Friday, October 3, 2008

post VP debate musings.

Last night’s VP debate was a real rager. Gwen Ifill didn’t press issues for fear of coming off as crooked. Joe Biden was absolutely spectacular, even though he held off on the aggressiveness for fear of being accused of picking on a girl. Sarah Palin played up the folksy shit, regurgitated some well rehearsed sentences, and talked about what she wanted to (ENERGY) regardless of what the question was.

There were many things I disagreed with Sarah Palin about but what got me particularly agitated was her ignorant, archaic, american-centric, and just plain FALSE statements about the environment. Lady, you are less qualified to talk about the environment than you are to be running for Vice President.

Palin is flat-out perpetuating a grand lie. Luckily Joe Biden’s response calmed me down. America is not only the leading polluter and consumer of energy in the entire world, but Mr. George W. Bush & Dick Cheney rejected the Kyoto Protocols ensuring that these United States would remain decades behind the rest of the world in exploring and implementing renewable resources and green technology for years to come.

Palin's 20th century "view"* on the subject of environmental issues is exactly what got us in the massive quagmire we are in in the first place. So, quite seriously, shut your fucking trap you dumb bitch.

Yes, by all means, if you would like another person who is in the front pocket of the oil companies making key decisions on energy production while personally and professionally profiting from such policies, Sarah Palin is your gal.

Speaking of which, Palin mentioned she would like to see the Vice President given more flexibility and power in their position which aligns her with Dick Cheney who has refused under “executive privilege” to testify in hearings about his role in the Valerie Plame CIA leak. So even if that was also a “lame excuse for a joke” it’s piss poor timing and lack of judgement on her part.

IFILL: Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch?
PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

So, her answer to the question about interpreting the role and power of the vice presidency and whether it falls under rules of the legislative or executive branch of the government was: the constitution is good and Dick Cheney knows how to work the system.

Here it shouldn’t be a secret that I enjoyed Biden’s answer to this question which he delivered perfectly and without being condescending:

BIDEN: 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.
And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit.
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.

I loved those two answers because they really showed a fundamental difference in beliefs, experience, and intelligence.

Also, SHE WAS WINKING AT SOMEONE!!!! Who was she winking at? Me? You? Dick Cheney? At a time when approval ratings and the amount of trust the American people have for their elected officials is at an all time low, while talk of needed “transparency” is at an all time high--- she’s WINKING at someone??? There’s full “transparency” for you right there. She’s showing EVERYONE that she can’t be trusted!

PALIN: As for disagreeing with John McCain and how our administration would work, what do you expect? A team of mavericks, of course we're not going to agree on 100 percent of everything. As we discuss ANWR there, at least we can agree to disagree on that one. I will keep pushing ***WINK*** him on ANWR. I have so appreciated he has never asked me to check my opinions at the door and he wants a deliberative debate and healthy debate so we can make good policy.>>
(it’s around 2:03 in this clip below)


Did anyone else find it slightly odd that the issue of abortion was never raised? I think I heard Joe Biden mention “Roe v. Wade” once, but that was it. And Palin when describing her family and average every day American issues was quick not to mention her pregnant teenage daughter.

PALIN: But it wasn't just that experience tapped into, it was my connection to the heartland of America. Being a mom, one very concerned about a son in the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills? About times and Todd and our marriage in our past where we didn't have health insurance and we know what other Americans are going through as they sit around the kitchen table and try to figure out how are they going to pay out-of-pocket for health care? We've been there also so that connection was important.

As far as the whole gay marriage topic is concerned, I still don’t understand why, in the year 2008, why to ANYONE that this is even an issue. Who fucking cares? Both sides had concern with it, the main difference I saw between the two candidates was this: while Palin outright opposed the idea without masking it with a lot of double-talk but DID say that no constitutional rights would be taken from homosexuals, Biden seems to want to enforce granting the same rights to homosexual couples in a committed relationship as heterosexual couples get (he gave specific examples: property rights, rights of visitation, rights to insurance, rights of ownership). However, why this remains such a semantics debate is beyond me. Marriage as an institution has been sullied by heterosexual couples for years, if homosexuals want to take the plunge into the abyss, I say ‘good luck’ to ‘em. Isn’t it high time to start treating everyone equally?** Oddly, this was the only topic the candidates "agreed" upon and when Gwen Ifil pointed that out it got a big laugh from the audience- one of the only laughs from the whole evening, which I'm sure left gay voters just overflowing with confidence.

Anywhoosits, I started this post thinking it would be a quick one but outrage got the better of me. My mind hasn’t changed, I’m psyched Biden did as well as he did, and Palin did just what I expected from her. She’s a PTA mom gone mad with power and it’s an insult to all Americans that she is even being considered for such an important political position.

So, despite the fanfare and attention paid to another “performance” by Palin by the press outlets, Biden was the clear winner.***

* It's in quotes because she was programmed to say these things

** the answer is ‘yes’.

*** other than the tv stations

No comments: