Ready for some job? Not sure she would pass many employers' first screen interview. The vetting process for many entry level positions in corporate America often entail a 2 to 3 month, multi stage process. Had McCain any management skills whatsoever we would not be enduring this ridiculous saga in the midst of terrific national crises.

I totally agree there. Palin helped Palin most of all. But, John McCain needs help on the economy. She did't help. He needs someone who's competent on foreign policy to back him. She hurts him.

I've seen little comment so far on how mangled Palin's statements on climate change are. This is what she said last night:

"I'm not one to attribute every man -- activity of man to the changes in the climate. There is something to be said also for man's activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet."

And this is what she said to Katie Couric:

"There are -- there are man's activities that can be contributed to the issues that we're dealing with now, these impacts. I'm not going to solely blame all of man's activities on changes in climate."

She seems not to understand that "blaming man's activities on changes in climate" is very different from "blaming changes in climate on man's activities," which is what she presumably means.

In tough times people are going to kick the tires.

Whack: Gravitas.
Whack: You betcha.

'nuf said.

The only reason she didn't have a Couric meltdown was because she didn't have an interviewer asking followup questions and asking for specifics. With that kind of format, she'd have even Faux News admitting she's a lightweight.

What job is she ready for? She should go back to Alaska as chief moose catcher.

here are word clouds on what each candidate said:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/3/0223/35665/837/618518

frequency of word use in debate is correlated with word size on the wordle. she said "also" a lot.

Guys, admit it, you were envisioning her as the potato skin and you were the sour cream and melted cheese. Or something like that. I think that's an old Eskimo fantasy. Just wanted you to have some blubber to chew on.

OK, I'm a lightweight. I'm not just superficial on the surface: I'm shallow to the bone. But for the last ten minutes of the debate, I couldn't hear anything Palin said. Here's what I focused on:

Her right ear is about an inch higher than her left ear

OK, now you can get back to serious discussion.

Biden seemed to address the issues just fine. Palin seemed to revel in avoiding the issues, which is consistent with her debate techniques to date. Everyone "acts' to some degree when speaking in front of people, but Palin comes across more as a trained actress than a leader. Substance matters, and because the bar was low for her, she got a pass last night.

Thanks for a laugh. She had a tough job to do and she exceeded everyone's expectations. As Mickey Kaus said, the big loser was Hillary. In two years, Palin will be so good that Hillary will have a serious problem. She is in the same learning curve that Bill Clinton had a year to do. She is doing it in five weeks.

That's not to say they will win but I think it is too close to call. I thought McCain would take 40 states but that was before the mortgage meltdown. If Hillary was the candidate, or even the VP candidate, it wouldn't be close but she isn't. We'll know in two weeks, I think.

You are still stuck with a poor candidate in Obama but there are none so blind as will not see.

Republicans are such dopes -- really -- all of them.

So today they are going around cheering:

HURRAY! OUR VP PICK IS NOT A COMPLETE IDIOT.

Take that, Obama.

New slogan: Country First. Not An Idiot.

They'll sweep West Virginia for sure.

From delawareonline:

Katie's restaurant used to be on Lincoln Street 25-30 years ago. It doesn't exist now.

Joe "six pack" Biden just likes to make stuff up. Why do this on such a minor detail?

Country First. Then maybe some Montovani, and then whatever John Tesh wants to play.

@ Cap'n Chucky OMG is she Steven (one ear higher than the other) Colbert in drag? She sure has a penchant for "Truthiness"

As far as 'looking back' goes, in one of her last comments, palin referred to the Democratic party track record on spending, so thats going back ~30 years. Fiscally( a term I use with trepidation), Clinton was a better conservative than any thug since Eisenhower.

"Palin helped Palin most of all."

Maybe, but not in context of the election. She helped herself to an on-air tv job at Fox News when the election is over. She'll follow in Rev. Huckabee's footsteps. She loves that camera pointed at her.

With Joe Biden it was clear he cared, he lives for this. He had real passion and conviction. Watching him last night I had the impression he lays awake at night thinking about all these issues. For Palin it seemed like just another pagent.

I haven't seen anyone mention what I thought were several important points in the "debate", which occured early on:

Biden did a good job of taking Palin apart with her "redistribution of wealth" bullshit, though I would have preferred that instead of rebutting with "fairness" he had pointed out that we've had 30 years of redistribution of wealth under Republican policies - with all the wealth moving up into fewer and fewer hands. This is important because it's the underlying reason for the illness in the economy, including the mortgage meltdown. But he did get to the really important point that under the slightly higher taxes on the wealthy under Clinton that not only they but everyone else as well did better than they have under the Bush tax policies that McCain proposes to continue and expand.

Another really important point: Biden didn't let Palin get away with that "John McCain is going to give you a tax credit for going shopping for your health insurance" BS - he got right to the point on that one, making the connection that McCain was going to tax everyone in the country on their employer-provided health benefits, and for employers who finally give up on providing coverage for their employees under this onerous new policy, it would mean their employees go shopping for $12,000 worth of health care with a $5,000 tax credit. This was a very important point to get out there, because Obama himself failed to connect these dots in the first debate with McCain. The debate coaches probably shouldn't have programmed Sarah to go there, because the McCain health "plan" has all along been a ticking time bomb for the McCain campaign. It needs to be really hammered home as a campaign theme from now until the election by Obama and Biden.

Eric Blair,
Damn, that's right. Why would he say that? Why would he lie to the American people about such a small matter? I mean, it isn't even likely to get anybody killed! I think you should push this one, Eric.

You are still stuck with a poor candidate in Obama but there are none so blind as will not see.

That's what you'll be saying about the voters in 4.5 weeks... "How could you not see that Obama's such a poor candidate???"

"The McCain campaign needed Palin to come out and speak in complete sentences. She did."

Oh? Not to my ears.

She did manage to string together a number of prepared points and catchphrases into semi-coherent collections. The majority of these collections were not "complete sentences".

Her complete unfamiliarity with syntax makes me cringe. I'm not being simply a language snob on this point. The Current Occupant also struggles to assemble thoughts into coherent sentences. It's not folksy, it's a sign of more general incompetence. Haven't we learned?

Politics is ... what? It's not skilled manual labor. It's not theoretical physics. It's not professional athletics. It's ideas, and words to express them. I'm fed up with the idea that syntactic incompetence is a mere quirk. Is it too much to ask for a politician to have some mastery of the only tools the job uses?

@ John R: I think maybe you've hit the nail on the head. There is no Sarah Palin. It's been Colbert all along!

That's why he pulled out of the South Carolina primary.

Guys, admit it, you were envisioning her as the potato skin and you were the sour cream and melted cheese. Or something like that. I think that's an old Eskimo fantasy. Just wanted you to have some blubber to chew on.

Actually, I couldnt help noticing that Biden looked over at Palin as she spoke with just a little half-smile that could be (1) the look of a proud father, (2) the look of a proud husband of a trophy wife, or (3) a patron of Hooters. You can be confident that Saturday Night Live will exploit the funniest of these three interpretations. Im looking forward to the skit.

Guys, admit it, you were envisioning her as the potato skin and you were the sour cream and melted cheese. Or something like that. I think that's an old Eskimo fantasy. Just wanted you to have some blubber to chew on.

Actually, I couldnt help noticing that Biden looked over at Palin as she spoke with just a little half-smile that could be (1) the look of a proud father, (2) the look of a proud husband of a trophy wife, or (3) a patron of Hooters. You can be confident that Saturday Night Live will exploit the funniest of these three interpretations. Im looking forward to the skit.

Low bar settings aside, Palin's performance was successful in one significant way: she gave the Republican base a reason to give her a second chance. With growing dissent from the ranks after a string of phenomenonally lousy interviews it was essential that Palin at least reach out and reassure the doubting Thomases in the base.

Think about it: 4 weeks out from the election and McCain and Palin are still busy trying to herd the Republican base.

Palin is probably qualified to be a car salesperson, although her personality and persona fit most people's conception of what they dislike about that job. To give her credit, she got through the debate without a total meltdown, punched some of her talking points, and probably appealed to her base. Even so, her over the top fake familiarity and constant winking were the type of things that would put me off from ever buying a car from her. Biden's depth will wear better than Palin's pep. Back to Obama versus McCain.

Blah. I couldn't watch after about 10 minutes. I got so irritated listening to Palin lie, in the first 10 minutes, that I just couldn't watch anymore. The assertion that corporate taxation automatically results death to the economy doesn't make it true. In fact, historically speaking, it seems to be the opposite of true. What happened in the 80's, when St. Ronnie dropped corporate taxes? I think we had a bit of economic strife. What happened in 2000, when Pudding Head George lowered taxes on the obscenely rich? Why, I think it went even more sour. To stand there, and say, "Look, if we do the same thing that those to intellectual luminaries did, this time it will work out!" Do they really think we're that dumb? Are we, as an electorate, really that dumb? If I were a debate moderator, I'd want a suction dart gun. Every time a candidate lied, or didn't provide some sort of factual evidence to back their claim, I'd stick one to their head.

Guys, admit it, you were envisioning her as the potato skin and you were the sour cream and melted cheese. Or something like that. I think that's an old Eskimo fantasy. Just wanted you to have some blubber to chew on.

Uh, no. I spent plenty of time in bars in my mad, impetuous youth, and I learned very early that a woman who looks OK (and, really, folks, she's just OK) and talks like a lunatic is a lunatic and bad for your health. As Nelson Algren put it:

Never eat at a place called Mom's. Never play poker with a man nameb Doc. Never lie down with a woman who's got more troubles than you.

Republicans were losing then, and they're losing now.

That's profoundly true, Steve. Palin desperately tried to distance herself from Republicans in general and Bush in particular with all her bullshit about "change" and "mavericks," and Biden not only didn't let her get away with it, he tied McCain even more tightly to Bush, who is of course radioactive.

And rightly so.

Palin clearly wanted to make this debate about personality, with her phony folksiness and affectations. Biden simply reminded voters of what they already know -- for all their terror of associating themselves with a brand Bush made toxic in eight short years, McCain and Palin are Republicans, and Republican policies suck.

Sarah Palin came off like a speed-addled and power-mad trollope for the GOP. She was practically Nixonian in her dishonesty. Her ferocious ideological rants would have been hilarious if so many trogs didn't eat that stuff up.

The most horrifying moment was Palin's embrace of expanded powers for the vice president. Really? It is good to know we both love Israel. Wink wink.

I actually woke up this morning with Sarah Palin's perky direct-to-the-camera face tattooed on my eyeballs (in a very bad way). It was as if watching the debate last night was a traumatic experience, and I was left with a PTSD-related after-image.

And that's really my take-away from last night. Like a trained poodle, she knew all the TV-bimbo techniques that the Women of MSNBC know: head bobs, nods, slight smiles, OMG! expressions, seriousness at the right punched-up word, etc. But when it came to actually being in the moment, or being on that stage, or being real, or being adept at discussing policy, I didn't see any of that.

She's a creature of television, and I predict she's going to have her own Fox News talk show before it's all said and done. But she's not smart, she's not ready to be president, and perhaps most important, she's not telling the truth to the American people.

Like George W. Bush before her, Sarah Palin is a whack-job evangelical who believes in a coming apocalypse. None of the answers she gave last night were true to her heart and mind. Rather, they were the lies all evangelicals tell in the name of Christ -- lying for Jesus! -- so they can get their hands on the levers of power for their own nefarious and deeply disturbing ends.

Now...if I could just get her practiced-sincerity headshot out of my mind...........

Mike K wrote something revealing: In two years, Palin will be so good that Hillary will have a serious problem.

Which, of course, presumes Palin won't be in the White House.

Mike K, you're deluded as usual. What serious problem? Is Palin going to move to New York and challenge H. Clinton's Senate seat? There isn't a Presidential election for four years, and Obama will be cruising to re-election by then anyway -- Hillary won't be a factor.

And anyway, since you keep trying to sell Clinton as the stronger candidate -- when you really mean the candidate you're prefer to run against so you Republicans could get your hate on -- that means that Hillary, who is a stronger candidate than the lightweight incompetent Palin, would mop the floor with her -- without having to worry about accusations of sexism.

Besides, Hillary might be on the Supreme Court by then, Mike.

Anyway, no further proof of your delusions is needed than this: I thought McCain would take 40 states

Mike, there hasn't been a realistic prospect of a Republican pickup for months. Obama's almost certain to pick up Iowa. Which Kerry states did you think McCain was going to take? do amuse us with your analysis -- if the hangover isn't too bad.

Even more than "Eric Blair," who is simply a liar, Mike K reveals how adherents of the modern Republican Party simply live in a fantasy world.

Please do bring it, Mike -- which 40 states?

Batshit-crazy is more troubles than you, even if you're batshit-crazy.

Posted by: Cap'n Chucky
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yeah Chucky, but sometimes you gotta go with batshit crazy to find one that can tie it in a knot. Just sayin'.........

I'm the only liberal in my office so I usually get him with every Fox talking point there is. When I got to work today, my boss looked depressed which is pretty unusual for him. He's a very upbeat guy. He now realizes that his ticket is going to lose. His actual words. He thought she did a great job, but he realized that it wasn't a game changer. On Fox he said they took a show of hands among some Anheuser Busch workers. Their opinion of her went up, but only 3 said it changed their mind about voting for her.

Um, Steve...I can't say as I ever really wanted anything tied in a knot. Sounds painful, and a simple vasectomy will get you the same results without requiring institutionalization.

Sarah-as-TV-moments:

* She had the same practiced ability to glance down at her notes, then back at the camera, that all TV people have. Half the time I don't think she was actually reading anything: rather, I think the down-glance WAS the point of the glance.

* The now infamous moment when she didn't even acknowledge Biden's emotion was no different than being a TV anchor and following a story about a ten-car pile-up with multiples deaths. You just look at the camera with a smile and start talking about the flower show at the old folks' home. The fact that she didn't even notice that she did that is what's so ugly.

* Her tendency to feel as if she needs to fill any split second of dead air was never more pronounced than on the question of nukes. I actually had to get up and leave the room I was laughing so hard. (Seriously.)

* Her 'folksy' demeanor seems to have wowed the TV pundits, who are, themselves, all practice creatures of televsion. I actually know some 'folksy' people, however, and I'm pretty confident that they noticed she was acting. And I'm also confident that they didn't like that.

* Her "I'm looking at the camera" look was so dead-on, so confident, and so professional, that it came off as all of those things. She looked like the people who read news on TV. She WAS one of those people.

* The winks, the smiles-at-the-right-moment, the ramrod straight focus on the camera lens, they were all part of a practice professional act, not reflective of a genuine person. And she's not bad at it: but I don't think people are going to wake up this morning and feel like they really know her. They're going to think they watched a decent (or indecent) TV show, and that she was the main character.

Okay -- enough! I'm going to go watch some footage of horrifying moments in Earth's history until something knocks her ugly mug out of my mind. And can someone for god's sake cut her precious bangs???

Governor, I worked with Ted Baxter: I knew Ted Baxter; Ted Baxter was a friend of mine. Governor, you're no Ted Baxter.

A little late in the game, but my two cents:

Palin attempted to turn the debate into a 90 minute long stump speech. She had no substantive answers, avoided questions, and generally bucked the format (I guess that would be the mavericky thing to do). In the beginning, her recitation of republican talking points seemed to demonstrate that she does have the ability to speak rather coherently and stay on message (after all, she IS a politician). As the debate wore on, her knee jerk repetition of talking points, catch phrases, and attempted sound bites, began to ring hollow, leaving an impression in my mind of some sort of programmed robot. On top of that, her grammar was atrocious, and her 'folksy' charm began to look too packaged to be genuine.

All she managed to do was 1) prove she isn't a complete buffoon, and 2) stroke her base (pun intended). This debate will have virtually no impact in terms of a boost for the McCain camp.

Biden, as expected, demonstrated a mastery of the issues, and refused to let Palin frame the debate. On virtually every jab Palin threw at Biden or Obama, he was right there counter punching, refuting her claims with facts. When Palin tried to criticize Obama's record in the Senate on key bills, Biden pointed out that McCain voted the same way on the same bills she was critiquing Obama for. He explained the core of important issues in laymen terms, which is key to a lot of undecided voters. He attacked McCain consistently, and in doing so, managed to relegate Palin to a mere commentator, not an opponent.

Biden won hands down to the people that matter. The republican base is pleased, but the republican base is not going to win this election for McCain.

I liken the race at this stage to a basketball game where the 1st half is close, at halftime the outcome is still undecided, and in the 2nd half the stronger team with more talent begins to pull away. Last night was the 10:00 mark of the 2nd half, and all Palin could do was score 1 point to Biden's 5. McCain's team can't afford to trade baskets at this point, much less cede any.

My prediction:
Obama/Biden = 84
McCain/Palin = 62.

The Obama campaign has been masterful.
From the beginning, they detected the core weakness of the McCain candidacy and have leaned persistently and heavily on that weakness. McCain is a third Bush term. Pressing on that point has progressively crippled the McCain campaign. The only way to answer that charge is to claim that McCain is a Maverick. But to prove his Maverickiness, McCain has had to demonstrate unpredictability and flakiness. Governor Palin was chosen primarily to prove his Mavericky goodness -- a team of Mavericks. All he has done is demonstrate that a McCain Palin presidency would not only be a third Bush term policy-wise, but with less competence and more cheap razzle-dazzle.
The absurdity of Governor Palin's dismissal of the evidence of the Bush Administration as being predictive of the M-P future indicates the final existential crisis of the GOP's campaign. Running against themselves. Next they will simultaneously nominate W for a Nobel Peace Prize and indict him for war crimes at the same news conference. After all, isn't McCain urging Bush to veto a bill he voted for?

Interesting philosophical question. Can a parrot be said to be lying? Can a Chatty Cathy be capable of falsehood? I'd like a ruling on this.

Gotta keep an open mind, Chucky. It's kinda like getting a Commodore but the linens survive. Helpul tip: The Wesson actually leaves a cheap 200 count easier than a fancy 600, again, just sayin'.......

Every morning I wake up, wipe the sleep from mine eyes and saw a little prayer of thanks, that Mike Huckabee was not chosen as McCain's running mate.

THAT decision doomed McCain to the dustbin of history. Thank God.

p.s. I saw one person on stage who looked eminently capable to be President (should the need arise). That person was not Sarah "Doggone it" Palin.

The FBI has begun interviewing friends of Rezko in Illinois. His sentencing is coming soon. We'll see how it is after he talks. That particular can of worms hasn't been opened yet. Obama may yet win and then we can see how the country does run by the Chicago mob machine. But there are still four weeks.

You write: "Palin might be ready for some job -- used-car salesperson, perhaps."

Yes, she could do that. Especially with tough times coming. Talk a few more people into loans they can't afford. Move those Hummers.

I was thinking that she would make a good weather person on TV. Not the news anchor, that's for sure. But she could cheer folks up on a cold and cloudy day.

I had some Mike K for breakfast once. Made me fart the rest of the day. Seems to have provided all the needed precursors for noxious gas in my bowel. Was even impervious to Beano. Like a bit of bad cabbage. Clears out a room quick. Nice if you want to be alone with your thoughts I guess. Kinda like prison without all the rape and violence I suppose. Yeah, Mike K, better than Cream-of-Wheat but definitely not a filet.

Students of history will easily recognize that Sarah Palin's campaign of homage to small town American values and verities has a distinguished pedigree. It's an exact replica of William Henry Harrison's 1840 "Tippacanoe and Tyler too" Whig campaign of "log cabins and hard cider."

Just as with the GOP of 2008, the Whigs of 1840 were the party of the wealthy Establishment seeking to win over middle and lower class voters by distracting them with cultural resentments against condescending Democratic elites.

As historian Arthur Schlesinger portrays it: "The answer soon rang across the land: The Whig Party IS the party of hard cider and log cabins and it will defend them to the end against all the sneers of the Democrats.

"With tireless industry and bewildering resources, Whigs everywhere rushed to doff their broadcloth and silks and flaunt their homespun. Every speech, song and slogan held up the rustic and plebian as closest to the Whig soul. The staid meetings of their past gave way to barbecues, clambake, excursions and noisy proceedings. Raucous campaign songs echoed in the streets as the Whigs marched by in disorder, shouting and staggering in the yellow light of torches."

In an even more recognizable parallel to today's carefully-controlled Palin campaign, the future President Harrison, who was born a Virginia aristocrat, "watched without protest his transmutation into a plain man of the people, while his spacious house in Ohio was reshaped into a humble log cabin. Pen and ink were as wholly forbidden to him as if he were indeed a mad poet in Bedlam. A committee adept at ambiguities answered all his correspondence. The Washington Globe called them the 'keepers of General Harrison's conscience.' His public appearances were infrequent, vague and highly effective. The weatherbeaten old soldier, exchanging his tall silk hat for a broad-brimmed rustic model, speaking with great earnestness to little effect, delighted crowds already exhilarated by Whig hard cider. But on most major issues Harrison's views were carefully concealed, doubtless even from himself."

It's nice to know that conservatives have kept up their veneration of the past in this selection of a campaign playbook that is 168 years old.

I expected the littany of talking points by rote. I did not, however, expect her to defiantly state that she was only going to answer the questions she felt like answering (only to repeat the spew of talking points). Is this how momma Sarah raises the young 'uns? Combine that "screw the rules" attitude with her approval of Dick Cheney AND her wish to expand the powers of the VP office and you have one crazy, scary woman.

Mike K wrote: That particular can of worms [Rezcko] hasn't been opened yet.

Mike, you're delusional. That can of worms was opened and found empty, as far as obama is concerned, even before the primaries.

Bush learned, to the nation's cost, that hope is not a plan. Mike K needs to learn that wishful thinking cannot change reality.

Speaking of wishful thinking, Mike K, you didn't answer my question: which Kerry states did you think McCain would win for your 40-state landslide? If you need your geographic memory refreshed, you can go here and look at all the pretty colors -- most of them blue.

It's nice to know that conservatives have kept up their veneration of the past in this selection of a campaign playbook that is 168 years old.

It's also nice to contemplate the ultimate self-destruction of the Whig Party as the Republicans slide into mockable irrelevance.

Ref: steve duncan on October 3, 2008 at 10:25 AM. Thanks man. You win this thread.....

Gregory--let's see...New Hampshire, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Mich...hmm, that won't work...how about Penn...no, not that either...

I'd better get on the phone to Cheney and get him to make some quickie states up...now for some names! "Mikeland", "Dorkistan"....

"Say-it-aint-so-Joe-there-you-go-again!"

Now we know why she asked Biden right off the bat if she could call him Joe. Had to get cover for this pre-packaged zinger.

Fail.

Mike K wrote something revealing: In two years, Palin will be so good that Hillary will have a serious problem.

Which, of course, presumes Palin won't be in the White House.

Why ? Everybody knows that McCain is unlikely to run for a second term.

Mike K, you're deluded as usual. What serious problem? Is Palin going to move to New York and challenge H. Clinton's Senate seat? There isn't a Presidential election for four years, and Obama will be cruising to re-election by then anyway -- Hillary won't be a factor.

I thought you knew enough to understand that presidential campaigns begin two years before the election. Silly me.

Two possibilities : McCain wins and Palin is VP. She and Hillary will be maneuvering for the next election.

OR Obama won and is doing worse than Jimmy Carter, in which case the Democratic nomination probably isn't worth much but Hillary is still interested.

You choose. Either way, I was quoting Mickey Kaus about the two years.

And anyway, since you keep trying to sell Clinton as the stronger candidate -- when you really mean the candidate you're prefer to run against so you Republicans could get your hate on -- that means that Hillary, who is a stronger candidate than the lightweight incompetent Palin, would mop the floor with her -- without having to worry about accusations of sexism.

Even you must know that Hillary would have been a better VP choice than lying Joe. There is already a list out of his whoppers. I've noticed you've done away with links, which is handy to avoid being shown your mistakes. Too bad Palin didn 't have a video screen to show the You Tube of Obama promising to meet with the "leadership" of Iran, for example.

A few Lebanese had heart attacks when he said Hezbollah had been "thrown out of Lebanon." I think it was Sam Goldwin who said, "Sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you've got it made." Joe does that well.

I also think Hillary would have been a far better choice for #1. Had the media not covered up Edwards' affair, she would be the nominee.

Besides, Hillary might be on the Supreme Court by then, Mike.

That's true but she might wait to see how he does before giving up on the presidency.

Anyway, no further proof of your delusions is needed than this: I thought McCain would take 40 states

Mike, there hasn't been a realistic prospect of a Republican pickup for months. Obama's almost certain to pick up Iowa. Which Kerry states did you think McCain was going to take? do amuse us with your analysis -- if the hangover isn't too bad.

I would not have made that prediction with Hillary the nominee. One of these days all the scandals from Obama's past will blow up. Let's hope he's not president when it happens.

Even more than "Eric Blair," who is simply a liar, Mike K reveals how adherents of the modern Republican Party simply live in a fantasy world.

Please do bring it, Mike -- which 40 states?
Posted by: Gregory

As usual, you can't debate. Just bluster.

Just an aside. I'm sitting in a cubicle listening across the wall to two of my female, moderate, soccer mom type colleagues completely rip Palin a new one for dragging a 4-5 month old special needs baby out on the stage (again!) under the lights with all of the ruckus at 11 o'clock at night (or whatever time it was when the debate ended in St. Louis). They clearly think she's selfishly using her kid as a prop in a phony "I'm just like you" schtick. I wonder if anyone else is talking about this other than at the bottom of a long list of comments in a lefty blog?

The entire 90 minutes I kept waiting for Palin to SAY something, anything of substance. Never happened.

As usual, you can't debate. Just bluster.

Um, Mike, debate works like this: You make delusional statements; I point out how they aren't grounded in either facts or logic. You can call it "bluster" or whatever you want, but I'm happy to let this forum judge which one of us has the better of the debate.

As for pointing out how your statements aren't grounded in either facts or logic, here's an example:

Why ? Everybody knows that McCain is unlikely to run for a second term.

But you said two years, Mike. Even if Palin takes over for McCain in two years, there wouldnt' be a Presidential election for another two! (And that's presuming McCain even wins the election; as I've said, I'd love to see your scenario as to how thats's possible, apart from "Mike K really wishes it were so!").

I thought you knew enough to understand that presidential campaigns begin two years before the election. Silly me.

"Silly you" are the first words you've used in this thread that are grounded in reality, Mike. Congratulations. But don't blame anyone else for your own lack of clarity. So you now explain that your fantasy involves Palin and McCain beginning a presidential campaign for 2012 two years from now. Let's look at your scenarios:

McCain wins and Palin is VP. She and Hillary will be maneuvering for the next election.

You have not yet provided a plausible model for this scenario to be anything other than a fantasy on your part. (I might add that sensible Americans are increasingly horrified at the idea of this nitwit being a heartbeat away from the Presidency.) But I'll grant you that if Obama doesn't win, Hillary would probably take another stab at it.

OR Obama won and is doing worse than Jimmy Carter, in which case the Democratic nomination probably isn't worth much but Hillary is still interested.

Admittedly, like Carter, Obama will have a lot of Republican messes to clean up -- nice incompetent party you shill for, Mike! -- but this scenario falls even more under the category of "wishful thinking."

And leaving aside any evaluation of whether the H. Clinton/Palin matchup is possible, there's your thoroughly ridiculous assertion that Clinton wouldn't utterly dominate palin on the campaign trail. Yes, Mike, you love Palin and hate Clinton, but we see time and again that your likes and dislikes have little relation to objective reality, you deluded moron.

All in all, we see that Mike K simply isn't able to admit the competing information of reality into his little Republican fantasy world. Speaking of which:

Either way, I was quoting Mickey Kaus

Ah, see, there's your problem right there.

Even you must know that Hillary would have been a better VP choice than lying Joe.

Mike, you really don't want to bring up the subject of "lying" with McCain and Palin's record. But aside from your obvious disappointment at being denied your Hillary hate, the overwhelming perception of Biden's competence and decency akes your assertion even less convincing than usual.

There is already a list out of his whoppers.

Translated from the Mike K: Some conservative blog posted a list! Whoopee!

So what? That an ignoramus like you (who still believes the "liberal media" fantasy!) swallows it is all we need to know about its veracity. Sure, Biden made some misstatements -- everyone does. But they pale beside the lies spewing from the McCain/Palin camp. Again, Mike, that's an own goal for you.

I would not have made that [40-state] prediction with Hillary the nominee.

Your concern trolling about Obama's nomination is legendary, Mike, but again, reality shows how off base you are. This caveat doesn't make your 40-state prediction any less ridiculous.

One of these days all the scandals from Obama's past will blow up.

Keep wishin' and hopin', Mike, but all that bullshit the conservative blogs screech amounted to a hill of nothin' during the primaries already.

Finally, let's go back to your concluding statement: As usual, you can't debate. Just bluster.

Since that was in response -- and the only response -- to my challenging you to provide a plausible 40-state scenario for McCain, we see Republican projection in action again.

C'mon, Mike, bring it: What's your McCain 40-state prediction? No one else has imagined McCain would flip any blue states for months, so what do you say? Amuse us!

NOTE: I watched the debate on NBC, not one of the cable channels.

I give Palin credit where credit is due.... she performed, for the Republicans, well, and she came across as one used to talking on Television... Her earlier training in TV paid off tonight. What she did, with her performance (and that is what it was) was to staunch the bleeding from the open wounds of the Couric interviews. With the format as it was, and her frank admission she was not going to answer questions "as you expect I will", it would have been difficult for her to fall down and break her leg... and she didn't.

I found myself being irritated by Palin's continued references to "Main Street" with the suggestion that she is just like every other Middle Class Main Street mom. Please note that the Palin family has a net worth of over $1Million. A Main Street Mom she ain't. I was also irritated by her winks at the camera, but I think the Republicans probably loved those winks.

There is no question in my mind that the Republicans will be happy with how Palin did.

You can call me a Democratic partisan (and I am), but to me, in terms of "debate", Biden won the debate handily. Biden also made a good appearance and presentation, and while getting across major Democratic "talking points" also, on several occasions, took the fight to the Republicans and McCain, and successfully corrected Palin, without attacking her, on several of her more dubious statements.

Palin responded to questions in two manners: rapping out a list of Republican "talking points" that have been in play since God was in diapers (well, anyway, since Ronald Reagan was Governor of California -- to the extent of stealing Reagan's most famous line --- "there you go again"), and when the question did not fit the talking points litany very well, she "winged it" by means of talking nonsense -- and by that I mean she babbled in a manner that one could not understand just what it was she was talking about.

With Biden, you knew exactly what he was talking about all the time.

Yes, Biden dodged a couple of questions, but he at least did so with understandable commentary.

One noticeable gaffe was Palin referring to the American Commanding General in Afghanistan as "General McClellan" -- and frankly, it is silly to try and make something out of that... an understandable error by someone from outside the beltway. What was more important is that she then fudged the truth as to what the good General said; Biden had it right, Palin did not.

Major mistake by Palin? Giving out the standard Republican Party lie about Obama intending to raise the taxes of people earning $42,500 a year. Biden called her on that, and you can bet she will be called on it by the MSM, which has finally come to being willing to occasionally tell the truth about Republican misrepresentations.

If there was one really stinging blow delivered during the show, it was Biden's comment about Richard Cheney being a very dangerous man, with no rejoinder from Palin, who indicated moments before she agrees with Cheney's view as to the Vice President's office being not quite in the Executive Branch of the government (and Joe Biden's constitutional response to that also was very stinging).

Biden, I thought, also did a good job of spiking Palin's repeated referrals to herself and John McCain as "mavericks", making it utterly clear that such is simply not the case.

But, ultimately, both did their jobs by keeping their supporters happy.

NOTE: I like Gwen Ifill, but it was clear that the GOP's attacks on her in the last couple of days, designed to "play the ref", were apparently successful; she let Palin again and again run off at the mouth without answering the question posed.

NOTE: In NBC, following the debate, three guests were called upon to comment directly as to the debate, Peggy Noonan, a Republican loyalist, somebody from NPR, and a Republican ex-Governor. Huh? Where was the Democrat? The two Republicans felt, not surprisingly, that Palin "won" the debate.

NOTE: In fairness to NBC, they also interviewed Geraldine Ferrarro, a Democrat, who gave a fairly nuanced response to the debate, saying that as a woman she was very glad that Palin gave a strong performance. She also praised Biden -- she was not asked for her opinion as to who "won" the debate.

As to how will independents and uncommitted viewed the debate.... I haven't got the foggiest, though early "snap" polls suggest that it is viewed that Biden "won" the debate.

Last note as to irritations: how many times is Palin going to have the baby available to take into her arms in front of the public? The baby has been reduced to being a Palin prop. One would think that, in the interests of the baby (if not the country - *snark*), that the baby should have been in bed by that time of night.

One of these days all the scandals from Obama's past will blow up. Let's hope he's not president when it happens.

Um ... yeah. Sure. Oooookaaaayyyyy.

I'm sure that after one of the longest and most contentious primaries in history ... with a Republican machine able to either find or wholly manufacture "scandals" of every stripe ... and just a month away from election day ... there's simply tons of legit stuff out there just ready to magically be "exposed" after he's elected.

Because, you know, the Clinton and McCain camps just sat on all of it, rather than exposing all of these "scandals."

Yep. It will totally happen.

Now how's about you take a little break, Mike K, go outside, and look up and enjoy that deep green sky and those fluffy pink clouds on such a lovely fall day.

Meanwhile, the rest of us will stay here in reality, laughing at you.

NOTE: In NBC, following the debate, three guests were called upon to comment directly as to the debate, Peggy Noonan, a Republican loyalist, somebody from NPR, and a Republican ex-Governor. Huh? Where was the Democrat? The two Republicans felt, not surprisingly, that Palin "won" the debate.

This pattern occurs a lot. It presumes the media person is the "liberal." Note, of course, how this reinforces the frame, and supports the premise behind the Republican rejection of objective reality for having a liberal bias.