The VP Debate; Is Palin Up to the Job ???

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
<font size="6"><center>
Is Palin up to the job? </font size><font size="5">

298-11web-CAMPAIGN-PALIN.major_story_img.prod_affiliate.91.jpg



VP debate may be her last chance to show it</font size></center>




McClatchy Newspapers
By David Lightman
Wednesday, October 1, 2008


WASHINGTON — Sarah Palin faces a huge problem in Thursday night's vice presidential debate: She's in danger of becoming a national punch line.

As a result, the Republican's 90-minute debate with Democratic rival Joe Biden could be her last big chance to persuade voters that she's got what it takes to run the country.

"She has a lot to prove," said James Riddlesperger, a professor of political science at Texas Christian University, "and this is a real opportunity for her to do so."

Biden also faces some risks. "He's like the champion getting into the ring with Rocky Balboa. He can't appear to be a bully," said vice presidential scholar Timothy Walch. The longtime Delaware senator also has a history of putting his foot in his mouth, and a gaffe while debating Palin could cost him.

The debate, though, is largely about Palin, the Alaska governor who was barely known in the lower 48 until John McCain put her on the ticket just before last month's Republican convention.

She was an instant hit, at least with Republicans, charming the GOP convention with her plainspoken, frontier woman ways and her solid conservative credentials.

Since then, however, the nation has seen another Palin: Carefully managed, kept under wraps, often scripted and seemingly out of her depth. A poll released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center reported, "opinions about Sarah Palin have become increasingly negative."

The Sept. 27-29 survey found that 51 percent of the public thinks she's not qualified to be president, and 37 percent think she is qualified. Just after the GOP convention last month, some 52 percent thought she was ready.

Worse, Palin has become the butt of late night jokes.

Saturday Night Live comedian Tina Fey's dead-on impression of Palin has parodied her as a rambling, perky celebrity unfamiliar with the day's biggest issues.

Experts say Palin has done too little to overcome that image. Her interviews last week with CBS' Katie Couric have been widely ridiculed. Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker led the charge. Palin's TV interviews, she wrote, "revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who is Clearly Out of Her League."

Parker urged Palin to leave the race, imploring her to "Do it for your country."

Couric asked Palin what she thought about the $700 billion Wall Street rescue package pending before Congress.

Palin's reply: "But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the — oh, it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is part of that."

Pundit jaws also dropped when Palin — who got her first passport last year — talked about foreign policy.

"As (Russian leader Vladimir) Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where do they go?" she asked on CBS. "It's Alaska . . . It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state."

However, Biden, a U.S. senator since 1973, knows that he has to be careful to avoid looking like a Washington know-it-all. "It could be very difficult for him to escape looking condescending," said Riddlesperger.

Biden also is gaffe-prone. Last week he told CBS that, "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened.' ''

The stock market crashed in 1929 and Roosevelt didn't become president until 1933. And when FDR spoke to the nation, it was on radio because television wasn't available yet.

"His critics are going to be looking for something like that," Riddlesperger said.

McCain strategists have tried to show that she's comfortable in the big leagues. She visited the United Nations last week and met with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, former secretary of state Henry Kissinger and others.

But she still has to endure jokes. David Letterman said that when McCain and Palin are together it seems like "Take Your Daughter to Work Day."

"When you become a punch line, you've got a problem," said Wayne Lesperance, a political science professor at New Hampshire's New England College. "She has to come across as serious, studied."

Palin has been practicing for the debate at McCain's Sedona, Ariz. ranch, with campaign officials standing in for Biden. Biden has been in Wilmington, Del., with Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm playing Palin in their mock debates.

One wrong word or convoluted sentence by either candidate will be replayed over and over by the media and on the Internet, and could become the frame by which the debate is most remembered.

Speaking at a rally Monday in Columbus, Ohio, Palin said she was looking forward to Thursday's debate.

"So I guess it's my turn now," she said. "And I do look forward to Thursday night. I look forward to seeing him, too. I've never met him before, but I've been hearin' about his Senate speeches since I was in, like, second grade. He's sounding pretty doggone confident like he's going to win . . . .This is the same Senator Biden who said the other day that the University of Delaware would trounce the Ohio State Buckeyes."

Actually, the two schools don't play each other in football.

Several attendees at the Columbus rally stood behind Palin.

"I think she fine. She's got as much experience as Obama, and he's trying to be president," said Roger Beloat, 66. "He (McCain) can't make a change — that would show indecision. I wish the other side would make a change."

For all the expectations about Thursday night's showdown, vice presidential debates rarely affect elections, even if they sometimes make for compelling theater.

In 1988, for instance, Democratic vice presidential nominee Lloyd Bentsen delivered the put-down line that made the debate memorable when he coldly told Republican Dan Quayle, "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy." Five weeks later, Quayle's ticket, topped by George H. W. Bush, won the election easily.

Lesperance of New England College argued that in close races, vice presidential debates can matter. The 1976 clash between Democrat Walter Mondale and Republican Bob Dole was often viewed as an important boost for the Democrats.

Dole railed against "Democrat wars" as Democratic nominee Mondale remained calm and statesmanlike, adding gravitas to the ticket topped by still largely unknown Jimmy Carter.

"If this race is close, the vice presidential debate matters," said Lesperance.

That's why the stakes are so high for Palin. Biden is a known quantity.

"If she's credible, she's been successful," said Walch. But he warned that the public wouldn't judge her by Thursday's performance alone. "The outcome could depend on how this plays on Saturday Night Live this week."

(William Douglas contributed to this story.)



http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/53332.html
 
<font size="5"><center>Biden, Palin compete
for middle-class champion role</font size></center>



276-vp_debate_365.major_story_img.prod_affiliate.91.jpg



McClatchy Newspapers
By David Lightman
Thursday, October 2, 2008


ST. LOUIS, Mo. — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin painted herself as a plain-spoken middle-class champion while Joe Biden blended a common touch with deep experience, as the two vice presidential nominees clashed over Iraq, the economy and other key issues in Thursday's debate.

Palin peppered her responses with "darn right" and "I'll betcha" and at one point a wink to the audience, while Biden debated among more traditional lines, offering point by point descriptions of where he and Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama stood.

Nowhere was the disagreement sharper than it was over Iraq. Both Palin and Biden have sons in or headed to Iraq, but they offered vividly different views of the conflict.

"We cannot afford to lose there or we're going to be no better off in the war in Afghanistan, either. We have got to win in Iraq," Palin said.

Biden fought back, saying that "Barack Obama's offered a clear plan — shift responsibility to the Iraqis over the next 16 months. Draw down our combat troops." Obama would withdraw one to two brigades a month.

Palin called that plan a "white flag of surrender," and recalled that Biden originally was for the war in Iraq. Biden voted to give President Bush broad authority to wage war in 2002, but has since been a leading critic of the way the administration has conducted the war.

"Oh, man," Palin said, "it's so obvious that I'm a Washington outsider and someone just not used to the way you guys operate...you're one who says, you know, as so many politicians do, 'I was for it before I was against it,' or vice versa."

That clash was typical of the 90-minute debate. At the outset, Biden described how Democrats want to help homeowners and financial institutions reeling from the nation's credit crisis by listing "basic criteria" an Obama White House would follow.

"You have to focus on homeowners and folks on Main Street . . . you have to treat the taxpayers like investors in this case."

Palin gave a folksy response.

"Go to a kid's soccer game on Saturday," said the mother of five, "and turn to any parent there on the sideline and ask them, 'How are you feeling about the economy?

"And I'll betcha you're going to hear some fear in that parent's voice," she said.

Biden countered such talk with common-man touches of his own, saying that he too knew what it was like to sit around a kitchen table with his family. He mentioned having been a single dad after his first wife was killed in a car crash, and choked up as he said it.

Biden concentrated on tying McCain to the record of the Bush administration, while Palin fashioned herself and McCain as middle-class champions who'd bring change to Washington.

"You ask anybody . . . whether or not the economy or foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years," Biden said, "and whether John McCain differs. . . . The people in my neighborhood, they get it. . . . They've been getting the short end of the stick."

"Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures," said Palin, referring to the two mortgage giants that last month were seized by the federal government.

"People in the Senate . . . didn't want to listen to him and wouldn't go toward that reform that was needed then."

After Palin repeatedly referred to herself and McCain as "mavericks," Biden responded sharply, insisting that McCain has never been a maverick "on things that matter to people's lives. . . . So maverick he is not on things that matter to people at that kitchen table."

Biden said he'd worked with senators across the partisan divide — "It's fair to say that I have almost as many friends on the Republican side of the aisle as I do on the Democratic side of the aisle," he said — in trying to craft solutions in 35 years in the Senate.

It's McCain, said Biden, who's out of touch. A few weeks ago, Biden recalled, McCain declared that the fundamentals of the American economy were strong. Hours later, he said it was in crisis.

"He was talking to and he was talking about the American work force," said Palin, who then winked at the audience. "And the American work force is the greatest in this world with the ingenuity and the work ethic that is just entrenched in our workforce. That's a positive, that's encouragement, and that's what John McCain meant."

Palin insisted that Obama had voted 94 times for tax increases.

"The charge is absolutely not true," Biden said. "Using the standard that the governor uses, John McCain voted 477 times to raise taxes. It's a bogus standard."

They fought over energy, as Palin charged that Obama's vote for a comprehensive energy bill wound up giving tax breaks to big oil. Biden countered that McCain's tax cuts would benefit Exxon-Mobil and rich CEOs.

Palin got feisty. "You know what I had to do in the state of Alaska?" she said. "I had to take on those oil companies and tell them, no, you know, any of the greed there has been kind of instrumental, I guess, in their mode of operation. That wasn't going to happen in my state."

Biden chuckled. "Barack Obama voted for an energy bill because, for the first time, it had real support for alternative energy," he said.

Biden talked toughest on foreign policy. A surge of additional troops like the one in Iraq won't work in Afghanistan, he said, an opinion shared by the top U.S. military commanders in the region.

"John continues to tell us that the central war in the front on terror is Iraq," Biden said. "I promise you, if an attack comes in the homeland, it's going to come as our security services have said . . . from al Qaida planning in the hills of Afghanistan and Pakistan."

That's why, particularly in Pakistan, he said, "a stable government needs to be established."

Palin agreed that dangers lurk in many places, including Pakistan, but coolly told Biden that it was Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, as well as al-Qaeda leaders, who said Iraq is the "central (front in the) war on terror."

They also disagreed on Afghanistan. "The surge principles, not the exact strategy, but the surge principles, that have worked in Iraq need to be implemented in Afghanistan also," Palin said.

Not so, Biden said.

"Our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan," he said. "Not Joe Biden — our commanding general in Afghanistan."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/53408.html
 
She was entirely too glib during the debate but that's what I was expecting. I found it extremely annoying and inappropriate. She had her eyes on her notes 90 percent of the time so she would keep parroting her talking points. I'm sure white folks with a non critical eye loved it. Another champion of mediocrity.
 
Re: <<video>> Vice Presidential Debate

<IFRAME SRC="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/index.html" WIDTH=780 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/index.html">link</A>

</IFRAME>
 
She was entirely too glib ....

I disagree. Gov. Palin did exactly what she had to do - demonstrate that she is able to stick to a script while under pressure.

Her handlers are breathing a lot easier now; the Republican party as a whole is relieved to know that Gov. Palin can make a puppet government look good.
 
Just give it a few days. She will be caught off guard w/o notes and she will trip all over herself again and again.
 
Just give it a few days. She will be caught off guard w/o notes and she will trip all over herself again and again.

^^^Basically. What she showed tonight is that she is capable of parroting talking points when coached and given time for it to be drilled in, but what she also showed is that she severely lacks detailed knowledge of the issues. Whenever she got stuck she just repeated the talking points but there was a clear lack on knowledge when compared to the answers Biden gave.
 
My answer is not just no but HELL NO. I could give a shit about how well she could regurgitate talking points. I was interested in hearing her opinions in her own voice.

What I heard in her own voice was a constant barrage of "you bet-chas'!" Fuck that.

What do YOU think about a particular issue and how did you get there? What careful and insightful thought did you put into arriving at how you think about Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and American policy foreign and domestic?

Begin with, "as I go around America", or, "the people in my state was impacted by this supreme court ruling" or "I argued with Washington when they wanted to force an unfunded mandate on the people of Alaska" something??

Show me how you gave a damn about the state in your charge. But she spoke in the language of the far right and you never heard shit from her.

Damn telling me a bunch of campaign crap you think will make me vote for you. I wanted to hear her thoughts in her own voice and I didn't hear that.

None of what she had to say came as a result of any of her own personal involvement in the body politic let alone national issues. She swung almost every question to her talking points, shit she NEVER said when Katie Couric asked her. She didn't say shit then because she didn't know shit then. But 2 days later she can lecture Biden on American foreign policy? When people now say she is ready and is the architect of her answers tonight are some of the most easily amused among us.

-VG
 
VG,

Like building a bridge to nowhere, building one "too-low" results in the same thing: uselessness. The one to no-where couldn't take us to a real place; and the one built too-low didn't force Sarah Palin to take us to the real Sarah Palin.

The low expectation that was built around Sarah meant the bar was set so low that Sarah could nevevr be challenged in the manner that any other person on a national ticket, would be. Hence, as you said, the "You Betcha's" and a few winks and not stumbling over the talking points (while it was clear she retreated to same each time she was near-challenged) allowed her to clear the low bar, the low bridge, the low expectancy -- without having to show us what Sarah's independent thoughts might be.

MODERATOR'S FAILURE: The debate moderator missed golden opportunity after golden opportunity to ask follow up questions of both Biden and Palen. Perhaps, it was her style to just ask the questions and let them go. Perhaps, she was affected by the Republican mid-week attacks that she couldn't be fair and should be removed.

Whatever. I don't recall a single follow-up question that could and should have moved the debate away from regurgitation. In the meantime, we'll see if Team McCain has enough confidence in her now to take down media wall around her.

QueEx
 
Palin's Debate Coach - Secret that Saved Sarah!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TUfWwMgoHoI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TUfWwMgoHoI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
''original post on main & sol'':cool:
 
Re: Sarah Palin Debate Flow Chart

<IFRAME SRC="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html" WIDTH=780 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html">link</A>

</IFRAME>
 
FactChecking Biden-Palin Debate


October 3, 2008
The candidates were not 100 percent accurate. To say the least.
Summary

Biden and Palin debated, and both mangled some facts.
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.
Biden wrongly claimed that McCain “voted the exact same way” as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it. Biden was referring to an amendment that didn't address taxes at that income level.
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.

Biden wrongly claimed that McCain had said "he wouldn't even sit down" with the government of Spain. Actually, McCain didn't reject a meeting, but simply refused to commit himself one way or the other during an interview.
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.
For full details on these misstatements, and on additional factual disputes and dubious claims, please read on to the Analysis section.
Analysis
Vice presidential candidates Joe Biden and Sarah Palin met for their one and only debate Oct. 2 in St. Louis, Missouri. The event was broadcast nationally. Gwen Ifill of PBS was the debate moderator.

We noted the following:

Palin Trips Up on Troop Levels

Palin got her numbers wrong on troop levels when she said "and with the surge that has worked, we're now down to pre-surge numbers in Iraq."

The surge was announced in January 2007, at which point there were 132,000 troops in Iraq, according to the Brookings Institute Iraq Index. As of September 2008, that number was 146,000. President Bush recently announced that another 8,000 would be coming home by February of next year. But even then, there still would be 6,000 more troops in Iraq than there were when the surge began.

Palin's False Tax Claims

Palin repeated a false claim about Barack Obama's tax proposal:
Palin: Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year for those families making only $42,000 a year. That's a lot of middle income average American families to increase taxes on them. I think that is the way to kill jobs and to continue to harm our economy.
Obama did not in fact vote to increase taxes on "families" making as little as $42,000 per year. What Obama actually voted for was a budget resolution that called for returning the 25 percent tax bracket to its pre-Bush tax cut level of 28 percent. That could have affected an individual with no children making as little as $42,000. But a couple would have had to earn $83,000 to be affected and a family of four at least $90,000. The resolution would not have raised taxes on its own, without additional legislation, and, as we've noted before, there is no such tax increase in Obama's tax plan. (The vote took place on March 14 of this year, not last year as Palin said.)

Palin also repeated the exaggeration that Obama voted 94 times to increase taxes. That number includes seven votes that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on corporations or affluent individuals; 23 votes that were against tax cuts; and 17 that came on just 7 different bills. She also claimed that Biden and Obama voted for "the largest tax increase in history." Palin is referring here to the Democrats' 2008 budget proposal, which would indeed have resulted in about $217 billion in higher taxes over two years. That's a significant increase. But measured as a percentage of the nation's economic output, or gross domestic product, the yardstick that most economists prefer, the 2008 budget proposal would have been the third-largest since 1968, and it's not even in the top 10 since 1940.

Biden's False Defense


Biden denied that Obama supported increasing taxes for families making $42,000 a year – but then falsely claimed that McCain had cast an identical vote.
Biden: Barack Obama did not vote to raise taxes. The vote she's referring to, John McCain voted the exact same way. It was a budget procedural vote. John McCain voted the same way. It did not raise taxes.

Biden was correct only to the extent that the resolution Obama supported would not by itself have increased taxes; it was a vote on a budget resolution that set revenue and spending targets. But he's wrong to say McCain voted the same way. The Obama campaign attempted to justify Biden's remark by pointing to a different vote, on a Senate amendment, that took place March 13. The amendment passed 99-1, with only Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold dissenting. It would have preserved some of Bush's tax cuts for lower-income people. The vote on the budget resolution in question, however, came in the wee hours of March 14 and was a mostly party-line tally, 51-44, with Obama in favor and McCain not voting.

Palin's Health Care Hooey

Palin claimed that McCain's health care plan would be "budget-neutral," costing the government nothing.
Palin: He's proposing a $5,000 tax credit for families so that they can get out there and they can purchase their own health care coverage. That's a smart thing to do. That's budget neutral. That doesn't cost the government anything ... a $5,000 health care credit through our income tax, that's budget neutral.

The McCain campaign hasn't released an estimate of how much the plan would cost, but independent experts contradict Palin's claim of a cost-free program.

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.

Palin also said that Obama’s plan would be "universal government run" health care and that health care would be "taken over by the feds." That's not the case at all. As we’ve said before, Obama’s plan would not replace or remove private insurance, or require people to enroll in a public plan. It would increase the offerings of publicly funded health care.

McCain in Spain?

Biden said that McCain had refused to meet with the government of Spain,
but McCain made no such definite statement.
Biden: The last point I'll make, John McCain said as recently as a couple of weeks ago he wouldn't even sit down with the government of Spain, a NATO ally that has troops in Afghanistan with us now. I find that incredible.
In a September 17 interview on Radio Caracol Miami, McCain appeared confused when asked whether he would meet with President Zapatero of Spain. He responded that "I would be willing to meet with those leaders who are our friends and want to work with us in a cooperative fashion," but then started talking about leaders in Latin America. He did not commit to meeting with Zapatero, but it wasn't clear he'd understood the question.

But the McCain campaign denied that their candidate was confused.
According to our colleagues at PolitiFact.com, campaign adviser Randy Scheunemann e-mailed CNN and the Washington Post the next day, saying that McCain's reluctance to commit to a meeting with Zapatero was a policy decision.
Scheunemann, September 2008: The questioner asked several times about Senator McCain's willingness to meet Zapatero — and id'd him in the question so there is no doubt Senator McCain knew exactly to whom the question referred. Senator McCain refused to commit to a White House meeting with President Zapatero in this interview.
That's not a refusal to meet with Zapatero, as Biden said. It's simply a refusal to commit himself one way or the other.

Palin's Small Business Balderdash

Palin repeated a falsehood that the McCain campaign has peddled, off and on, for some time:
Palin: But when you talk about Barack's plan to tax increase affecting only those making $250,000 a year or more, you're forgetting millions of small businesses that are going to fit into that category. So they're going to be the ones paying higher taxes thus resulting in fewer jobs being created and less productivity.
As we reported June 23, it's simply untrue that "millions" of small business owners will pay higher federal income taxes under Obama's proposal. According to an analysis by the independent Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, several hundred thousand small business owners, at most, would have incomes high enough to be affected by the higher rates on income, capital gains and dividends that Obama proposes. That counts as "small business owners" even those who merely have some sideline income from such endeavors as freelance writing, speaking or running rental properties, and who get the bulk of their income from employment elsewhere.
Defense Disagreements

Biden and Palin got into a tussle about military recommendations in Afghanistan:
Biden: The fact is that our commanding general in Afghanistan said today that a surge – the surge principles used in Iraq will not – well, let me say this again now – our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan, not Joe Biden, our commanding general in Afghanistan. He said we need more troops. We need government-building. We need to spend more money on the infrastructure in Afghanistan.

Palin: Well, first, McClellan did not say definitively the surge principles would not work in Afghanistan. Certainly, accounting for different conditions in that different country and conditions are certainly different. We have NATO allies helping us for one, and even the geographic differences are huge but the counterinsurgency principles could work in Afghanistan. McClellan didn't say anything opposite of that. The counterinsurgency strategy going into Afghanistan, clearing, holding, rebuilding, the civil society and the infrastructure can work in Afghanistan.

Point Biden. To start, Palin got newly appointed Gen. David D. McKiernan's name wrong when she called him McClellan. And, more important, Gen. McKiernan clearly did say that surge principles would not work in Afghanistan. As the Washington Post reported:
Washington Post: "The word I don't use for Afghanistan is 'surge,' " McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a "sustained commitment" to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution.
However, it is worth noting that McKiernan also said that Afghanistan would need an infusion of American troops "as quickly as possible."

Killing Afghan Civilians?

Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called "reckless" and "untrue."
Palin: Now, Barack Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air-raiding villages and killing civilians. And such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment, again, hurts our cause.
Obama did say that troops in Afghanistan were killing civilians. Here’s the whole quote, from a campaign stop in New Hampshire:
Obama (August 2007): We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.
The Associated Press fact-checked this one, and found that in fact U.S troops were killing more civilians at the time than insurgents: "As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can’t be attributed to one party." Afghan President Hamid Karzai had expressed concern about these civilian killings, a concern President Bush said he shared.

Whether Obama said that this was "all we're doing" is debatable. He said that we need to have enough troops so that we're "not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians," but did not say that troops are doing nothing else.

Out of Context?

Biden claimed a comment he made about "clean coal" was taken out of context:
Biden: My record for 25 years has supported clean coal technology. A comment made in a rope line was taken out of context. I was talking about exporting that technology to China so when they burn their dirty coal, it won't be as dirty, it will be clean.
Was it really taken out of context? Here’s the full exchange, which took place while Biden was shaking hands with voters along a rope line in Ohio.
Woman: Wind and solar are flourishing here in Ohio, why are you supporting clean coal?
Biden: We’re not supporting clean coal. Guess what? China’s building two every week, two dirty coal plants, and it’s polluting the United States. It’s causing people to die.
Obama-Biden campaign spokesman David Wade later said that “Biden’s point is that China is building coal plants with outdated technology every day, and the United States needs to lead by developing clean coal technologies.”

Whatever Biden meant or didn’t mean to say on the rope line, he has supported clean coal in the past. When the McCain camp used this one remark from Biden as the basis for a TV ad saying that Obama-Biden oppose clean coal, we said the claim was false. Obama’s position in favor of clean coal has been clear, and pushing for the technology has been part of his energy policy.

McCain in the Vanguard of Mortgage Reform?

Palin said that McCain had sounded the alarm on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago.
Palin: We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain's call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse.
Palin is referring to a bill that would have increased oversight on Fannie and Freddie. In our recent article about assigning blame for the crisis, we found that by the time McCain added his name to the bill as a cosponsor, the collapse was well underway. Home prices began falling only two months later. Our colleagues at PolitiFact also questioned this claim.

And There's More...

A few other misleads of note:
Palin said, "We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries" for imported oil, repeating an outdated figure often used by McCain. At oil prices current as of Sept. 30, imports are running at a rate of about $493 billion per year.

Biden claimed that McCain said in a magazine article that he wanted to deregulate the health care industry as the banking industry had been. That’s taking McCain’s words out of context. As we’ve said before, he was talking specifically about his proposal to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines.

Biden said five times that McCain's tax plan would give oil companies a "$4 billion tax cut." As we’ve noted previously, McCain’s plan would cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent — for ALL corporations, not just oil companies. Biden uses a Democratic think tank's estimate for what the rate change is worth to the five largest U.S. oil companies.

Palin threw out an old canard when she criticized Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill and said, “that’s what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks.” It’s a false attack Sen. Hillary Clinton used against Obama in the primary, and McCain himself has hurled. It’s true that the bill gave some tax breaks to oil companies, but it also took away others. And according to the Congressional Research Service, the bill created a slight net increase in taxes for the oil industry.

Biden said that Iraq had an "$80 billion surplus." The country was once projected to have as much as a $79 billion surplus, but no more. The Iraqis have $29 billion in the bank, and could have $47 billion to $59 billion by the end of the year, as we noted when Obama used the incorrect figure. A $21 billion supplemental spending bill, passed by the Iraqi legislature in August, knocked down the old projection.

Biden said four times that McCain had voted 20 times against funding alternative energy. However, in analyzing the Obama campaign's list of votes after the first presidential debate, we found the number was actually 11. In the other instances the Obama-Biden campaign cites, McCain voted not against alternative energy but against mandatory use of alternative energy, or he voted in favor of allowing exemptions from these mandates.
 
Back
Top