digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
See the original image at huffingtonpost.com —

McCain Lost the VP Debate Too

huffingtonpost.com — Sarah Palin has experience being a runner-up -- which will come in handy in November. Tonight she barely kept up.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • AlwaysDuggDown, on 10/03/2008, -142/+51PoHuff Spin time....yay! Look, the only thing Americans saw tonight was a debate between two people who BELONGED ON THE STAGE. Watch the McCain bounce....digg me down now, believe me later.
    • cjshamrock, on 10/03/2008, -24/+9I will digg you up because you should never ever celebrate victory too early
    • swr1ght, on 10/03/2008, -6/+17I doubt very seriously if McCain will get a bounce, I personally feel that Biden won. However, I must admit...of all the times that I have watched a politician dodge questions at a debate, I have never witnessed one flat out state that they do not want to talk about a subject, and instead would talk about something else entirely. Governor Palin did this three times. That's amazing. But you have to respect that honesty to just state that you aren't going to answer the actual question. At one point Biden actually started laughing about it. It was really good stuff.
      • lowtolerance, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2I don't respect that kind of honesty, at least not in a potential leader of our country. If she can't follow the rules of a simple debate, I don't see how she can trusted to play by the rules as VP, or god forbid, president.
      • sinrtb, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1She stated in the debate that she was not going to follow the rules, in fact she feels Cheney did not have enough power and the role of the VP should be expanded.
    • RekCognize, on 10/03/2008, -3/+7Obama supporter, hate McPain, but even I think all the huff post diggs are getting a little old.

      Great site, but damn ...
      • Bith8654, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2You're right, digg is really becoming dangerously close to being considered just another one of those "radical left wing sites" the majority of the population only hears mentioned in a negative light on MSM channels.

        Though some people just don't seem to care, I think digg's public image is important. Do you think Katie Couric is going to ask us for questions if she is convinced we are just another dailykos? I doubt it. Also, no one will want to give an interview like Pelosi did if it become politically risky to associate yourself when digg.
      • Pedestrian101, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1"Great site"..... errr....
      • sinrtb, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1The problem is that Digg is ran by the people. Plenty of right wing stories get dugg just not enough diggs to get to the front page. Digg more right wing stories and more right wing stories will be at the top.
    • nick1971, on 10/03/2008, -6/+5Sarah Palin exceeded all of my expectations in this interview. Having said that it was based upon a set of expectations which were so low that some might characterize them as sub-terrainian.
      Its true that she was there, had a color coordinated camera friendly outfit, she didn't scream in the 1st 5 minutes I'm going back to Alaska and was able to speak in complete sentences. I have to say that the sentences mostly started with "and" so she would be getting low marks from my English teacher.
      If your only expectations of a VP candidate is that they can completely ignore whats going on in the world and then tell you something you don't agree with on a topic that you don't feel is important then Sarah Palin is for you.
      She is incredibly vacuous, brings hebate a new meaning, has a anserine style and is perfectly phatic. Armed with the ability to ignore a question, the ability to wink, a beauty pageant background and a style of sentence construction which would land me a C- she managed to make sure that everything that was on her flashcard got said.
      Consider the following scenario, McCain wins, McCain dies, Palin is president, Russia starts to be more expansionist can you honestly tell me that you want a barbie doll, a women who would obtain an intellect hike from brain stem death to sit opposite Putin and negotiate for the USA. Sorry but based upon his past you need more than the fact you can view Russia from your kitchen, look cute, can wink and can put together 5 points from a card to make politics.
      • lowtolerance, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1OK....I've seen the word hebate twice in the forums tonight, and it's not an English word. I think what you meant to say is hebete. If you're going to use obscure words and talk about grades from your English teacher, at least spell them correctly.
    • jperson, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1I know, it would be nice to at least see more source variety. Yet, with the economy still dominating headlines, the effect of the VP debate is a wash for Palin. If she did anything, she energized the base. Big deal.
  • oldman, on 10/03/2008, -23/+84Palin did better than predictable from the past weeks interviews but added nothing new to the McCain candidacy. Rote repetitions of the standard McCain line is not necessary, and we all know (or anyone who looks below the Washington D.C. surface) that sometimes things get voted for as the lesser of evil bills. I doubt this changed any votes, but WTF palin hinting for more power??? What a douche!
    • tetsuo29, on 10/03/2008, -3/+23Did she do better? She appeared to do better but only because neither Biden or Ifill pressed her on any follow up questions. There were so many instances of her just avoiding the question or giving a smarmy one liner in response to the question and then diving off into one of her own little rehearsed diatribes. I think that if she had been pressed to actually answer most of the questions, that she would have come across as poorly or worse than she did with her press interviews. Sarah Palin, she's all style and no substance.
      • jason210, on 10/03/2008, -19/+1You thought either one of them sounded like anything but political hacks and windbags? you are more naive then she is.
      • LordVance, on 10/03/2008, -6/+1I'm actually with jason210 on this one; neither of them impressed me last night.
      • puzzud, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3I'm not saying Biden did poorly, but I was expecting to see him all fired up during this debate. That certainly was my expectation after his convention speech. I had been waiting for this debate because of it.

        I think after his tear jerking response about his family, he really put his soul into it. Then you started seeing him address things like Cheney and the idea of McCain as a "maverick"... those were honestly some of the best moments in the debate.
      • noen, on 10/03/2008, -7/+2Gwen Ifill did her best to make it as easy for Palin as possible. She is after all Condi Rice's lover.
    • brundlefly76, on 10/03/2008, -2/+22I think this was the perfect example of 'putting the lipstick on the pig'.

      Sarah Palin is the same frighteningly unqualified Sarah Palin we saw in the Gibson and Couric interviews - the difference was that a team of extremely professional and top-notch preparers crammed a litany of talking points down her throat, and to her credit, she crammed relatively well.

      But it was still clear she wasn't talking from her own knowledge and experience, but from script.

      This was best illustrated when she said she wouldn't answer questions posed by the moderator (!?) - that's because some of the questions she was not scripted to respond to. Also, a lot of her responses were on-topic script, but did not relate to what was being discussed specifically (this is common in politics, but in her case, it wasn't that she was professionally spinning, but instead 'inserting topical filler and hope she doesn't get called on it'.)

      I think anyone of reasonable intelligence and who is used to speaking in public could be cram-prepped for a vice-presidential debate and walk away without making a fool of themselves, which has nothing whatsoever to do with their being even a remotely qualified candidate.
      • Bith8654, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2Lemme rephrase that last sentence:

        I think anyone of reasonable intelligence and who is used to speaking un public could be cram-prepped for THE NEW "IMPROVED" vice-presidential debate and walk away without making a fool of themselves...

        Remember the McCain camp changed the rules in hopes of getting rid of any time for Biden to effectively call her out on being so scripted.
      • geekee, on 10/04/2008, -3/+1Barack Obama is the same frighteningly unqualified Barack Obama we saw claim Iram was a small country that wasn't a threat to the US.

        Palin did more than read off cue cards. She responded to comments made by Biden. Both were essentially reading off talking points, and both made many innacurate comments. Get over yourselves liberals, look at the inexperienced person you chose at the top of your ticket, no more qualified than Palin, and it shows.
    • geekwithsoul, on 10/03/2008, -1/+9Yeah, I really liked how she sought to distance herself and McCain from the current administration on the same night she said that she agreed with Dick Cheney about the powers of the V.P.
    • 3anthony, on 10/03/2008, -16/+1huffspam
    • darling, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3According to the CNN talk with the people generating that graph of theirs, of those, about 4 decided on Obama/Biden, while about 4 decided on McCain/Palin. So evidently, it did at least make up some peoples' minds. I don't think they went so far as to ask what it was about the debate that made their minds up.
    • bebopredux, on 10/03/2008, -11/+4"What a douche"

      How intellectual. Amazing how Liberals display their 2nd grade mentality with name calling and insults.

      But, when you can't debate, you get frustrated and shout obscenities. Fascinating.
      • flavanoid, on 10/03/2008, -1/+7@bebopredux

        Amazing how people without a decent argument make sweeping generalizations based on off-topic items
      • h0m3styl3, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal

        see- synonyms


        I love when the word liberal is spun in such a way that it becomes derogatory. I can only hope that I am more liberal in my political views.
    • friendsofpalin, on 10/03/2008, -0/+0ask palin your own question!

      www.askpalin.org
  • oxphantomxo, on 10/03/2008, -29/+121I was struck how he talked about the tragedy with his family, Then Palin started talking and my heart died a little.
    • obamacan, on 10/03/2008, -2/+8As did mine.
    • ShogunWarPig, on 10/03/2008, -43/+4He is a spectacular actor.
      • onwardknave, on 10/03/2008, -0/+16Call me crazy, but I'd expect someone to get emotional when their wife and daughter die in a car crash. You call it acting, I call it empathy. Whether he planned to use it shouldn't matter. He still spoke the truth about understanding what it's like to raise his kids as a single dad.
      • Dipsomaniac, on 10/03/2008, -0/+17McCain supporters are simply wondering why Biden didn't find a beer heiress to marry after the accident, that's all.
      • AverageJane2, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3Hmmm, so your saying he faked emotion while recalling the memory of his wife and infant daughter dying in a horrific car crash, while on their way to pick up a Christmas tree. Oh, then he's got two little boys that are seriously injured in that same crash -- but hey to you that's nothing right?

        And, because you seem so clueless I'll also point this out: he brought it up only because Palin put forth the argument that only SHE knew what it was like to struggle with a family and hardship.
    • TheAngryFatMan, on 10/03/2008, -7/+28And she's a cold hearted bitch.
      • cerajim, on 10/03/2008, -23/+5and your an angry fat man.
      • Manther, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5^^^^ BOOSH!
      • puzzud, on 10/03/2008, -0/+14Did you see her hold that damned smile even during the question and answer concerning what Biden would do if Obama died?

        There are things you have to put your fake smile away for, Palin!
      • chrispchiken, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2@cerajim I saw what you did there.
    • AndrewMoyer, on 10/03/2008, -1/+36He actually seemed to get a little choked up at that point...

      I would have.
    • jason210, on 10/03/2008, -34/+1hes such a hack.
    • mchristiansen, on 10/03/2008, -2/+40I cant imagine loosing my wife and a child.
      And she talks about her infant like he or she is a merit badge.
    • runCMD, on 10/03/2008, -22/+4Were you so easily distracted by the tears when they came from your other Democratic candidate for the nomination ? Or is it somehow different because of the subject matter or the person doing the crying ?
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -2/+16Lets see you talk about losing your wife and child, jackass.
      • runCMD, on 10/03/2008, -12/+3Good Grief Rivetgeek - that was pretty rude. I made no assertion that Senator Bidens tears weren't genuine. How did you react when the same set of real tears flowed down the face of your other Democratic leader ? Senator Clinton was accused to faking her tears - and called weak for demonstrating that she has a heart as well. Where did yours go ?
        edit: Nevermind. I've read your other posts and you have none to speak of. : )

      • appleofdischord, on 10/03/2008, -1/+10runCMD: Clinton's situation was totally different. This man is talking about losing his *family*. The difficulty of the campaign trail simply can't compare to that.
      • jperson, on 10/03/2008, -1/+6runCMD: Could you please try practicing some empathy for your fellow man? Your callous behavior explains why you had trouble empathizing for Biden's situation versus Clinton's.
      • runCMD, on 10/03/2008, -5/+2I have great empathy for Bidens loss. My heart bleeds for his suffering. I am compassionate to a fault - especially when I see an inner pain brings someone to tears. I just don't see why you rip one and praise the other. The causation is different, the emotion is different, but the result is the same -A welling up of tears. I don't criticize either of the democrats for expressing their emotions ... especially when neither of them would have chosen such a display if they could have avoided it. What I illuminate in my comment - is your collective reactions by comparison are less than admirable.
      • Andelstein, on 10/03/2008, -1/+8Because it's comparing apples and oranges.

        Crying because campaigning is hard vs crying because you lost your wife and child.

        Sorry, but there's a difference.
      • runCMD, on 10/03/2008, -3/+2ahh. Then perhaps a misunderstanding. She did not say she emoted because of hard campaigning. She emoted because of WHY she was campaigning - for us. For every under represented person that felt left out of the process - but never gave up. When asked where the source of her strength came from - that's what pulled out the water works. Obama Supporters and Republicans alike assumed it was because the campaign trail was too hard wahhhhhh. Waaaah. It was not. Watching her and watching Biden - I see no difference in the source of their tears - only the source of the pain is different. They are both caring people. It's WE who put them in little boxes and said one has more value than the other. ... or you do anyway :) I understood both instances perfectly.
      • loganro, on 10/03/2008, -5/+2runCMD, there is no use in trying to state your point. The Obama/Biden ass kissers on digg will spin anything to make it sound like they are always right about everything.
    • friendsofpalin, on 10/03/2008, -3/+0ask palin your own question!

      www.askpalin.org
  • lateralus13, on 10/03/2008, -26/+39it was a good debate
    • Kizilbash, on 10/03/2008, -12/+58It was not a debate at all.
    • obamacan, on 10/03/2008, -8/+10What it was good at, was showing one candidate was worthy of the job applied for, and one could memorize, 'act'.

      It can not be a DEBATE when one candidate is participating but the other only reciting. For that reason, I'm not quite sure what exactly it WAS that we witnessed last night. The Dark Horse was miles above the folksy teenager.
      • MHunt, on 10/03/2008, -5/+1I assume you're talking about Biden reciting, right? When asked about what he would do, he always turned it into what Obama would do. From the primaries, it's clear that Biden and Obama don't share too many views. Palin showed the country what SHE thought when allowed to. Joe never spoke how he felt, instead saying "Obama has this idea..." and "Obama has that idea...". If Obama is the only person on the ticket with viable ideas, and Biden has to take over, we have no idea what Biden would do (although he had opinions of his on during the primaries, and I think they were more viable). We have a good idea what Palin thinks. This was supposed to be a vp debate, not a show of who could recite what your running mate's opinion is.

        I'm not knocked out by either ticket. The problem I have with the Obama/Biden ticket is that Obama says he's going to bring change, but won't really offer specifics. Biden would essentially only say that Obama is going to bring change, and it will be different than Bush. So what? A lot of things are different than Bush. Some are good, some are bad. I'm currently a little worried about the prospect of Obama youth camps.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXABTmZP6oA

        http://www.bucksright.com/because-of-obama-im-insp ...



    • Gloony, on 10/03/2008, -4/+4To be frank; once again, as happens in everyday life in the US, Americans are being sold something they don't need that ultimately won't do what was advertised.

      I mean this with respect to all candidates. Times have moved on and the world has become more complicated. Politicians are no longer qualified to make the decisions we empower them to make, possibly it was a mistake to think they ever were.
    • sgtiger, on 10/03/2008, -1/+11"Here's a shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School, you get extra credit!"
    • verifex, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1I would say that it was an OK debate, good seems like much too strong of a word for what we witnessed. There were moments they shined, but they were quickly overshadowed by talking points and red-meat. For the most part no new information about them surfaced. Remember, the republicans negotiated a much more structured debate on behalf of Palin, so you didn't see such a free-form argument between the two candidates as you saw in the presidential debate.
    • jperson, on 10/03/2008, -1/+6Gwen Iliff didn't need to be there, really, since Palin decided it was okay to take the job on herself.
    • Funpolice2050, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2How do you debate a tape recorder?
  • WallaceFreeman, on 10/03/2008, -28/+172Sarah Palin aka maverick, did exactly what i expected her to do. she combined her talent of reiterating programed talking points which she did well with in the GOP convention and stumbling horribly over real time questions which she demonstrated with Katie Couric. She emphasized that she is a "normal" American who has a family with issues yet knows nothing about politics, the economy, foreign affairs, her own position as a VP, her candidates policies and in no ***** way should be running a country. She showed and admitted that she has only been in Washington for 3 weeks. Guess what hunny, WASHINGTON DC IS THE CAPITOL OF THE US AND YOUR RUNNING FOR THE SECOND HIGHEST POSITION.

    For a side note, for not knowing a lot about Biden, I was impressed. There certainly was no plagiarism in this speech. He was able to answer questions through good judgment and knowledge of Obama's policies as well as McCain's. It's a disgrace that he had to "debate" with a soccer/hockey mom for the potential position of leading the most powerful country in the world.

    Not to play the gender card but if Biden was Palin, Biden would be the laughing stock and intimidate downfall of Obama's campaign.
    • rightwingattila, on 10/03/2008, -45/+16Joe Biden aka 36 years of change, did exactly what i expected him to do. He combined his talent of lying and then LIED some more. How stupid must one be to become so brainwashed to want this joker as veep? And don't get me started on Mr. change/NO experience/community organizer NObama. He's the biggest joker of the bunch. What flavor kool-aid is it this week, FOOLS GOLD?
      • petron99, on 10/03/2008, -3/+19What exactly did he lie about? Show us these lies. I
      • SmartfulDodger, on 10/03/2008, -3/+8I'm curious too. I've been a Biden fan since 2005, and I have yet to see him lie. Do you have any facts to support your claim?
      • apackofmonkeys, on 10/03/2008, -8/+2@petron99,SmartfulDodger:
        This is a copy/paste from someone else:

        close but I think Palin gets the edge. For one thing Joe Biden had a littany of factual errors and misrepresentations including:

        1) ARTICLE 1 OF THE CONSTITUTION: While attempting to correct Palin, Biden said that Article 1 of the Constitution describes the powers of the executive branch. But Palin was correct. Article 1 is in fact a description of the powers of the legislative branch. It is amazing that a VP candidate and veteran Senator would not know this.

        2) BUDGET RESOLUTION: Biden said: McCain voted the same way on the Budget Resolution this year as Obama. Not True- On both votes March 14 and June 14, McCain voted No and Obama voted Yes.

        3) TAX INCREASE (on people making less than $42,000) Biden said: Under Obama people would pay no more than they did under Reagan. The top rate under Reagan was 28%. Under Clinton it was 39.5%. Obama wants to raise it to 39.5% so obviously they WILL be paying MORE under Obama’s plan.

        4) TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

        5) TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

        6) TAX INCREASES: Palin argued that Obama’s tax increase would hit small businesses with over $250,000 in REVENUES (true). Biden spun it to say that most small business OWNERS make less than $250,000 per year. The fact is America is filled with small business that have revenues in excess of $250,000 and who file their taxes using 1040’s and they will be hit hard by the Obama tax increase just as Palin claimed.

        7) TAXING HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely claimed that McCain will raise taxes on people’s health insurance coverage — they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this.

        OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska — she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it’s not a windfall profits tax.

        9) AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

        10) OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

        11) OIL PRODUCTION: Biden claimed it would take at least 10 years to get any oil from new production- Not true! Worse case scenario even those who oppose drilling concede that it would be more like 6 years and it would take a year or two in some instances.

        12) CLEAN COAL: Biden claimed his “clean coal” remarks were taken out of context but they weren’t “Joe Biden said just last week at a rally “We’re not supporting ‘clean coal.’ and went on to say “No coal plants here in America.” (Joe Biden, Remarks, Maumee, OH, 9/17/08)

        13) ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

        14) USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ: Biden said: The use of force resolution on Iraq was not a war resolution, an authorization for war. It was….and he voted for it. Even Hillary hasn’t tried to use that excuse.

        15) VOTE ON SUPPORTING THE TROOPS: Biden said, McCain voted same as Obama on funding the troops. Not True, Obama voted No, McCain voted Yes!

        16) AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

        17) BOSNIA: Biden said McCain opposed Clinton on Bosnia. NOT TRUE – he actually supported Clinton on Bosnia.

        18) REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation — he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

        19) BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”
      • crweaks23, on 10/03/2008, -3/+7Biden's lies?

        Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

        Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.

        Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.

        Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

        Also, Palin tried her hardest to look like a sweet, innocent, adoring female, starting with her "can I call you Joe?" comment, and it came across as incredibly insincere and fake. A+ performance for hamming it up for the camera though, I hear Days of Our Lives is hiring. Unfortunately, running the country doesn't come with stage directions and a script.
      • rightwingattila, on 10/03/2008, -5/+2@petron99 & SmartfulDodger: You two can't possibly be this dumb. Oh wait, you're supporting NObama, never mind...
      • SmartfulDodger, on 10/03/2008, -2/+7Rightwing - I stick to the facts, and so far, you haven't been able to provide anything to back up your allegation.

        Apackofmonkeys gave it a shot, but took some large liberties in his copy/pasting. For example, Article 1 of the Constitution discusses the Legislative Branch - which is crucial when defining the VP's role in Congress. When it comes to funding the troops, both Obama and McCain voted opposite on two bills. As was pointed out in the last debate, they're differences were on whether the bill should include a timetable for withdrawel - not whether funding the troops was necessary. If you read through his comment, you'll find spin on every issue Apackofmonkeys brings up.

        So Rightwing, why don't you try it again? Can you support your allegation, or are you just talking out of your ass?
      • rightwingattila, on 10/03/2008, -5/+2Here's a thought, stop getting all your "news" from Huff-Poop" and MSNBS! Even much of the MSM is reporting Biden's out right lies last night.

        JOE BIDEN’S 14 LIES TONIGHT

        1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

        2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say that specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

        3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

        4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

        5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

        6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

        7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

        8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.

        9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

        10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

        11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

        12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

        13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

        14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

        Now take the blinders off and do your own research. I'm not supporting nor voting for McCain!
      • SmartfulDodger, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5Okay Rightwing. I took the time to read your list....and was appalled! The majority of these "facts" you give are just plain wrong. The ones that are marginally correct are either out of context, dodge the main point, or focus on little issues while forgetting the much larger ones. I've corrected your list for you.



        1. TAX VOTE: The bill Palin brought up was a Budget and Appropriations bill, which was voted on

        2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Obama said he would sit down with leaders of other nations, including Iran, North Korea, etc. No one disputes this.

        3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden supported the most recent energy bill, which opens up off-shore drilling. McCain opposed this bill, because it also grants funding for alternative energy.

        4. TROOP FUNDING: This was covered in the first presidential debates - the issue was on a timeline, not on troop funding. Neither Obama, Biden, or McCain have opposed troop funding on its own accord.

        5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden's energy plan puts a priority on clean -coal.

        6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: Biden claimed McCain voted against alt, energy. McCain has voted against the most important alt, energy bill - The Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008 - 10 times.

        7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden never claimed McCain would raise taxes on benefits - he claimed McCain would begin taxing benefits. This is true.

        8. OIL TAXES: Biden never stated Palin supported windfall taxes in Alaska - he even gave her credit for fighting oil companies, and hoped her actions would have an effect on her running mate.

        9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: You forgot the second part of the quote from McKiernan. "But I think that has to be led, that tribal engagement, it has to be led by the Afghan government. I specifically tell my chain of command in ISAF [International Security Assistance Force, the name for NATO's mission in Afghanistan] that I don't want the military to be engaging the tribes to do that."

        10. REGULATION: Regulating Frannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the sub-prime lending. This is a straw-man argument. McCain has voted to deregulate industry repetitively.

        11. IRAQ: "When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war" - this proves nothing. McCain can still be dead wrong on the Iraq war - and is. Furthermore, Biden's claim was in the context of future actions.

        12. TAX INCREASES: "Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more." - Again, not true, and can be proven at Obama's website: www.barackobama.com/issues/economy

        13. BAILOUT: You must not have read the most recent bill that passed - all of Obama's clauses are present in the legislation.

        14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is correct in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan, as can also be proved on obama's website.
      • drinklord, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4The most important claim she made, on a substantive point, was regarding her claims about the Unitary Executive Theory (though she's certainly never heard of it) and the powers of the VP. Joe Biden correctly asserted his claims about what the VP does in the Senate based on Article I, which describes the legislative branch AND THE VP'S ROLE in this branch. It requires willful ignorance to call Senator Biden "wrong" about his position on Article I's articulation of the VP's legislative duties.
    • mikesoba, on 10/03/2008, -6/+65Yes, we want Biden for VP. Anyone who would vote for Palin shows incredible disregard for the welfare of this nation.
      • jason210, on 10/03/2008, -21/+4Biden is a hack. he would never ever get a presidential nomination because hes a scumbag. i guess though with dick cheney you want to keep the streak alive.
        Palins dumb, but so are most americans. it works.
      • evo8ftw, on 10/03/2008, -19/+1Ok comrade.
      • mikesoba, on 10/03/2008, -1/+11@Jason, he's running for VP - we already know he didn't make it as candidate for Pres (remember, he ran for that position already). And I see you're an American, so what's your point about being dumb - that backers of Palin are the nation's brightest?
    • saurabharya, on 10/03/2008, -2/+8i agree with you pal in my opinion palin should pass by the remaining tenure of her governorship in a peaceful manner she is just like a programmed robot who can't even utter what is programmed
    • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -17/+4Not to play the [race] card but if [McCain] was [Obama], [McCain] would be the laughing stock and intimidate downfall of [the Republican's chances of securing the presidency].
    • ssreject, on 10/03/2008, -2/+15WallaceFreeman hit the nail right on its head. Each time she tried to get all cute and folksy with the You Betchas and Darnits I was gritting my teeth. And enough of the "I'm a' Maverick too!" crap. Gag. Can you imagine Hillary up there going Ya Darn' Tootin' we're gonna change Washington, You Betcha! Hee-haw!" Has Bush really dumbed the general populace down that much??

      It would behoove us to learn more about Biden, for those that do not. It is worth the effort. He is really an admirable man. And the plagiarism accusation that was made years ago was the result of a misunderstanding.
      • NJank, on 10/03/2008, -2/+6"Has Bush really dumbed the general populace down that much??"

        with Bush the GOP finally realized that the general populace is already that dumb.
      • catdawg555, on 10/03/2008, -6/+0Yeah i can see ole Joe now on a diplomatic mission to Pakistan,as he meets the P.M. he say's "hey don't you run the 7-11 down the road from me where i get my slurpees?". Then an advisor whispers in his ear he looks mortified and say's "oh im sorry i ment the uh uh dotheads next door to you !my bad".
    • manda2, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2How many times did that woman say "maverick"? She has made women all over this country look bad. It just shows what we have to look forward to if the McCain/Palin administration are elected into office. It's just some more Bush *****!!!!!!
    • nemodomi, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1"intimidate"? Huh?!
    • AnalJustice, on 10/03/2008, -1/+0Although her performance has been less than stellar, it's unfair to simply label her debate tactics as pure memorization and that she understood nothing of what she said. All candidates do memorization on a certain level as it is a excellent method for enhancing both the consistency and fluency of your speech. Also, to declare that she didn't know what she was talking about is more than a stretch. I don't know how many people has had experience with this but it's incredibly difficult to pass of a good oral performance when you have no idea what your talking about. Unless your professor is the unbelievably clueless type, he/she will definitely recognize the faults in your analysis and overall performance in general.

      It's like you get 100% on a exam and the prof says he's going to give you 50% because he thinks you don't understand what you wrote. Right now, most people on Digg are playing the part of the professor. Honestly if you're just going to post one line comments like "Palin was obviously memorized the whole thing", that just defeats the whole purpose of having a debate in the first place.
    • LemonChicken, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1The fact is, if Madame Palin was Mr. Palin, she'd be getting slammed twice as hard.
    • hsth, on 10/04/2008, -0/+0If Biden was Palin, he'd be Dan Quayle. Or worse, he'd be this guy:

      http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/I/O/bush_m ...
  • Independentsam, on 10/03/2008, -15/+57For the most part, Palin did her job. Her response about Dick Cheney and her desire to increase the VP power will certainly cause a stir. Biden countered that well by citing the Constitution. Her calling the U.S. general "McClellan" was definitely a mistake, but not a huge one.

    What she was successful in doing was 1. Setting a foundation on which she will never do another interview that involves answering questions and 2. Giving momentum to McCain by not making a total fool of herself.

    Biden also did his job. He attacked McCain and did not appear condescending towards Palin.

    My two favorite parts. Palin's approval of Dick Cheney's interpretation of the Vice Presidency and Joe Biden's statement concerning the expense (to the United States) of three weeks of the war in Iraq being more than six and a half years in Afghanistan.

    There was also the brief gaffe when Palin stated "Leave McCain" before correcting herself.
    • shutaro, on 10/03/2008, -2/+39There was also the part where she insinuated that McCain's brilliant strategies won the Vietnam war (and thus would be useful in Afghanistan)... I got a chuckle out of that.
    • BedlamX, on 10/03/2008, -17/+6"Biden countered that well by citing the Constitution."

      Are you kidding me he gave as an answer the wrong Article of the Constitution. That isn't countering well.


      "concerning the expense (to the United States) of three weeks of the war in Iraq being more than six and a half years in Afghanistan."

      This is not true the amount spent in Afghanistan in the 6.5 years is 11.8 billion and the money spent in Iraq in 3 week is less than 8 billion. Seems minor but if your going to look in the camera and repeat your statement with conviction at least get the facts right.




      • gweedo767, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5Article 1 sets up who and what the Legislative branch is. Article 2 sets up the Executive branch. Saying that stating Article 1 didn't apply would be a stretch, but more accurately it is both articles that explain all the powers in this topic.
      • tikal2k, on 10/03/2008, -2/+3It's a difference of only seven days, seems minor when we're talking about scale differences in YEARS.
      • rednip, on 10/03/2008, -1/+10Biden -
        "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."

        From article 1 section 3:

        The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

        http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec3

        He wasn't talking about the definition of the Executive Branch, but the extent of the legislative powers assigned to the Vice President.
    • jason210, on 10/03/2008, -12/+3i liked when biden said gay marriage 10 times and seeming to support it, then him saying that he was against gay marriage.
      • puzzud, on 10/03/2008, -0/+7Actually, Biden was pretty clear about not supporting gay marriage (or rather, redefining the traditional sense of marriage... which, in my opinion, is still pretty weak).

        Biden was also pretty clear about being against the discrimination of gay couples.

        That is the distinction: gay couples... not legally married gay couples.
      • EtherGnat, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3"i liked when biden said gay marriage 10 times"

        Palin said "gay marriage", Ifill said "gay marriage, Biden never once uttered the phrase however. Feel free to check the transcript: http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debate ...

        What Biden did say is that he and Obama support same-sex benefits, which is their official position.
    • tikal2k, on 10/03/2008, -3/+14This political Paris Hilton has no business running for Vice President.
    • wherearemymeds, on 10/03/2008, -2/+1her entire spewfest was a gaffe.
  • busterpratt, on 10/03/2008, -18/+41I don't think she won but she didn't do too bad.
    She did well enough for the people who support her to claim she did well.
    I did notice she said a lot of words but really said nothing specific about anything. If the expectations weren't so low it would have been considered a loss.
    • KSUdesigner, on 10/03/2008, -2/+10She may have done well enough for the people who support her to claim she did well, but that's not really what she needed to do. I don't care how low the expectations were, the point of a debate is to convince uncommitted voters to vote for your ticket, and she definitely did not do that.
      • Larsonal777, on 10/03/2008, -7/+1says the guy so committed he has his head halfway up Obama's ass.
    • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -17/+3[Obama] did well enough for the people who support [him] to claim [he] did well. I did notice [he] said a lot of words but really said nothing specific about anything.
    • troyfoley, on 10/03/2008, -0/+10When your main strategy is to not look like a fool, you shouldn't be there.
      • Larsonal777, on 10/03/2008, -3/+1so what you're saying is all the politicians out there today need to be replaced
    • jperson, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8Arrrgh and that's what pisses me off! When, in a PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, should expectations be LOW??
  • techweenie, on 10/03/2008, -23/+13Palin will get a bounce because she didn't drool or go silent.
    As those who listened get some distance from the debate they will begin to realize they just heard a perky rendition of the same old phrases. Not once did she 'close the deal.' Biden missed a lot of opportunities, to close the deal though. She lost, but not by that much.
    • KSUdesigner, on 10/03/2008, -4/+10You had a point there until you tried to claim that Biden barely edged her out. Biden mopped the floor with her.
      • jason210, on 10/03/2008, -12/+1only in your mind because you are completly in the tank.
        thats ok. just don;t fool yourself into believing that everyone else thinks just like you.
        that debate was a tie.
      • jperson, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3In the tank. In the tank. I seriously hope that by November 4th the entire ***** country is in your tank so you can finally understand how your divisiveness damages the country you live in.
  • manyamile, on 10/03/2008, -28/+57Joe Biden carried the debate. Articulate , knowledgeable, assertive, well reasoned and well spoken, Biden made his points clearly and convincingly. He reminded me why his ticket is the better choice for the country. He showed me, without question that he would be an excellent and effective Vice president, an asset to an Obama administration and to the American people, and ready to serve as president if the need arose. After all the McCain/Palin histrionics and drama these past few weeks , I was glad to finally get to hear Biden
    • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -10/+4Clearly articulating a policy that makes no sense isn't exactly a breath of fresh air, not to mention the ridiculous number of outright lies by Biden during the debate.
      • SmartfulDodger, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6Can you expand on this claim? Most of the fact checking I've seen and read have so far found mistakes with Palin, rather than Biden. If you're going to call someone a liar, you need to be able to prove it.

        So Zachary, what can you show us?
      • crweaks23, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6Biden's lies?

        Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

        Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.

        Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.

        Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

        Also, Palin tried her hardest to look like a sweet, innocent, adoring female, starting with her "can I call you Joe?" comment, and it came across as incredibly insincere and fake. A+ performance for hamming it up for the camera though, I hear Days of Our Lives is hiring. Unfortunately, running the country doesn't come with stage directions and a script.

      • barnett25, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6I am a Republican, but it seems to me that in this election McCain is the one who's policies in many cases don't make sense.
        His health care policy is one that really worries me. Taxing employer paid benefits, and somehow ignoring state law to allow out of state health insurance. I would rather keep my health insurance that my state has required to provide a minimal level of coverage, something that would seemingly disappear under the McCain plan. We will see how much sense McCain's health care plan makes when the market is flooded with cheap, bad health insurance providers who are given a US Government carte blanch to ignore state law.

        Also his "no time limit" in Iraq.
        If we tell Iraq (a struggling democracy with lots of challenges ahead of it) that we will continue pumping billions of dollars into it (billions that Iraq therefore does not have to pay itself) with no time limit, how much effort do you think they will spend in getting themselves prepared to take care of their own business? Setting a time table forces the Iraqi government to plan for taking care of themselves. That makes more sense to me personally.
      • Larsonal777, on 10/03/2008, -3/+2@barnett... but telling them when we are leaving would mean they just hunker down and wait for us to leave. Think of this... you go into a bank robery... you suround them... you keep mooving in... taking out the robbers one by one... but then... then you say... if we don't get the rest of you within the next 2 hours... we are leaving and letting the bank security take over. Does that sound smart to you? But at least them security guards know they better get their ***** act together within the next 2 hours. No the way to make sure we don't keep pooring money in is to find a better way to motivate (not scare the ***** out of) JUST the allies... and not the terrorists.
      • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1@barnett25:

        You need to take a closer look at the health care proposal McCain is putting forth. The basic premise is that the tax credit given to employers for providing health care will be shifted to families who carry health insurance. Instead of providing health care benefits, employers would presumably pay employees more (and that money, as income, would be taxed; the taxes on that increased pay would be more than offset by the tax credit given to families). His proposal would also eliminate protections currently afforded health insurance companies and allow people to buy health insurance from any state.

        As Larsonal777 pointed out, the only type of withdrawal that makes sense is one dependent on conditions. You leave when the bank robbers have been killed or apprehended, not before. We will leave when Iraq can be stable without our help, not before.

        @SmartfulDodger:

        According to Biden, Obama never said he'd sit down with Ahmedinijad without preconditions. He did. Look up the freaking tape if you'd like. Biden was there when he said it.

        Biden said McCain would tax health insurance benefits, when in fact under McCain's plan employers aren't supposed to provide health benefits (extra pay is presumed). Yes that pay is taxed, but families that carry health insurance receive a tax credit that more than offsets the increased taxes. This equates to untaxed health insurance benefits.

        Biden said McCain weakened regulation for Fannie and Freddie when McCain supported increased regulation for both organizations.

        Biden said Obama wouldn't raise taxes one cent on Americans making less than $250,000. Obama's plan calls for letting the Bush tax cuts elapse and reducing taxes from those rates. This is effectively a tax increase on all Americans (other than the 40% who pay no federal taxes).

        Speaking of the 40% of Americans who pay no federal taxes, how can Obama decrease taxes for 95% of Americans when a full 40% pay no federal taxes?

        Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the
        four principles that Obama laid out despite the fact that it doesn't include an emergency economic stimulus package nor is it part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20. The economic rescue legislation thus met only two of Obama's four principles.

        Biden said he's always been for clean coal despite a record of voting against clean coal in the US Senate.

        These lies aren't minor or mistakes, they are outright and blatant lies which misrepresent the positions of all involved.

        @crweaks23

        McCain's health plan is, for all intents and purposes, budget neutral. If you shift tax credits from employers to employees, the plan will only cost the government more money if more families carry health insurance (isn't that the goal?).
      • EtherGnat, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2zacharytelschow: "McCain's health plan is, for all intents and purposes, budget neutral."

        Lies!

        FactCheck.org: "The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that McCain's plan, which at its peak would cover 5 million of the uninsured, would increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 10 years. Obama's plan, which would cover 34 million of the uninsured, would cost $1.6 trillion over that time period.

        The nonpartisan U.S. Budget Watch's fiscal voter guide estimates that McCain's tax credit would increase the deficit by somewhere between $288 billion to $364 billion by the year 2013, and that making employer health benefits taxable would bring in between $201 billion to $274 billion in revenue. That nets out to a shortfall of somewhere between $14 billion to $163 billion – for that year alone." http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecki ...

        "Biden said he's always been for clean coal despite a record of voting against clean coal in the US Senate."

        More lies. Would you care to share these votes with us? In fact Biden's own energy plan which he submitted has substantial support for clean coal, and he's consistently voted for the technology. http://biden.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BidenRecordE ...

        There are other problems with your claims, too, but I'm out of time.
      • zacharytelschow, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1You do realize you cite two sources on McCain's tax plan, and the numbers from the two conflict, don't you? The first says McCain's plan will cost $1.3 trillion (presumably during his presidency); the second says it will cost between $14 billion and $163 billion a year (or between $56 billion and $652 billion). Personally, I don't need a third party to perform common sense for me. If a tax plan shifts the credits from employers to employees, that plan will be tax neutral unless more people are covered (which is exactly the way the McCain plan would work).

        Biden, just a couple weeks ago. He seems to have a very clear position on coal: build plants if you have to build them, in China, and make them clean. No coal plants here in America. He didn't say that? Oh really? Watch him say it yourself.

        http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Biden_ ...
    • vtnerd, on 10/03/2008, -3/+1You lost me at "his ticket is the better choice for the country."

      Please explain why pretending to be the global police officer, stripping people of civil and personal liberties and bailing out irresponsible corporations are good for this country? Bush already does all 3 of those things and most of the country and practically the entire world hates him.

      You can then add Obama's unconstitutional work towards gutting the 2nd Amendment and his flip-flop on FISA/telecom immunity. And let's not forget all of the new spending that the taxpayers get to pay for as well (ie. Universal Healthcare).

      Now I don't like McCain either, but you're an Obama supporter so I won't tell you why McCain/Palin are bad news. My point is there are other choices that are immeasurably better than McCain/Palin or Obama/Biden.

      Moral of the story: Vote 3rd party or don't vote at all.
  • texasred54, on 10/03/2008, -32/+59She lost the debate. And, she lost the Mother of the Year Award. Will someone please intervene on the behalf
    of that infant. He is not a stage prop to pass around like a hot potato. He has special needs. Not just because
    of Down's Syndrome. Also because he is a premature baby. They cannot deal with overstimulation. I'm at the
    point of thinking that CPS should be called.
    • BECoole, on 10/03/2008, -14/+6"he is a premature baby. They cannot deal with overstimulation."

      Trig slept quite peacefully at the Convention during the speeches, just like any other baby would have.
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -2/+6oh well then, if the baseless assertion of random internet guy is that everything is fine, then that's good enough for me!
      • NJank, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4if the baseless assertion of random internet guy is that everything is not fine, then that's good enough for me!
    • shutaro, on 10/03/2008, -7/+16You're making the assumption that she's actually that baby's mother...
      • cerajim, on 10/03/2008, -13/+5Give me a break are you a complete idiot??? Her daughters? Who is 5 months pregnant herself? Do the math moron.
      • shutaro, on 10/03/2008, -13/+3@cerajim: FAIL! Would you like some more FAIL with your FAIL? Perhaps some fresh FAIL with a side of FAIL... Maybe some FAIL sauce on the side? Or a nice hot mug of FAIL... That would be lovely... FAIL!
    • AndrewMoyer, on 10/03/2008, -1/+11I'm not sure what kind of babies you are familiar with, BECoole, but some chicks brought two babies into "Eagle Eye" this weekend and they were screaming for half the movie. That's how the babies I know act.
    • mchristiansen, on 10/03/2008, -3/+24She holds that baby up like its a merit badge for the pro-life crowd.
      • greatbigbrain, on 10/03/2008, -2/+11it kinda is...
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -12/+4A screaming, drooling, pants-*****-for-life, retarded, merit badge
      • apackofmonkeys, on 10/03/2008, -1/+7@Rivetgeek:
        Wow, that anybody would digg up your intolerant, uncompassionate insult of the disabled makes me ashamed for this website.
      • Larsonal777, on 10/03/2008, -5/+3yeah... preliminary tests led doctors to believe my youngest brother might be born with down syndrome... the doctor basically came in and told my parents that abortion was the best option... I think my dad just about laid him out. And then months later my brother was born... perfectly healthy.

        people who think abortion is a convenience should be shot... for my convenience.
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1@apackofmonkeys

        Are you ***** stupid or just beat down with the liberal stick? That child IS retarded. That child WILL ***** his pants and scream. That child WILL live its entire life with the mental capacity of a 5 year old. Just because the truth is dirty doesn't mean it's not the truth. Take your PC ***** elsewhere.

        The fact of the matter is that she had no business getting pregnant at her age as the rate of down syndrome skyrockets past 35. What you SHOULD be mad about is the fact that she is using her child for political gain. Get your bleeding heart priorities straight.
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4@Larsonal777

        Either the doctors lied to your mother, your mother lied to you, or you are lying to us. Down's syndrome isn't some mystical nefarious thing. Its a birth defect caused by an extra chromosome (chromosome 21). It's extremely testable and we have had the ability to check it with 100% accuracy for 20 years.
      • cerajim, on 10/07/2008, -0/+0@Rivetgeek

        If only the doctors had lied to your parents and done what you suggest. Your a complete idiot.
    • troyfoley, on 10/03/2008, -3/+15CPS should be called for naming him "Trig".
      • omjeremy, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3Is Trig short for Trigger?
      • bringitdownnow, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2I think Trig is short for "will never comprehend Trigonometry."
      • timta2, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1My friends neighbor who was crack dealer was named "Trigger" and he said his friends called him "Trig" for short. My guess is that it is.
  • thepalineffect, on 10/03/2008, -67/+47Huffpo = automatic bury. You don't have to read the article to know it's crap when it's Huffpo.
    • tetsuo29, on 10/03/2008, -12/+14*****. There is plenty of well thought material on Huffington Post. They are like the anti-Fox. Yes, they are very pro-Democrat and very left. However, I think it has become apparent that the oft repeated joke actually has some substance to it, "Reality has a liberal bias."
    • Dipsomaniac, on 10/03/2008, -5/+7Here's the whining again. Show the problems with the article, rather than attacking the source.

      Or STFU, would you?
      • ChayesFSS, on 10/03/2008, -7/+5propaganda != news, I'm independent but only a total blinded sheep could stand to read the amount of hatred on huffo
      • flannerus, on 10/03/2008, -2/+4You're not independent Chayes because you sound cliche. Hahaha ***** I didn't even read the end, "hatred", baaaahahahaaa you soft little bastard. Go DO something in your ***** life if you think that a liberal blog/news website is hateful.
  • PuterPrsn, on 10/03/2008, -49/+32Amazing how everyone here seems to think she lost, while the international newspapers and pundits seem to think she won.
    • animalwheeler, on 10/03/2008, -47/+16Amazing how that works, huh?
      And the lib Obamabots say we Conservatives are the ones out of touch with reality...
    • Kizilbash, on 10/03/2008, -14/+47Really? Because the newspapers here say she lost.
    • InRussetShadows, on 10/03/2008, -30/+10Well you know how it goes. Pundits and the international press are just more props to be thrown under the bus when they're not nice little lapdogs.
    • absurdist, on 10/03/2008, -5/+20Yet again...

      [citation needed]
    • sweetbwaoy, on 10/03/2008, -7/+15Are they insane???? She didn't say ANYTHING! It was embarrassing to watch.
    • waxcrash, on 10/03/2008, -6/+24"…while the international newspapers and pundits seem to think she won."

      O RLY? Care to back up your comment with some facts?
    • sb66, on 10/03/2008, -4/+15I haven't seen that anywhere except for the Drudge poll. Links?
    • wendelgee2, on 10/03/2008, -7/+28Nobody's saying she won.
      Nobody.
      What she managed to do was not crap her pants on stage. Somehow, that's a victory. Keep reaching for the stars, America.
    • jason210, on 10/03/2008, -6/+10why do people listen to what the press thought? think for yourself. either way. did you watch it? what did you think?
    • yojiffyskippy, on 10/03/2008, -17/+4Don't let the Diggberals distort reality. Of course the Diggberals, HuffingtonCompost and KOS are going to say she lost. What else would they say? Obviously the best thing to do is watch it for yourself and make your own independent decision. If you missed it, I'm sure Fox News will be replaying it in it's entirety over and over.
      • flannerus, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4No, gee, it's probably the worst idea to watch it yourself and decide.
    • SwampAss, on 10/03/2008, -16/+4Just wait till McCain wins the election... they will be in Denial for the next 4 years as well.
    • jackdaniels, on 10/03/2008, -0/+18Some articles in the international newspapers about the debate:


      http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,5 ...
      "The first polls pointed to Biden as the clear winner of the debate."

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7647986.stm
      "Voter polls suggested Mr Biden had won but Mrs Palin did better than expected."

      http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-10/03/conte ...
      "U.S. Democratic senator Joe Biden won the vice presidential debate Thursday night with both candidates exceeding expectations, a poll released on Friday showed."

      http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/BFA559E ...

  • animalwheeler, on 10/03/2008, -29/+18Maybe I am missing something here.
    What is the deal with everyone saying "more of the same talking point" and "more of the same phrases"
    Isn't the point of the debate to talk about your campaign stances while rebutting those of the other candidate? Especially since the VP's support the Pres candidates stances?

    You know, back when debates actually meant something, the candidates had not been in every state 10 times before the debate came. Talking points were about the campaigns to stress what they are about, and let the people know. Is it any wonder so many people now think the debates are pretty useless anymore.
    And are the VP's not supposed to support the Pres Candidate they are running with? You really think they will come out with tons of new promises to undermine the campaign their partner has worked so long to establish?

    What did y'all expect, all new material?
    • Kizilbash, on 10/03/2008, -5/+18I guess we did not expect someone to just spout talking points without actually listening to questions or to whatever the other person was saying.

      Palin is a talking point rendering machine. Biden improvised. For that alone he deserves credit.
      • Rabbot, on 10/03/2008, -8/+3Can you quote either of those statements... instead of just running the mouth.

        I mean all I hear is you guys saying she just read off a cue card, and that he was some wizard with words but yet not one of you cite your information or a point in the debate when this happened...... You're like kids in Jr. high writing a paper on the election....

        Go home with your spin, you want Obama to win so your going to say the same talking points over and over again about Palin/McCain and Biden/Obama... Ironic....
    • MadKennyP, on 10/03/2008, -3/+14I expect an VP candidate to be able to answer the question presented. I understand the candidate is going to try to bring the discussion around to his or her strongest arguments, but refusing to answer a question or to take a question about health care and answer it based on energy policy is unacceptable.
    • KSUdesigner, on 10/03/2008, -2/+7Please tell me where you got this notion that people think the debates are useless. A hell of a lot of people watch these debates and finalize their decision on who to vote for based on the debates.

      Nobody is expecting them to come out with brand new promises in the debates, but they should at least answer the questions instead of ignoring the question and coming back to your talking points. At one point Palin said that she wasn't even going to answer the question that Biden or Ifill wanted her to, instead she went back to the same old point that she had already made at least 3 times previously. At one point Ifill actually cut her off because she just kept on regurgitating the same point. Yes Palin was past her time limit at that moment, but if she was trying to make a point that we hadn't already heard a dozen times previously in the 20 minutes prior Ifill would've let her continue.
      • irgeek, on 10/03/2008, -2/+3I would tend to agree that these days the debates have almost no impact on the election. Not because of the candidates, but because we have so watered down the debate format to the point that it isn't really a debate at all. Too many silly rules about what the candidates can and can't discuss, requiring the audience to maintain absolute silence, and a moderator who totally disrupts what should be the natural flow of a debate. I was a news junkie and one time huge fan of the debates. I fondly remember the debates during the primary/election season of 1987-1988 as those were both entertaining and truly informative. It's important to see how a candidate responds under pressure and how they respond when actually pressed on the issues. Seeing a candidate like Jack Kemp interrupt another candidate's ramblings and call *****, and then watch the other guy fall to pieces, unable to come up with facts to back up his ***** statements was golden. Kemp didn't win the nomination, but he sure weeded out a lot of the posers all because there was a time when we actually let the candidates debate one another.

        Can't say that's the point the original poster was trying to make about the 'useless' debates of today, but it's why I tend to agree with him. Never again do I expect to get to see another one of those great "You're no Jack Kennedy" moments and that's really a shame.
    • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2Without any other context around last night's debate, you'd have thought Obama and Biden were running against Bush.
      • timta2, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4From what I've gathered they are! Bush administration part 2 anyway!
      • MadKennyP, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Obama and Biden are running against the failed Republican policies, which McCain has promised to continue.
  • InRussetShadows, on 10/03/2008, -47/+29Huffpo = autobury
    • tjhawkin, on 10/03/2008, -14/+12AMEN BROTHER
    • calroot, on 10/03/2008, -4/+2InRussetShadows, tjhawkin, = Fake "Republican" Buffoons!
      • tjhawkin, on 10/03/2008, -2/+3Again with the Buffoon stuff.
        calroot = Big Dummy, yeah!
      • flannerus, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2Ahahah FAKE republicans, I'm sure. Us crazy liberals probably just ACTED like conservatives and said ***** that wasn't in line with your little chain of 6 brainwash comments in a row, right? Why don't you ***** get a biggg group account so you don't sound so redundant all the ***** time?
  • BECoole, on 10/03/2008, -36/+24Biden kept comparing McCain to Bush when the reality is that Obama's foreign policy is more like Bush's.

    Obama supports a surge in Afghanistan, like Bush.
    Obama supports unilaterally going in to Pakistan to hunt Terrs.
    Biden tonight said that they would seek to put a stable Gov't in Pakistan and invest billions in Pakistan's infrastructure. Wow! How do you think they could accomplish that? That's how they "reject the Bush Doctrine of preemption and regime change"?

    Biden even called for us to go into Darfur. Is he & Obama crazy? What did Sudan do to us? While he's rejecting Bush doctrine, what did Kosovo do to us?

    Another interesting point Biden made was that he supported going into Kosovo where "...they had been killing each other for a thousand years..." Not much more than three breaths earlier he criticized McCain saying "John McCain was saying the Sunnis and Shias got along with each other without reading the history of the last 700 years." as a reason to avoid intervention in Iraq!

    So Joe, tell me again why Kosovo was a good idea?
    • nace33, on 10/03/2008, -3/+8If there is any place in the world the US should be sticking it's nose, it is in Darfur, there is a genocide going on there.
      • BECoole, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2How quickly you forget the chemical warfare against the Kurds and the rape & torture rooms.
    • sweetbwaoy, on 10/03/2008, -7/+4Very good point.

      I have a hunch, however, that all of this pseudo-war mongering rhetoric that Biden was spewing about Darfur and Pakistan is just window dressing designed to cater to the voters who like to hear politicians say that sort of of thing. When it comes down to it on the day, I really don't believe Obama is going to send troops anywhere.

      The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq was based on total falsehood. The real reason was just to secure the pipeline in Afghanistan and build bases in Iraq. They just got lucky when it came to the fact that terrorists just happened to live there as well. Once Obama and Biden get briefed on this, they will act accordingly and either pull out completely or just let the whole thing whither away and die like it deserves to.
    • tetsuo29, on 10/03/2008, -4/+7I can't believe you're using a pic of Calvin for your icon. Calvin would grow up to be way smarter than you.

      Bush took our collective eye off the ball by ignoring Afghanistan.
      Obama does not support unilaterally taking out the existing government in Pakistan. You're using "going in to Pakistan" as if it means the same thing it did in "going into Iraq".

      Going into Darfur to stop genocide is not the same as invading Iraq and ousting a stable government. I can see that you're trying to equate the genocide in Darfur with the atrocities Sadam committed in Iraq. But, are they really the same? Were we stopping an ongoing genocide when we invaded Iraq? I don't think so. Biden's point was that by invading Iraq, we unleashed ethnic cleansing, i.e. we created the violence, not put and end to it.

      Same thing with Kosovo, we were stopping the violence, not starting it.

      So, to help you understand the difference:
      "going into Iraq" = us starting violence and ethnic cleansing
      "going into Pakistan" = us hunting down and killing Bin Laden and the Taliban (not regime change)
      "going into Darfur/Kosovo" = us stopping violence and genocide
      • BECoole, on 10/03/2008, -2/+3You, too have forgotten Sadam's ongoing campaign against the Kurds.

        And, yes, going into Pakistan does mean in the Iraq sense. Or probably in a way more prone to losing. Obama: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0 ...
        Biden last night:
        "And right now that resides in Pakistan, a stable government needs to be established. We need to support that democracy by helping them not only with their military but with their governance and their economic well-being.

        There have been 7,000 madrasses built along that border. We should be helping them build schools to compete for those hearts and minds of the people in the region so that we're actually able to take on terrorism"

        How do you build schools in an area that is openly at war against you? You kick their asses first. Sounds like war to me! And regime change.

        You Kos Kids are so deluded. Pity.
  • TCSavant, on 10/03/2008, -41/+22Both Sarah Palin and Barak Obama would make excellent vice presidents.
    • ketchupwfries, on 10/03/2008, -13/+17You, sir, are dumb.
    • bigfatphony19, on 10/03/2008, -4/+8Hahahahahaha
    • ProUSADigger, on 10/03/2008, -10/+9I actually agree completely with your comment. While Palin's executive experience would clearly make her the better VP than Obama, Obama would still be a good choice for VP because his President would be able to use his color as proof of his/her stance on diversity. And, Obama can "talk pertty" too, which is always good when the VP has to speak on the President's behalf.
      • cerajim, on 10/03/2008, -4/+4Talk pretty until his teleprompter goes out then he is a babbling fool.
      • shutaro, on 10/03/2008, -4/+3@cerajim: Sounds like someone hasn't had their morning glass of fresh squeezed FAIL yet. I hear it goes well with FAIL cakes, drenched in rich creamery FAIL. Personally, I've always been partial to golden fried FAIL. But, each must make their own FAIL choices...

        Oh yeah, FAIL!
      • ChayesFSS, on 10/03/2008, -3/+2Ron Paul/Biden would be a great ticket!
      • flannerus, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3"We all know what a good VP candidate is like because....."
        What the ***** are you people talking about? You don't know ***** (me included) because we're clearly NOT POLITICIANS. Don't tell me you know what it takes when you don't DO what it takes to get there yourself. A good candidate is one who supports us and we support. By the by, ProUSA, you're a piece of ***** in real life because you spend your time away from real life being a little peckerhead on an internet website. Cerajim, you don't know ***** about teleprompters, period. Everyone you watch on TV is reading. They've been doing it since TV was invented. You and I both have seen Obama speak without a teleprompter. If he were indeed a babbling fool then, it would be news. It's not in the news (even your "non-biased" "non-mainstream" Fox News *****), because you know as well as I do that if they had ANY dirt on Obama they would be all over that *****, period. "Comprehensive sex education, Bob, FOR KINDERGARTENERS!!!"; yeah that ***** stuck like wet glue.
      • ProUSADigger, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1Wow, flannerus. You have had a double shot of the koolaid, huh? Just re-read this for yourself:

        "If he were indeed a babbling fool then, it would be news.". It has been news. You only watch the liberal mainstream media, obviously.

        "you're a piece of ***** in real life". - Hilarous. I'm a business owner who is going to be raped by your babbling fool, Obama.

        "You don't know ***** (me included)" - So, you're not going to vote then, right? I mean, why would you if you don't know what makes a good President or VP.

        You're just a child having a little tantrum. Go take a nap, sweetheart
    • calroot, on 10/03/2008, -5/+3Hahahaha. TCSavant. You are a buffoon!
  • scot333, on 10/03/2008, -35/+39huffington post has a negative story about Palin? SHOCKING!
    • cybrguy, on 10/03/2008, -3/+5Yea, and WTF is with them saying

      "global warming (which she doesn't believe in, as she believes in creationism)"

      Huffington post writers need to get smacked on the side of the head now and then for letting their personal views effect their reporting so much. Its as bad is "Watermellon(Which Obama loves, because he is black)" Some people are dumb enough to believe either.

      • timta2, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2Well except that it had nothing to do with race. My bet is that you are a racist just from your comment alone.
    • MHunt, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4And in other news, the sky is blue, and water is wet.
  • 0260, on 10/03/2008, -26/+22I don't know... she was much better looking than that guy.
    • whahaa, on 10/03/2008, -7/+10her hair looked pretty.
      • Shiloah, on 10/03/2008, -11/+4Titties make me smile.
        TITTIES TITTIES TITTIES TITTIES TITTIES
      • catdawg555, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3Titties and Beer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • bigfatphony19, on 10/03/2008, -13/+67I think she repeated the 5 points she was forced to memorize quite well
  • ProUSADigger, on 10/03/2008, -35/+27October 3, 2008 - Huffingtonpost Marathon Day at Digg.

    Buried.

    I will digg up the first huffingtonpost article that accurately describes the Biden's many lies during the debate.
    • pos3000, on 10/03/2008, -12/+12The Huffington Post a bastion of journalistic integrity. *sarcasm*
    • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -7/+8He did have some doozies. I think my favorite was to the effect of "Obama will not raise any tax one cent for anyone making under $250,000/year." Maybe he was being sarcastic?
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -1/+8obama's plan is to raise taxes for the top 7% that's 300k a year or more. Everyone else gets their taxes lowered.
      • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5Let me explain this to you as simply as I can. Obama's plan:

        -Let Bush tax cuts expire.
        -Set taxes somewhere between Bush tax cuts and previous tax rates.
        -Claim lower taxes.

        Under that scenario, which is indeed Obama's plan, will your taxes be lower or higher? Assuming you pay taxes (unlike 40% of Americans) the answer should be quite obvious.

        Did you honestly believe Obama could lower taxes for 95% of Americans, give us "free" health care, stop global warming, create 5 million jobs in clean energy, and walk on water? The inability of people to think critically and examine positions is the only reason Obama has a chance to walk away as president.
      • timta2, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3"The inability of people to think critically and examine positions is the" is the only reason that Bush still has more than a 1% approval rating and candidates like John McCain and Sarah Palin can be running for office.
      • flannerus, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2Yes Zachary, I believe the answer to your final question is much better left unanswered by you. ProUSA cannot write an article himself, I assume. I've looked through all of your recent posts, kiddo; you've never suggested a single ***** thing that Huffington should actually talk about or change their message towards. A pro-Palin article is what you're suggesting I gather? If you could take the time, please just write SOMETHING for once that isn't simply a "***** this" equivalent; spell out why she's better than Biden, or McCain than Obama. Do a side-by-side comparison, not just one about Obama and what he "wants to do".
    • yojiffyskippy, on 10/03/2008, -4/+6Don't hold your breath waiting on accuracy from HuffingtonCompost.
    • ChayesFSS, on 10/03/2008, -2/+3Do you have any idea how long you'll be waiting???
  • shadowspawn, on 10/03/2008, -17/+60NUE-cue-LAR

    I never shouted at someone talking on a screen in my life before last night.

    I can forgive not understanding E=MC2, I just can't forgive mispronouncing a word on purpose.

    And we *KNOW ITS ON PURPOSE YOU STUPID BITCH*!
    • matu4251, on 10/03/2008, -5/+29I couldn't believe it either, it was like Bush prepared her for the debate!
    • eviljolly, on 10/03/2008, -5/+20I think that's part of being republican, you aren't allowed to pronounce nuclear correctly.

      You were not the only one frustrated hearing her say it that way.
    • Val451, on 10/03/2008, -4/+13I was gonna post about this mispronunciation 'til I ran across your post. I was wondering if this irritated anyone else. But you know what? George W has been pronouncing it the same for the past EIGHT YEARS!
    • ousthouse, on 10/03/2008, -19/+6Biden pronounced it the same way.
      • Shiloah, on 10/03/2008, -5/+20No, he did not.

        I heard Biden pronounce it correctly; you would have heard it too, if you were listening to his voice, and not to the voices in your head.
    • TSK05, on 10/03/2008, -16/+7Oh my god, she's from Alaska where their accents are a little different from the east coast. Holy *****, that's crazy - what idiot would vote for her?

      (I highly doubt you understand e=mc^2 beyond "it says energy is the equivalent of mass (with a constant of proportionality)").
      • Rivetgeek, on 10/03/2008, -2/+11accents change inflection, they dont add vowels. Are you retarded or something?
      • TSK05, on 10/03/2008, -6/+4Accents change pronunciations of words. Are you retarded or something?
    • yojiffyskippy, on 10/03/2008, -5/+3You might be focusing on the wrong thing. I'm just 'sayin'.
    • bluesman3535, on 10/03/2008, -0/+7I agree, no person remotely close to "the button' should pronounce the word 'nuclear' improperly. The last 8 years is at least a partial indicator of government illiteracy on many levels. Gifted to the American people are a Recession and 4 Wars--Afghanistan, Iraq, proxy war with Iran, and brand new Cold War with Russia. Obviously we need smarter people at the top, not ones that sound like hicks--the types that get all riled up about immigrants not knowing proper English.
      • aquafire, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2I don't think you would be saying this if your candidate of choice pronounced it "nucular". Really, who votes on the basis of a speech pattern? That's idiotic.
    • skmckinny, on 10/03/2008, -12/+4You mean, you cannot accept diversity of pronounciation unless it is Afrian-American English?
    • bebopredux, on 10/03/2008, -9/+3Biden mispronounced "Ahmadinejad".

      Does that make him a "Stupid Bitch" too?

      We should all show the class you exhibit here right? Yeah....right.
    • Thuktun, on 10/03/2008, -1/+6@bebopredux

      "Nuclear" is an English word that's been in use for over 150 years. Ahmadinejad has only been in the world news since the middle of the current decade.

      Which is lamer for an English-speaking American to mispronounce?

      Palin pronounced it wrong even after her teleprompter at the RNC spelled it "new-clear" to help her say it correctly. She should know how to say it correctly. One can only deduce she's sticking with it because it's folksy.
  • ChayesFSS, on 10/03/2008, -23/+13spam spam spam, arggghhh spam
  • skydivedan, on 10/03/2008, -28/+20Digg is the most biased site I've visited when it comes to any sort of political news. Every story on the front page is Pro Obama, and this site has never offered any support of McCain.

    Where did all the Republicans go?
    • kingofinternet, on 10/03/2008, -8/+21is the rest of the country biased when they give bush a 22% approval rating?

      get real
      • zacharytelschow, on 10/03/2008, -12/+9Almost as dismal as the approval rating of the Democrat-controlled Congress. You get real.
      • kingofinternet, on 10/03/2008, -5/+13i'm sure the terrible approval rating has nothing to do with the previous decade of republican control or the unprecedented use of filibusters by the republican party.

        you get real too
    • MrMysterious, on 10/03/2008, -6/+12They have better things to do than feed the digg machine and beat their own chests in supposed triumph.
      • skydivedan, on 10/03/2008, -3/+4Good Point. All the republicans have jobs and can't spend all day on DIGG.
      • Larsonal777, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2yeah... its not that hard to get a job in this country... unless of course you are spending all your time on digg... complaining about how you can't find a job.
    • absurdist, on 10/03/2008, -4/+11LGF with all the other racists and xenophobes.
    • crownedgriffin, on 10/03/2008, -3/+18I'm a registered Rupublican, but I hate McCain and Palin.
    • TSK05, on 10/03/2008, -10/+12We're still here, but there are barely enough of us to digg any truth up. Anything with even a hint of criticism about Obama or Biden gets instantly buried - despite Biden being the opposite of change, an architect of the drug war, against file sharing, against net neutrality. He has also worked to pass pro-RIAA legislation, bragged that he wrote a bill like the patriot act after the WTC bombing. Nor have we ever seen the story about Obama's grant to his campaign volunteers being under investigation or how he went to an elite prep school in Hawaii with a tuition of 16.5k a year since 5th grade and his grandmother (who paid for it) was a VP of a bank - somehow people still think he was middle class.
    • mijohnst, on 10/03/2008, -12/+8Agree...Digg is over run by liberalism... Every time I read something from one of these know-it-all types I automatically think of that character from South Park that represents PETA. I'M TOTALLY SERIAL!

    • mrshare, on 10/03/2008, -4/+10Where did all the Republicans here go?

      To Ron Paul.
    • potatonet, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5you think there are any republicans left after bush's reign of terror?

      give me a break...
  • Smaug52X, on 10/03/2008, -23/+12Believe this: Palin is an administrator, and has the skills to do all the paperwork that the VP's main job is.
    Biden is an old-boy type, who has cronies that caused the mess we are in. He will schlep and schmooze at his handlers commands. Palin knows she will make enemies, but she has a weapon. { and a lot of ammo}
    • Nidy1, on 10/03/2008, -3/+7Please. I don't want someone who can do paperwork. She may have to lead this nation if McCain is elected and he dies. She is NOT ready. Even my very Republican father admits she isn't ready after watching that debate. I won't even get started with "I'm not going to answer the questions and I don't care if you or the moderator like that."
      • loganro, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2"She is NOT ready" Obama doesn't have that much experience either douchebag.
      • Nidy1, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2He's been in the Senate and seen how it works. He's traveled and talked to leaders of different nations. When he speaks he has a command of his facts. I think we have different definitions of experience.
    • Shiloah, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5She wants to expand the role of the VP. Most people wonder whether she is even competent to hold the office at all. Her weapon is pointed at herself.
  • ousthouse, on 10/03/2008, -14/+34I'm no Palin fan - but I'm pretty certain that 95% of that article was written before the debate.
    • hcl40u, on 10/03/2008, -5/+4Well it shows just how predictable Palin was.
      • LemonChicken, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2I think it shows a little more than that.
  • AndrewMoyer, on 10/03/2008, -9/+48"Can I call you Joe?"

    I was SO hoping he'd respond saying, "Call me Senator Biden."
    • dw4prez, on 10/03/2008, -28/+8It was a powerful and intelligent move. By asking she made him and Glen decide to either call her by her title "Governor" or allow her to equally call him by first name. It's called diplomacy of the playing field. Leaders need that skill. I just wish Biden or Obama had it.

      • ljw5021, on 10/03/2008, -14/+3Now that you mention it that's very true. Biden already came off as not very personal and seemed to think he was better than everyone else, pausing only to unnecessarily reference his childhood and squirt a few fake tears. He used the word change in almost all of his answers even though this is Carter all over again.
      • omjeremy, on 10/03/2008, -2/+14I can't believe you're insinuating that Palin is better at diplomacy than Obama or Biden. Wow.
      • antibastard, on 10/03/2008, -0/+11Actually, you're wrong. The reason she asked to call him Joe is because she was hoping that he would in turn call her Sarah. Notice that he consistently called her Governor throughout and she eventually switched back to calling him Senator. The reason for this is if he had called her Sarah, people would have construed it as him being belittling or condescending to her, whereas her calling him Joe is just her being friendly. It's called reverse sexism.
      • RuSTeDs, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8"It's called diplomacy of the playing field" lmao.
        Its called being an assclown. Its a Vice Presidential debate for the country of United States of America, not a high school election debate.
        "CAN I CALL U JOE? LOL K"
  • piratearggghhh, on 10/03/2008, -7/+37Joe Biden defused any hockey-mom allusion she told by his genuine heart-felt story of his family's accident and being a single parent. That was her big selling point in connecting with the middle class but he not only took it away from her but showed incredible restraint and sensitivity. In the end, she was left with nothing but pathe