Sarah Palin fought with empty soundbites against Joe Biden

by , under All categories, Enrique

Both vice presidential candidates, Joe Biden and Sarah Palin, sqared off their only debate on Thursday night. If you were expecting Palin to cave in and cry you were going to be disappointed. However, even though the Republican candidate held her own against Biden, her answers were without substance.

She used an old trick when debating: do not answer the question.

One of the matters that worried me were Palin’s answers on climate change: “I’m not one to attribute every activity of man to the changes in the climate,” she said. “There is something to be said, also, for man’s activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet. But there are real changes going on in our climate, and I don’t want to argue about the causes.”

Biden hit back with a: “I think it is man-made,” he said. “I think it’s clearly man-made.”

If you want to read about the debate check the New York Times or reader’s reaction at the Washington Post.

Biden said it well. He felt that the United States is at a crossroads. We can follow the same path as the Bush administration or erase those ruinous years by electing Barak Obama.

I think he is right. This will be a very important election.

  1. DeTant Blomhat

    Such a disappointment… I was expecting the jumping frogs of calaveras county but it was so… so… *rehearsed*.

  2. John M. Hooks

    I love my country and except the wonderful diversity that it represents. There is no better place to live and all Americans should be proud to be a citizen. But I shudder when I hear someone would be vice-president (or even president) make the following assertion:
    “But even more important is that world view that I share with John McCain. That world view that says that America is a nation of exceptionalism. And we are to be that shining city on a hill, as President Reagan so beautifully said, that we are a beacon of hope and that we are unapologetic here. We are not perfect as a nation. But together, we represent a perfect ideal. And that is democracy and tolerance and freedom and equal rights. Those things that we stand for that can be put to good use as a force for good in this world.”
    Suggesting that Barack Obama’s position on world affairs and diplomacy is naïve and dangerous is breathtakingly ignorant and arrogant on the part of a so-called qualified candidate who can blithely make such an assertion. Clearly she understands history as well she understands current world affairs.
    History is replete with examples of the disastrous consequences of one nation/peoples fervent belief that they are exceptional, represent a perfect ideal and should put those qualities “to good use as a force for good in this world”.
    One only has to recall the 1920s, 30s, and 40s when the twin evils of Nazi fascism and Japanese imperialism were unleashed on the world. The Nazis were the super race – super in purity, super in strength, super in culture. The Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, etc. were untermenschen, subhuman, to be subjugated, enslaved and murdered, all in the name of spreading the Aryan ideal.
    The Japanese also saw themselves as superior to all others – the Chinese who were to be subjugated and forced to work for the good of the Empire and the barbarian races of the West who were to be defeated in all out war.
    Hopefully one does not have to remind Sarah and John of the disastrous consequences of their outspoken right to expand and recreate large parts of the world in their own image.
    The consequences of such hubris have been with us since ancient times. Witness the Mongols, the Tatars, etc. who sacked and razed numerous centers of civilization and slaughtered countless thousands simply because they abhorred the others’ ways of life.
    Lest you miss the parallels with today, consider this: absent any real issues of imminent danger (and we know that the Bush administration knowingly lied and misrepresented the facts thereon) what is different about the Bush policy of forcing democracy on sovereign nations without a single concern for the wishes of the people or the government involved (i.e., Iraq)?
    One last comment; lest Sarah and John not understand the disastrous nature of their stated position. While I have particular disdain for the policies and actions of the Bush administration, we cannot forget the other recent examples of American hubris that stems from variations of the McCain/Palin “doctrine”: Teddy Roosevelt re: Puerto Rico; missionaries in China, American paternalism in the Philippines; Kennedy and the Bay of Pigs; installing the Shah in Iran; you could go on and on. Ironically enough, most of these misadventures resulted ultimately in long term problems, often of a grave nature. How about the theocracy that really runs Iran?
    I repeat. I love my country. Can we really afford 4 or 8 more years of ignorant, arrogant, chauvinistic, paternalistic governance as the McCain/Palin ticket promises?

  3. Enrique

    –I repeat. I love my country. Can we really afford 4 or 8 more years of ignorant, arrogant, chauvinistic, paternalistic governance as the McCain/Palin ticket promises?

    Hi John and welcome to Migrant Tales. Do you want a forceful laconic answer: NO we don’t!

  4. Enrique

    Hi Detant, I think Biden handled himself well. Palin, well, she did not really answer the questions. Empty, sweet and a typical campaign commercial is what could describe Palin. Her voice and demeanor are getting on my nerves. Imagine having to listen to her arguments every day as vice president! It would be a disaster for the United States and the world — even for Finland.

Leave a Reply