NP Rank:
Palin Delivers Hope In Protecting Freedoms For Americans :: MAXINE
![]()
Sarah Palin and Joe Biden after Thursday's vice presidential debate. Image Credit: Ron Edmonds
Palin Delivers Hope In Protecting Freedoms For Americans
While gaining confidence throughout the evening, Governor Sarah Palin delivered a message of Change and Hope better than the Democrat talking point delivery of Senator Joseph Biden.
Sarah stayed on point while not allowing the thrust and parry of minutia in the questions to divert her from showing the difference between the inbred stance of Washington insiders and a “mainstreet” living Governor from and energy producing state that has a lot to contribute.
Sarah Palin was in a good mood while the Senator of 35 years was stuck in “senate speak”. Palin showed an energy and acted like an everyday person … better than expected.
In a post debate interview conducted on Fox News by Dr. Frank Luntz, several people in the crowd strongly felt that Sarah Palin would be ready to lead if the events came about where she had to step in. They felt that her executive experience and her performance in the debate brought them around to understand that our country needs an outside point of view to help refresh the leadership to run politics in Washington.
Plain talk can not be discounted in our country at this unique time, and it does not come cheaply. In the end, Governor Palin stated that it would be the goal of a McCain administration to help protect the freedoms each preceding generation has fought for and that these freedoms would not be eroded on their watch.
Charles Krauthammer, when interviewed in a post debate segment on Fox News felt Joseph Biden may have won on points but looked very sour in the end.
Note to Chuck Todd, NBC’s chief political observer, who had stated on Morning Joe this morning that the presidential race was over … the race is not over, not just yet!
This excerpted and edited from USA Today –
Fact check: Context of key debate claims
By Ken Dilanian and Richard Wolf, USA TODAY
A look at some of the claims made by Sen. Joe Biden and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in the vice presidential debate Thursday night in St. Louis:
Tax votes
The claim: Palin said Sen. Barack 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.
Seven were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either corporations or affluent individuals, according to FactCheck.org, which is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.
The 94 tally includes two, three and even four votes on the same measure.
Tax rate changes
The claim: Palin said Obama's plan to raise the top income tax rate would affect "millions of small businesses." Biden responded that the vast majority of small businesses do not report more than $250,000 in income.
The facts: The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, citing 2003 data from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, said in a report that 436,000 tax filers with small-business income — 1.3% of the 32.8 million filers with small-business income — were subject to the top income tax rate. Another Tax Policy Center analysis concluded that "roughly 97% of small businesses would not be affected at all by increases in the top two tax rates."
Health care
The claim: Palin said 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.
Energy
The claim: Biden said he has "always" supported clean coal. He said "a comment made at a rope line was taken out of context" by John McCain's campaign.
The facts: In the video, recorded at the beginning of Biden's bus trip across Ohio last week, he is seen responding to a question about why the campaign is supporting clean coal. "We're not supporting clean coal," he says. "Guess what? China is building two every week, two dirty coal plants. And it's polluting the United States, it's causing people to die."
As the exchange continues, Biden says: "China's gonna burn 300 years of bad coal unless we figure out how to clean their coal up, because it's gonna ruin your lungs, and there's nothing we can do about it. No coal plants here in America. Build 'em, if they're gonna build 'em, over there and make 'em clean because they're killing you."
Mortgage crisis
The claim: Biden said McCain said he was "surprised" by the subprime mortgage crisis.
The facts: McCain's use of the word "surprised" came in response to a leading question in New Hampshire last December. At the time, he compared it to the dot-com collapse of the late 1990s, adding: "I was surprised at other times in our history. I don't know if surprised is the word." Later in the same interview, he said, "When I say 'surprised,' I'm not surprised when in capitalist systems that there's greed and excess."
Troop funding
The claim: Each vice presidential candidate said the opposing presidential candidate voted against funding U.S. troops in Iraq.
The facts: Palin's charge that Obama voted against funding the troops is true. But Obama said at the time that he wanted to fund the troops, but the bill in question didn't include a requirement that President Bush begin bringing troops home. Similarly, Biden's charge that McCain also voted against funding is true — because the bill in question included a timeline for withdrawing troops, and McCain opposes timelines.
Diplomacy
The claim: Biden said Obama did not say he would meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "This is simply not true about Barack Obama," he said. "He did not say sit down with Ahmadinejad."
The facts: At a news conference in New York City in September 2007, Obama was asked, "Senator, you've said before that you'd meet with President Ahmadinejad … would you still meet with him today?" He replied: "Yeah, nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their adversaries." Reference Here>>
Crowd Power
-
Edmund Jenks
Los Angeles, California, United States














-1.jpg)
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (14)
at 21:17 on October 2nd, 2008
a lot of hogwash here.
at 03:49 on October 3rd, 2008
I agree! USA Today is quite misleading I thought. The facts get to be irrelevant really! Yes Im sure they all spouted non-facts at times. I though she did pretty well: I guess she was carefully trained to provide the scripted answers on her sheet. I know I could never in a month of Sundays have produced such a convincing appearance. No gaffes either from either party. My verdict: fifty-fifty!
at 04:20 on October 3rd, 2008
The fact that the press and the comedy shows have done nothing but a 24/7 task of smearing the Governor's character and conversely have not done the job on highlighting "Gaffe-A-Tron" Joe Biden, his voting record, and how wrong he has been on position after position in the arena of foreign affaires over a largely undistinguished 35 year career in the Senate in terms of "Change" - Palin proved she is ready for PRIMETIME.
Fifty-Fifty is another Dodger win against the Cubs for McCain*Palin!at 04:12 on October 3rd, 2008
Edmund Jenks, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 04:18 on October 3rd, 2008
There were so many times that Palin just ignored the moderators questions and left us asking: "What is she talking about?"
I'm not saying her points were awful or she was outright lying, but take a look at the transcript...half the questions she was asked, she answered about something completely different or off-topic.
It was frustrating to watch.
at 04:34 on October 3rd, 2008
What was frustrating was Gwen Ifill, with a $300,000 payday on the line if Barack Obama takes the presidency (which would allow her planned book about "The Era Of Obama" to do well) and the lack of continuity in her follow up questioning that would draw both Biden and Palin out - WEAK.
Palin was smart to take the leadership role and take command of her debate responses from the podium ... not the moderator's chair.
Again - Sarah stayed on point while not allowing the thrust and parry of minutia in the questions to divert her from showing the difference between the inbred stance of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 />Washington insiders and a “mainstreet” living Governor from and energy producing state that has a lot to contribute.
at 06:17 on October 3rd, 2008
Well, remember, Rob, she did say:
.... And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also....
So, she rewrote the rules of the debate for herself.
Sometimes, it was as if when she heard a topic or phrase, she said to herself, "Oh, I know that one!" and using the phrase or word as a focal point, she crafted a response, not necessarily answering the question but, the response did contain the word or phrase.
Other times, she just veered off back to a topic she wanted to discuss.
at 04:32 on October 3rd, 2008
Edmund Jenks, I like this story. It's good stuff.
She seemed rehearsed and did OK in my opinion. What I found encouraging is that she is a "quick study," having made a giant leap forward since her interviews with Charles and Katy, and, therefore, believe she will greatly improve in her grasp of world affairs and delivery of her positions in the near future.
-END-
at 04:33 on October 3rd, 2008
The analysis afterwards was interesting: Palin was praised for not crashing and burning, while Biden was praised for not sticking his foot in his mouth. If I complete a task, I'm really unhappy if the only feedback I get is "You didn't completely flail"- I'd consider that a D.
(Also, what was up with the "undecided Ohio voters" live graph? They didn't specifiy that the button-clickers were human, or even mammal, and by the end I was convinced that they were just hanging on individual words while not really comprehending entire sentences. Or maybe they turned the debate into a drinking game)
at 06:39 on October 3rd, 2008
The low level of expectation was weird, wasn't it?
Basically, all the governor had to do was not fall onto the stage and the senator, since it was decided going in he had more knowledge than she did, the concern was about his body language and possible gaffes.
The talking heads do us all a great disservice by helping to lead so many viewers down the path of idiocy, although many go willingly.
I tell you, Jordan, I'd like to hear more discussion on Governor Palin's idea of expanding the vice president's duties and her interpretation of what she thinks is the vice president's authority to expand them. I found that somewhat disconcerting.
at 15:26 on October 3rd, 2008
I seem to remember the same talk in the run-up to the Bill Clinton era by Al Gore. He was looking to expand the power of the Vice-President so that his office could play a larger role in the review of Bureaucracy in the search to eliminate waste and duplicity ... sound familiar?
What is troubling is that time after time, politicians talk a great game but end up kicking the can down the road. Al Gore's can has been kicked so often down the road, reform has turned green and the attitude is ... to heck with duplicity and waste.
It is a nice thought that there would be some super executive office that would be able to move reform along ... but that would be the job of the President to lead and have others to follow.
at 05:18 on October 3rd, 2008
What debate were you watching?
at 07:16 on October 3rd, 2008
Sarah Palin, great suit!
at 11:37 on October 3rd, 2008
Edmund Jenks, I like this story. It's good stuff.