Biden's of-the-cuff remarks have tripped him up at times and that may be what they are concerned about with Palin as well. Even though I was very excited about her addition, I think that holding her back is hurting the perception viewers are getting.

I would like to see honest, off-the-cuff comments from EVERYONE but the press and the competition make too much hay on that stuff. President Reagan would slip at times, but I always got the impression he was being sincere, so it did not matter.

Neither Joe nor Sarah have to know everything about everything. Intelligent sincerity goes along way with me. I may not always agree with someone, but if I believe it is truly coming from the heart, I give it a LOT more consideration.

I tend to agree.

If a finite person starts out with sincere good will,he or she can apply basic common sense to study the matters in question,seek good counsel and make sound decisions without being an expert on everything from day one.

On the other hand,someone who lacks either the wisdom or the inclination to find out what he needs to know and implement appropriate action can ignore his tasks or leave them in the hands of people who aren't up to the responsibility.

An elected or appointed official must be able to delegate authority,listen to constructive advice and criticism and heed the will of the constituents.

Nonetheless,he is selected for his position based on the assumption that he will take responsibility for necessary actions himself.

He must make the ultimate decisions based on what is in the best interests of the people.

He cannot become a rubber-stamp-wielding android who parrots whatever sound-bytes have been scripted by whoever is crafting the agenda for a given week.

If an official has a good heart,there's a chance he will find good brains to supplement what he has to offer.

If he is shrewd or charming but lacks the means and the desire to serve the people,he is less likely to notice his deficiencies or find the right way to make up for what he lacks.

It's easier to gain information and skill sets than it is to acquire wisdom and integrity.

so, what makes obama prepared to be president? gov. palin is the vice-presidential candidate and obama is running for the big job. big, big difference. isn't it funny how hypocritically biased people can be?

-- Posted by DoubleJ on Thu, Oct 2, 2008, at 2:42 PM

LOL!

Sarah Palin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

Palin attended several colleges and universities. In 1982, she enrolled at Hawaii Pacific College but left after her first semester. She transferred to North Idaho community college, where she spent two semesters as a general studies major. From there, she transferred to the University of Idaho for two semesters.[11][12] During this time Palin won the Miss Wasilla Pageant beauty contest,[13][14] then finished third (second runner-up) in the Miss Alaska pageant,[15][16] at which she won a college scholarship and the "Miss Congeniality" award.[17] She then left the University of Idaho and attended Matanuska-Susitna community college in Alaska for one term. The next year she returned to the University of Idaho where she spent three semesters completing her Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism, graduating in 1987.[11][12]

In 1988, she worked as a sports reporter for KTUU-TV and KTVA-TV in Anchorage, Alaska,[18] and for the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman as a sports reporter.

Obama: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obam...

Obama moved to Los Angeles, where he studied at Occidental College for two years.[10] He then transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations.[11] Obama graduated with a B.A. from Columbia in 1983, then worked for a year at the Business International Corporation[12] and then at the New York Public Interest Research Group.

Obama entered Harvard Law School in late 1988. At the end of his first year, he was selected, based on his grades and a writing competition, as an editor of the Harvard Law Review.[19] In February 1990, in his second year, he was elected president of the Law Review, a full-time volunteer position functioning as editor-in-chief and supervising the Law Review's staff of eighty editors.[20] Obama's election as the first black president of the Law Review was widely reported and followed by several long, detailed profiles.[20] During his summers, he returned to Chicago where he worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley & Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990.[21] After graduating with a Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991, he returned to Chicago. Beginning in 1992, Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years, being first classified as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996, and then as a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004

No doubt that Governor Palin did not set a course early on for elected office. NOT being a lawyer does not bother me in the least. In fact, it is probably a plus in my mind.

I graduated with the same major and minor as Obama, but I do not see where that qualifies me any better than a person with intelligence, good common sense and strong integrity. Surrounded with similar people, great things can be done.

I too was disappointed by her faltering in the interviews and noticed her referring to her notes much more than she should have. Throw away the notes! Talk from the heart for both of them.

We need truth and sincerity more than fancy words properly place to make a point.

and most of his college records have not been released. kind of funny and very suspicious. by the way, that's a very elitist comment by you nathan. what's the point? that obama's supposed supreme education further prepares him to be president over gov. palin's preparation to be vice president. as a matter of fact, gov. palin represents many, many more americans and their lives. i'm more concerned with obama's shady, shady dealings over the years. his integrity and our ability to trust him is extremely important in my opinion. again, you're comparing the democrats' #1 to the republicans' #2. kind of ironic.

-- Posted by DoubleJ on Thu, Oct 2, 2008, at 3:33 PM

First of all I took your original semi-coherent question DoubleJ as wanting to know what makes Obama any more qualified than Palin. I answered your comment that way because that is what I was able to extract from the incomplete thoughts you posted. I apologize.

Second, I am sure Palin picked up some great tips on how to improve the sheen of her lip gloss on the beauty pageant circuit, but I don't think those skills are going to help her any tonight.

Third, Obama doesn't have to present any school records to prove that he earned everything that he has accomplished. I am pretty sure that being elected by his peers as president of the Harvard Law Review or graduating magna cum laude from Harvard says enough about what his grades look like and what those around him thought of him so I see nothing funny or suspicious here. Whether you lean far right or far left you cannot take anything away from his credentials when discussing Obama's education.

Do you have proof of shady dealings? Has he been indicted and charged with a crime?

You say I am elitist for implying that Obama's education makes him more qualified for the nation's top job. Does going out and working hard to accomplish ones dreams make them elitist? If you think so then their isn't something wrong with Obama, there is something wrong with you. No, I think either the fact that Obama is half black or half muslim tickles your fear and hatred bone a little and you just can't help yourself DoubleJ.

you couldn't be more wrong. it has 100% nothing to do with his race or ethnicity. i see you're playing the race card like obama. i'm not. that means zero to me. it is his experience or lack there of and his dealings with reverend wright, father fleiger, rezko, bill ayers...just to name a few. he doesn't have to be indicted or charged with a crime to turn me away. his radical, left-wing friends and dealings with the most liberal of our society combined with his 100% liberal voting record is plenty of enough for me. we need a solid independent-thinking president that will work with both parties to bring this country together. obama talks the talk, but mccain has walked the walk for years. he is much more ready to lead this country in my opinion. then again, if you're prepared to vote for an extreme liberal to take over, that is your right by all means. knock yourself out. that is what makes this country so great.

When we blindly follow, never bothering to verify, we doom ourselves to walk over the edge of the cliff, never seeing it. Granted McCain and Palin may not be great choices, but at least we can verify their politcal history. Biden we can laugh at as the goofy old uncle who does not know when TV was invented, but Obama? So much of what we know about him is smoke and mirrors. 200 million dollars of overseas contirbutions which are illegal, and the Election commision is not even investigating. Ties to American terroist Ayres, a preacher who damns America and labor organizers. And this is just a small part of his history. In four years if I am wrong I will humbly apologise for doubting Dear Leader Obama, if we are still allowed to express our views.

Watch out for that Hussein Obama, he's a terrorist, a radical, a cheater that never earned anything on his own. He is so far left, he is going to shred the Constitution and rewrite the Bill of Rights! Right now him and Bill Ayers are sitting in a Chicago neighborhood making plans to bomb John McCain's summer home, I just know it. And whoever payed for all his Harvard education has been planning on him being president for years and now the time is here! Not on my watch, buddy! And all those Muslims sending him money so that he can win the White House has got to stop. I know that if he wins we will all be praying towards Mecca three times a day. He doesn't say the Pledge of Allegiance you know? He hates America. His wife said so. Did I leave anything out or does that just about sum up every ludicrous fear that you have stated so far?

Just saw it on the evening news... Palin asked what is the worst thing Dick Cheney has done while in office. She says the duck hunting incident. LOL... God love her!

darrick_04 . . . tell that to the guy that Cheney shot. LOL!

Here is why I think Obama is not ready and Palin is... Someone commented about the fact that she doesn't know alot about the history in D.C. She does not know how things work. Obama is there and knows how things work. He is a Washington insider. She is a Washington outsider.Obama talks about all of the changes that we need and that there will be no more "business as usual" in Washington. Then he picks a running mate that has been a Senator longer than I have been alive! All Biden knows is "business as usual".At the same time, McCain has also been there a long time. The difference is that McCain has proven time and time again that he will step accross the isle and work with ant party. Obama can't say that. Palin is an outsider who will stand up for what is right, whether a Republican or a Democrat come up with it. There are alot of politicians in Washington who say Palin isn't qualified. What have those politicians done for us? For anyone who is interested, I am an Independant. I think the best thing we could do for our nation is to run every politician in D.C. out of there and fill it with business minded people. They set there and squabble over partisonship like children while our livelyhood is at stake! In Obama's defense, he does seem to care more than most politicians. He does have some good ideas. I just don't think he has the experience to put those ideas into place. My hope is that McCain will win and change the way politics is done. If that happens and it becomes the new status quo for "business as usual" , then there is no doubt in my mind that Obama may someday be a great President

darrick_04 . . . tell that to the guy that Cheney shot. LOL!

-- Posted by jaxspike on Thu, Oct 2, 2008, at 8:54 PM

In the words of Biden: 'Cheney is the most evil V.P. in history!'... Accurate? Most would believe so! And he also said the V.P. is most DEFINITELY part of the Executive Branch, and the only time it does ANYTHING like the Legislative Branch is a tie breaking vote, which rarely has to be done. Haha... Biden, gaffes and all, is a brilliant man. There is no way around that.

Biden calls a Republican an evil VP . . . big shock there. That is like Biden saying you cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent. I take much credence in what he says and I would be surprised if a Democrat did not criticize the opposing party. Granted, I am no fan of Cheney and will be glad to see him go but making an obvious comment that most of America knows does not make him brilliant.

But really, Palin held her own against Biden and many didn't she would. In fact, I tend to like her more during the debate than I did Biden because she seemed more connected with the average person (that Joe six pack comment though is a bit retarded though). Biden just came across as another stogy politician which we have seen enough already. The problem though is that neither Palin nor Biden said anything that really would change anyone's opinion . . . they pretty much staid true to party lines.

Giving shout outs in a debate to a 3rd grade class is a clear indication you are out of your league...

What did you like about her? The fact that she skirted around the questions, and continued to go back to Energy, which she claims is her expertise...? Btw, Alaska, the "energy producing state" has the highest price of gasoline in the nation, hmm...

She wasn't very good, having to continue to read her cards and she hardly even breathed when she began talking because the slightest deviation would certainly prove detrimental.

I see your poll, but every other major poll had Biden ahead by more than double digit numbers, because instead of saying "those leaders over there" like Sarah did on multiple occasions, he actually had a clue to who they were and why many are not good people.

By the way, I WANT an intelligent president next time. We have become desensitized in expecting someone who "we can relate to"... or someone we would most likely want to sit down and have a beer with.

Just a thought- most Americans have NO clue who our REAL threats are, what it takes to engage in legitimate diplomacy, what it takes to shore up confidence in the U.S. again, how to stabilize markets, or how to interpret secret intelligence. So, don't forget the person running as the President on the Republican ticket is one of the wealthiest men in Congress, owning more houses than he can remember, owning more cars than anyone needs, and more money in more banks than most Americans will EVER be fortunate to have. He cheated on his first wife after she became disfigured in the car accident, and his children didn't even want to attend his second wedding because of the fact. So, someone PLEASE tell me how that is more indicative of the average American. Most Americans will never be in beauty pageants or kill moose for fun.

nathan.evans,

you may think its funny that some people are afraid of obama, that just shows how brainwashed you are by the democratic party. there are alot of questions people have about him that will not get asked nor answered. he is a far left radical no matter how you paint it thats what he is.

i could care less if hes a muslim a buddhist or whatever. i would prefer a true christian as president, but thats just a preference.

darrick_04,

i have to agree 100%, sarah palin was chosen only to fill a void. i like her, and i think she is a refreshing change, but she is republican window dressing. her only purpose was to pull in voters that might have been on the fence about mccain. where i disagree is that i think the tactic worked. i know several people who are voting for mccain only because palin is on the ticket. i like her, but she is not qualified for the job yet. i would like to hear what she would have to say without all the coaching of the mccain camp though. i also thought she performed very well last nite and i would call the debate a draw.

I once heard someone say, "The dark, little secret about debates is that they are not that hard."

It makes sense to me that an interview is much harder than a debate. True, a debate is more watched at the time it happens. Although, I would bet that more people have seen the CBS interviews and Saturday Night Live skits than both debates combined.

During a debate you know the topics (Foreign Policy, Domestic Issues, National Security, etc.) and you can adequately prepare for such topics. If a question isn't asked exactly as you have prepared to answer, then dodge it and answer on your own turns. Obama did it, McCain did it, Biden did it, and so did Palin. Interviews can be much more devastating, and in a way more of a measuring stick towards one's true personality and beliefs. It can be easier to be caught off guard, or become relaxed and reveal your true character in an interview session that normally isn't live.

That said, both VP candidates did well, and the most striking thing to me from both debates so far is how far apart these two camps are on issues. There are some dramatic differences, and I think those differences were once again highlighted last night. Unfortunately, they were overshadowed by focusing on issues such as appearance and likability. The last time we elected a President based on emotions such as fear, likability, and 'folksiness' was in 2004.

I doubt this debate will have a real effect on voters except ones who have been looking for an excuse to not vote for Obama/Biden. The bailout and football will be front page all weekend, and then it will be time for the next Presidential debate.

Sarcasm

Pronunciation: \ˈsär-ˌka-zəm\

Function: noun

1: a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain

2 a: a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b: the use or language of sarcasm

jaxspike, you really believe Palin is middle class? If that is true, i'm freaking poor!

I dont think I said that did I?

Read what I said . . . she is closer to what I make than Biden.

Make sure and read the content before assuming anything.

WOO SAAA Jax, I was simply asking you a question, and not assuming you said anything.

And, Palin did say that last night, that is why I brought it up.

Speaking of salaries though, I personally don't believe any of them are hurting for anything.

By the way, I just had to buy a tire for my car like 10 minutes ago, and after looking at my bank account; it is confirmed. I am poor!

I will get back to you on the figures jaxspike, because I don't think Palin has made her income records public yet. The information below is available by searching Wikipedia for Joe Biden.

"With a net worth between $59,000 and $366,000, and almost no outside income or investment income, he is consistently ranked as one of the least wealthy members of the Senate. Biden states that he has been listed as the second poorest member in Congress, a distinction that he is not proud of, but attributes it to being elected early in his career."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

Okay I apologize. carry on

Biden makes $169,300 a year as congressman.

Plain makes $125,000 as Governor of Alaska.

Of course the McCains are worth more than Biden, Palin, and Obama combined.

Nathan, I find that figure to be startling. So much so, I want to yell at you and call you a liar. (j/k)

I don't know how much he makes, and if he is truly the public servant he says he is, then that net worth would reflect his claims.

Don't get me wrong, I said it earlier, I like Joe Biden. I'm just too stoic to accept that answer with absolute certainly.

I would think that he is worth more than that from just his pay on a yearly basis. I would much rather ask, 'How could a person hide money he makes while he's in office.'

I'm not claiming he is, but I'm not going to sit here either and be spoon fed.

But, as I said earlier, this is not the important question; nor is McCain's finances or Obama's, or Palin's.

But since we all love talking about who said what and then rush to a fact check website, I'll share this with you. I remember watching a movie (I know, I'm quoting movies now!) when I was a teenager and one line stuck out to me that I've thought about every time I watched a politician. I think it fits very well in this election.

'I know the difference between a man who cares about what I believe in, and lies about it to get elected, and a man that, well, just doesn't give a..... And, I'll take the liar.'

Biden played it safe, and Palin stuck with the RNC talking points to avoid screwing up badly. Overall, it was pretty boring, which benefits Obama since is he already ahead in the polls.

Biden did a good job of comparing Mccain to Bush. Palin's only defense was that he is looking into the past instead of the future, or "but he's a maverick". That's not going to cut it. She needed to explain how there is any difference between Mccain's policies and the policies of George W. Bush. She couldn't answer that. Maybe because there is no difference.

Below is a preview of your comment. If you are satisfied, press the Save button at the bottom to finish posting your comment. If you wish to correct something, use your browser's Back button to return to the previous page.

Jax, I'm sorry, but I have to say I think the average person would have been hurt more by the bailout not passing. I know it stinks, and I know it makes so many people mad, including me, but I think the flip side would have been much darker.

Another paper - can I mention another publication here? - ran a nice cartoon about it this week. A tax payer was being force to accept the bailout bill and his only comments where, 'Can I afford to accept this?' and 'Can I afford not to accept this?'

Mike_10,

Sorry but I have to disagree, I think the Bailout is a huge mistake. I don't mind suffering for several years as long as I know that the companies will not do it again. This Bailout will last for 4 decades and it will never be paid off ever. Well, get used to living like a third world country because within 5 years, that is what America will be.

I agree Evil Monkey . . . this doesn't resolve the core issue of why we got into this mess to begin with and in fact it seems to encourage this lack of responsibility people have for their decisions and actions whether it be a greedy CEO, mortgage lenders, or a homeowner that bought a house he knew he couldn't afford to begin with.

Time may prove you both right, but I can't help to feel 'afraid' of doing nothing.

This situation makes me feel like, 'If you don't feed the beast, the beast will get hungry and eat me.'

I didn't say it will solve the problem, but I do think it will help people like us maintain our way of life longer. The bailout is simply a stop gap that was a necessary evil.

There will have to be major changes to our structure of government, the way we run our economy, tax our citizen's, and (God help me for saying this out loud) distribute the wealth of our nation for things to be 'fixed'. I don't think the word fixed is a good term to use there either.

Thing will simply have to be different. The problem is not the bailout, it is the absolute refusal of people on both sides of the line to reach out and try other ideas - other ways to run our country. Accepting something different, that might have been frowned on in the past doesn't make you Un-American. It makes you willing to save something you cherish regardless of past ideology.

People say socialism's death bell tolled when the Soviet Union collapsed, but will we look back in 10, 20, 50 years and say this was the day Capitalism died, or began to die?

I don't know the answer to how to solve this issue, and I doubt anyone else alive today knows for sure either. That's a fair statement. Predicting the future is not a science, it's not even a formula that should be used to approach a problem. But, looking back and seeing what not to do is a step in the right direction.

I believe this is what we are seeing today with this bailout. It solves nothing, but similar interventions have helped before.

It stops the bleeding for another day. Bleeding that I believe you underestimate towards the suffering that it would have caused you if nothing was done.

If you knew me, you would laugh at this post from me. I've been accused of being an anarchist in my lifetime more than once, and seeing the bailout not pass would please me more than anyone, if I truly held that set of beliefs. I don't. I'm just an average person who believes that if something wasn't done now, that I would be the first of the heard to be picked off when the dust settled.

And, it's okay to disagree. How else would we learn?

BTW . . . did anyone see the clip of Bill O'Reilly yelling at Barney Frank on this issue. I really dont like O'Reilly but I do agree with his point in this video.

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

I thought his head was going to explode but many Americans are mad about this situation.

-- Posted by jaxspike on Fri, Oct 3, 2008, at 2:54 PM

jaxspike,

That was a very good video clip. O'Reilly rightfully knows that Barney Frank is almost the #3 horse to take blame for the runaway mortgage wagon although the wagon had a Willie Wonka sticker on it.

So Gov. Sarah Palin can speak spontaneously in complete and coherent sentences.

Let's judge her, then, as we would a presumptively seasoned and competent political leader. By that standard, on issues of foreign policy, she was outgunned by Sen. Joe Biden at every turn.

And more than Sen. Barack Obama, who could have answered some of Sen. John McCain's charges more forcefully in last week's debate, Biden made no effort to muffle his fire. When Palin called Obama's plan for a phased withdrawal from Iraq "a white flag of surrender," Biden shot back that the plan was identical to the policy of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

When Palin repeated her charge that Obama was "beyond naive" in calling for negotiating with adversaries "without preconditions," Biden explained what the phrase meant, then noted that it was supported not just by the five former secretaries of state who recently co-authored an endorsement of the idea but by our allies, with whom Palin had just said we needed to work together.

When Palin recited McCain's line about applying the principles of the Iraqi surge to Afghanistan, Biden (correctly) noted that the U.S. commanding general in Afghanistan has said the surge wouldn't work there. (By the way, it does not bother me at all that Palin referred to Gen. Dave McKiernan as "Gen. McClellan." We all make mistakes like that now and then.)

Finally, when Biden said the Bush administration's foreign policy has been an "abject failure," and proceeded to list the many ways in which that was so, Palin's only reply was to smile and say, "Enough playing the blame game." If Obama and Biden talk so much about change, she added (as if this were really a clever point), why do they spend so much time looking backward?

To which Biden replied, with uncharacteristic pith, "Past is prologue." And so it is. At another point, he noted, "Facts matter." And so they do.

More to the point, he noted that McCain has never explained how his policies would differ from Bush's on Iran, Lebanon, Pakistan, or Iraq. In other words, even if Palin is right that 2009 is Year Zero, what would she and her No. 1 do differently? She didn't answer the question, any more than McCain ever has, perhaps because there is no answer.

When Biden was asked what line he would draw in deciding whether to intervene in other countries militarily, he cited two criteria: whether we had the capacity to make a difference and whether the countries in question were committing genocide or harboring terrorists--in which case, he said, they would have forfeited the rights of sovereignty.

Palin replied merely by hailing John McCain as a man "who knows how to win a war, who's been there." (McCain has said this about himself as well several times, though, with all due respect for his military record, where's the proof of this claim? What wars has he won, and what did he do there?)

One might disagree with Biden's criteria of intervention as excessively expansive, but at least it's an arguable position. Palin's reply was a cliché. That sums up her performance as a whole.

http://www.slate.com/id/2201510/