What I got out of it:

1. Sarah Palin did not say anything that was so stupid it was shriekingly funny, like she has been doing in her last several televised interview bytes.

2. Joe Biden did not put his foot in his mouth like he is so often fond of doing…I think we all remember his reaction to learning that Barack Obama was going to run for the Democratic presidential nomination..?

3. I didn’t get the impression that Gwen Ifill treated either candidate in a biased fashion. However, I do not care for Sarah Palin, so I may simply be unable to see if she did. Anybody else have a different opinion?

4. Sarah Palin quite often failed to even remotely answer the question directed at her by Ifill, who did not attempt, as Lehrer did with both candidates during the presidential debate, to force her to stay on track. Joe Biden did answer all questions, and even when Palin left herself open to some serious pwnage, like when she burbled brightly about how she’s “clearly not a Washington insider, ya know, all this ‘first taking one stance and then another,’” he did not follow through with said pwnage (”Bridge to Nowhere,” anyone?). I would say that both Ifill and Biden were deliberately avoiding putting any real pressure on Palin, Ifill to avoid seeming biased (while requiring candidates to answer the actual question posed is hardly biased, it would guaranteed be construed that way, since she would not have done so with Biden as he did not need to be required) and Biden to avoid seeming sexist.

5. It was fairly brilliant of Biden to throw out that remark about “just because I’m a man” and then to choke up. A woman could never in a million years have gotten away with it. A billion years. But on him, a man who has established a 35-year reputation of not being a girly-boy (yeah, maybe someday we’ll be past all that, meh) it came across as giving him not only a very human side, but a complete puncturing of Palin’s posturing as Superparent. Others, even others who don’t live in the American heartland of Wasilla, Alaska (wtf?) do indeed have life crises involving their children and parenting! …imagine!

6. Biden’s takedown of current Veep Cheney and, by subtle extension, Palin’s hearty endorsement of Cheney’s veep power grabs, was good enough to send chills down my cynical spine.

Anybody else’s impressions are welcome!


8 Responses to “Very brief, possibly totally premature, weighing in on the veep debate. (I just finished watching it for cryin’ out loud, cut me some slack..!)”  

  1. 1 Quin

    I am going to watch the debate tonight, and I promise to watch it with a closed mind so I can try to find ways to completely disagree with you on every single one of your points. ;-)
    More later.

  2. 2 Karley

    To answer number 3– The entire thing was one sexist screed against Palin. They insisted on asking her questions, which is totally not fair!!!! (/Palin apologist mode)

  3. 3 Quin

    I just watched the first 10 minutes with a Japanese friend, until she finally said, “Stop it! I don’t want to watch RETARDS talking to OTHER RETARDS.” Her words, not mine.

    So we’re going to watch old episodes of the Muppet Show now instead.

  4. 4 James H

    “So we’re going to watch old episodes of the Muppet Show now instead”

    How will you know you’ve switched over though?!

  5. 5 Quin

    The laughter’s not as bitter. But you’re right. At least what I caught of it, the debate was Fozzie Bear vs Miss Piggy.

  6. 6 Angela

    3 - At the beginning I thought she was holding Palin’s hand. Biden would answer a question, Palin would “respond,” and then Ifill would say to Palin “But did you want to address [x] from Biden’s statement?” Then Palin would say something folksy (darn it! ~wink wink~) that didn’t really address what Biden said again!

  7. 7 Lisa Kansas

    I missed the first 20 mins of the debate…glad I missed any hand-holding, ugh!

    Aw, c’MON, Quin…dissent, dissent! :D

  8. 8 Quin

    There’s really nothing there for me to dissent with. For instance, re:#5 I’m happy to agree that Biden is a well-practiced politician who’s picked up a lot of good tricks for manipulating an audience. And re:#6, regardless of how odious I might find Biden, it doesn’t invalidate his criticisms of Cheney.

    As I’m short of time today, I’ll just say, “What he said!“:

    To me the most despairing moment of the whole debate was the discussion of when it is appropriate to use military force, and Joe Biden laid out two points, the first of which was is it feasible, which sounds reasonable after the last eight years until you pause and consider just how monstrous it is. It is, in fact, one of the most explicit rejections I’ve heard of the quaint and never-practiced doctrine of war as an instrument of the utmost last resort, a point at which feasibility becomes a meaningless rubric because the only other choices are death and subjugation. It affirms violence as a basic tool of statecraft–of course, we all know this to be historically and almost universally the case, but it still rankles to hear it spoken without even the Cold-War-current nods to “the peace-loving American people.” In the question just prior, asked if Americans had “the stomach” for Biden’s expansive view of acceptable foreign military intervention, Biden was even plainer: “The American people have a stomach for success.” This too is a basic truth–that people love peace only until promised triumph–rarely publicly expressed. In a sense, I suppose we owe Senator Joe thanks for his honesty.

Leave a Reply