I managed to watch the debate last night and saw that Gov. Sarah Palin did a more than credible job in handling Sen. Joe Biden, whose lifelong ambition to be President has meant he's been preparing for these kinds of debates practically his entire life.
Of course, all that preparation means that he's able to smooth talk his way through all kinds of issues on which he completely blows key facts and information.
Gov. Palin's problem wasn't that she didn't respond or respond effectively. She did. It only appears that Gov. Palin didn't do nearly as effective job in responding to all of Biden's gaffes because she could have spent the entire debate eviscerating Biden's positions, particularly on foreign policy.
Let's start with the top whopper of the night from Biden. It relates directly to Sen. Obama's declaration and preference to meet with Iran's Ahmadinejad and other dictators, tyrants, and thugs without any preconditions.
Biden says that isn't the case.
Obama has said that, and reiterated as much on several occasions.
Biden then goes on to talk about how Hizbullah was kicked out of Lebanon. That's not only the most bizarre statement of the night, but it's so clearly wrong that someone who supposedly has the foreign policy acumen that Biden supposedly does should hang it up right now. Hizbullah has been prominent in Lebanon since the Lebanese Civil War at the end of the 1970s. Hizbullah was responsible for the 1983 Marine barracks bombing, and have never left Lebanon. Not even Israel's invasion of Lebanon to thwart Hizbullah and PLO attacks against Northern Israel and subsequent occupation of Southern Lebanon did anything to remove Hizbullah from Lebanon. Hizbullah is stronger now than it has ever been, precisely because of its support from not only many Lebanese, but because of Syria's and Iran's support.
No one has kicked Hizbullah out of Lebanon, and Hizbullah's ongoing presence is a cancer on the Lebanese society that has the potential to metastasize and infect Turkey as well.
Ed Morrissey thinks that Palin hit a home run. I'm thinking that it was a stand up triple. She did everything she needed to do, but then again, I was expecting a moment where Palin would eviscerate Biden and Obama in one fell swoop, particularly about the financial meltdown.
Palin was weak when talking about the financial crisis and the crooks on Wall Street. She engaged in populist talk, and it would have been more effective to not only mention the crooks on Wall Street, but that those same people, including Raines and Johnson, are advising Obama's campaign, and helped pick Sen. Biden as Obama's running mate. Further, as Palin is the only Washington outsider, she could have slammed Congress for failing to engage in proper oversight over Fannie and Freddie, which was precisely the kind of law that Sen. McCain had proposed but was thwarted by Congressional Democrats on a party line vote. Far from trying to deregulate the system, McCain was looking to target regulations to prevent the very meltdown we're now witnessing.
Sen. Biden did a decent job parrying that line of attack by claiming that McCain had not seen this crisis coming, but again, that ignores the legislation introduced by McCain to increase oversight over Fannie and Freddie.
There were tax gaffes on both sides, and Palin was weaker here than I would have liked.
The Moderate Voice has a solid roundup.
Instapundit notes that there were multiple constitutional law gaffes, particularly by Sen. Biden and the role of the Vice President, but ABC glosses over that in favor of pointing out that Gov. Palin didn't know the name of a general in Afghanistan. It's all about priorities.
What is truly telling is how the media and punditry were focusing on how Palin would be an abject disaster or wouldn't be able to hold her own against Biden in the debate, and yet when it's more than apparent that she could do so, and got in her shots, that the media declares that there's nothing to see.
UPDATE:
I think Palin would have been better served going after Obama and Biden for Democrats blocking regulation that would have increased oversight over Fannie and Freddie, to say nothing of their campaign relying on Johnson and Raines as advisers - asking them for information about the housing market or using Johnson as part of the VP search committee rather than referring them to the Department of Justice for investigation into fraud and other missteps that make Enron look like child's play.
I would have attacked on the issue of affordable housing and wondered how Congress can honestly say that this current situation is affordable given Congress and past Administrations' penchant for expanding lending to those who could not afford to ever repay, let alone when markets inevitably engaged in corrections.
UPDATE:
Dick Morris seems to think that Palin hit it out of the park. So does Rich Lowry. Even the New York Times columnists had to acknowledge that she regained control over her image. That much is apparent, but she missed out on a chance to truly do lasting damage to the Obama campaign, particularly on the financial mess.
UPDATE:
Don Surber showcases what the media elites had to say; they have a narrative and they're sticking to it.
UPDATE:
James Pethokoukis at US News sums up the problem I had with Palin's performance on the financial crisis questions, and notes that this is part of McCain's general reluctance to deal with the issue straight on - attacking Obama for his cozy relationship with the very individuals who propagated this mess in the first place at Fannie and Freddie.
No comments:
Post a Comment