Ifill
I, too, was greatly disappointed in Gwen Ifill's "moderator" role last night. She seemed ill-at-ease and uncertain. She missed countless opportunities for follow-up questions and completely abrogated her responsibilities to keep Palin, especially, on subject. I guess she must have been intimidated by the negative wacko press she had been receiving for the past two days.
Now we have to deal with pro-McCain Brokow's mishandling of the debate next week between McCain and Obama. Yikes!But I have great confidence in Obama's ability to get around that hurdle.

EVEN FAUX NOISE!!!!
I just went to the poll (still open!) at Fox, and the results are the same as CNN and MSNBC...Biden WON THE DEBATE HANDILY!

This debate was not a game changer, but Biden certainly came off as the more knowledgable and intelligent politician, while Palin played her little cutsey routine and outright refused to answer two or three questions...

Most of those on the right say Palin did well, but I haven't found any on the right who say Palin "won" the debate.

Check out Andrew Sullivan for some good remarks on the debate...he thinks Biden won handily.



I don't think you are being fair to Ifill
I have read on TPM and other sites that she was prohibited from follow up questions by the debate format and the revised rules imposed by the McCain campaign just a week or so ago.

They had originally had the option of follow ups, but the campaign insisted that they alter the rules just last week at the same time McCain was threatening to not debate Obama.  This nugget did not recieve the same attention at the time, but I don't think it fair to say that Ifill was remiss in her duties as moderator.  She could ask for clarification, which she did a few times, but follow up questions were prohibited.

They also strictly changed the time frame for the questions and the response time alloted for rebuttal, as well as changing the format to a lecturn rather than sitting at a table like the last two Vice-Presidential debates (2000 and 2004).


The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY


The Veep Debate | 73 comments
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Join the Blend Chat Room



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox