I can’t recall who said it, but it was someone involved in politics, obviously, who said, "The nominees for vice president are only influential or relevant at three specific times: at the announcement of their being selected, at their acceptance speach, and in their debate." Sarah Palin made a huge splash at the first two of those events. Biden made no splash at either of those two events. No matter the outcome of the debate, Sarah Palin has already been more relevant and influential than Biden had ever hoped to be.
I believe that if scored by points, as in a boxing match, Biden probably tallied a higher score for jabs and fakes, but never really threw or landed a solid punch. He was all blow with no go. His basic platform and the premises supporting it were 100% fantasy. But, if scored on style and charm, as in figure skating, Palin scored more points for grace, elegance, authenticity, and all around impression. Her basic tone was one of common sense, practical solutions, and an empathetic understanding of the American citizen.
Overall, I’d conclude that neither of them won a victory, Biden suffered defeat through his reassertion that all the lies of the Democrats were true and Republicans are to blame for everyting wrong, and that the Democrats have the only real solutions for America’s woes. Palin did not score a win because, for whatever reason, she did not explain the basic ideological differences between the two parties represented and the different results each political doctrine would produce. She had a perfect chance to paint the democrats as socialists and the republicans as freedom fighters. Instead, the two debaters jabbed, faked, and feigned their way to a non-decisive generality of the same-old-same-old and of a non-seasoned apprenticeship.
SPECIFICS
Biden blames the current mortgage industry situation on the failed policies of the Bush administration and McCain’s and republican’s consisitent voting for more and more de-regulation. Palin did not attempt to place the culpability where it belongs in the laps of the democratically created HUD, Community Redevelopment Act, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and with Janet Reno’s mandates to lenders to relax earnings limits and increase leveraging. Instead Palin advocated even stonger regulation of the greed on Wall Street.
Biden claimed that McCain voted not to fund our troops abroad. McCain and a majority of the Senate voted against that funding bill because it mandated a timeline for troop withdrawal. By voting that bill down they forced the Senate to pass a no timeline bill that included 100% of the funds requested for war funding. Palin explained that the timeline was why McCain voted against the bill but did not explain that McCain voted for a second bill with no timeline.
Biden stated that McCain has the same plan for ending the Iraq war as Bush. He claims it is flawed because there is no plan for the withdrawal of troops. Palin did not explain that a timeline would essentially tell the enemy how long he had to resupply, recruit replacements, and how long to wait before they could re-enter Iraq without US resistance. She failed to explain that the plan for withdrawal depends, not on time, but on completion of certain milestones already established. She failed to point out that the commanding general dictates strategy and mission objectives and will dictate when troop strength can be reduced. Biden stated Obama’s plan would have us out of Iraq in 16 months. He did not say whether we would win or lose the war. He did not say how our pull out would effect the people and government of Iraq and neither did Palin.
Biden listed the elements of Obama’s economic plan for America such as health care, college funding, childcare subsidies, subsidies to create green jobs, subsidies to promote development of alternative energy, increased taxes on excessive corporate profit, taxcuts for the middle class, etc., but never mentioned the defense budget. He claimed that ending the war in Iraq would return $10 billion per month to the treasury. He nor Obama see defense as the primary responsibility of the federal government but all the entitlements above and existing as necessary spending. Palin did not attempt to explain that their plan was full of government interference and entitlements nor the fact that defense is the primary reason for the federal government.
Biden claimed that McCain represents more of the same failed Bush policies. Palin did not attempt to explain the few successes of the Bush economic policy, nor did she aatempt to place the blame for the economic woes on the real culprits. She admitted "huge bungling" of the Iraq war and economic plan by Bush and offered a general statement about the McCain policy of putting American’s first and fighting for middle class America.
Biden referred to Palin’s restructuring of royalty payments to Alaska by oil producers as a windfall profit tax imposed by Gov. Palin. Palin did not attempt to explain that these payments by the oil companies are not a tax but are royalties negotiated and agreed upon by the oil companies as payment to Alaska for the oil they remove from the state. Palin renegotiated for a higher selling price and succeeded with no complaints from any oil company executive. There is no tax on oil companies in any state except the state in which they are incorporated.
Palin, to her credit, did dispute a few of Biden’s rebuttals to her account of Biden’s voting record and statements of policy which ran counter to Biden’s claims. Without saying as much, she made a liar of Biden by expressing the historic validity of her claims and saying he held those beliefs right up until he became the VP nominee. But, time after time she failed to take the initiative and offer specific, meaningful conservative solutions in accordance with the Constitution and, instead, whether by a lack of knowledge or by a lack of commitment to conservative ideals, offered only vague, tempting allusions to putting government back into the hands of America, putting government back on the side of the people, and promising major reforms to end corruption in Washington. All of which great conservative concepts, but all very vague, safe generalities too. She did say that they would get government out of the way of the people and lower taxes, but every opportunity to reaffirm details of the why and how behind the conservative beliefs in smaller government, less regulation of the market, and leading from a position of power, or to delineate the why and how of failed liberal social policies was left unexploited to my disappointment. Likewise, the opportunities to press home the real reasons for the present economic situation, the dangers in Obama’s foreign and defense policies, the lack of consistentency in Obama’s position on any subject, Obama’s lack of patriotism, his radical anti-American associates and background, and the socialistic roots of his vision for America were all either forfeited or not recognized as the chances they were.
Palin came across as "just one of us plain folks" who knew the everyday worries, hopes, fears, and frustrations that no rich politicians or lawyers will ever know. She is the only one of the four candidates who is not a typical politician or a Washington insider. She is the only one who represents a real, authentic, change in the personality of candidates running for office. She exuded sincerity and authenticity: what you see is what you get.
Overall, in the minds of American’s who know the true political history of the past seventy years, in the minds of true believers in the Constitution as the ultimate law of the land, in the minds of cognizant, intelligent Americans, Biden proved himself to be all that the Democrats espouse to be: lying, cheating, opportunistic elitists who claim to have a better plan for America than the Constitution assures and will do or say anything at anytime to further his chance of succeeding in the socialization of America. Palin did not take advantage of that euphamistic confession by Biden to emphasize the differences in conservative and liberal ideology and the failures of liberal social policies in action. She missed a chance to use Biden’s own words to expose him, the Democratic party, and especially Obama as the Marxist socialist enemies of the Constitution that they are. She missed the chance to embrace the constitutional foundation of America’s greatness and exceptionality in the world and thereby inspire conservatives who have felt, and rightly so, dis-enfranchised by every party. Whether this apparent moderation in her expression of conservatism was planned or was a revelation of less than true conservative values I cannot say, but I was not particularly impressed by her performance in the debate, instead finding myself somewhat disappointed that she didn’t seem to be all that we thought she was five weeks ago, appearing, instead, to be playing it safe.
But, then again, this might be explained by her inexperience in government. Afterall, she IS a relative newcomer to politics, is obviously still quite overwhelmed at being selected, and she has not had the chance to sit back, ponder her situation, and just let it all soak in. She also is probably unaware of the extent to which she has raised the hopes of conservative Republicans for a leader with her magnetic attributes and down to Earth common sense. It is possible that the Sarah Palin we saw in the debate is only a foreshadowing of the true political potential of Sarah Palin. If that is the case, we die-hard constitutionalists and every patriotic, red-blooded nephew of Uncle Sam will be able to claim being witness to the rebirth of truth, justice, and the American way that has made this the greatest nation in the history of mankind, and also, hopefully, witness to the final death throws of liberal, socialist ideology as a relevant factor in American politics. One can only hope for that kind of change.
Hope is not a strategy and change is not a goal. Hope is only valid and justified when one has done all they can do toward the attainment of what is desired. Change is only valid and authentic when specified plans and actions are carried out successfully. The use of specific change and reform is the strategy we employ in earnest which then gives us a valid reason to hope for the desired result. The succesful outcome of implementing our strategy for change is the goal we rightly hoped it would be. This is hope and change you CAN believe in.
NOBAMA ! !
Glenn Flowers