Yep, Sarah Palin Won The Veep Debate

I admit that I may not be the best choice to judge who won the debate. Those of you who are Khaki Elephant regulars know that I was calling for John McCain to add Sarah Palin to the ticket before Tina Fey knew that Alaskans had Midwestern accents. Saying I am biased on the topic of Palin is like observing that Chris Matthews gets the giggles for Obama. So I suppose the question in my mind is not whether I thought Palin won the debate, I'm in no position to objectively analyze that (though she won it handily), but whether or not I think her performance will provide a bump in the polls.

The answer is yes. She was solid on substance and spectacular on style. I can't help but feel that most Americans not already opining Obama felt for the first time in a debate of this magnitude that they weren't watching a politician; which, of course, makes her the most effective of politicians.

First, substance. Most pundits knew Palin would do well on the issue areas she managed as a regulator, mayor and Alaskan governor -- taxes and energy. And while liberal pundits will claim that Palin was "short on details" even a cursory review of the debate transcript reveals that not to be the case.

When it came to corporate taxes, Biden tried to tether McCain's employer based stimulus plan solely to the hitch post of dastardly oil companies by repeatedly complaining that McCain's plan is picket-worthy unfair because it gives tax breaks "for the MobileExxons of the world." Meanwhile, Palin went to the heart addressing the Oil Company CEOs directly with,

"And that's why Tillerson at Exxon and Mulva at ConocoPhillips, bless their hearts, they're doing what they need to do, as corporate CEOs, but they're not my biggest fans, because what I had to do up there in Alaska was to break up a monopoly."

Biden was more effective when talking about middle class tax cuts and the need for universal health care. But even there Palin was strong with specifics, pointing out that Obama's tax plan would impact millions of small businesses that fall into the $250,000+ bracket. And when it came to health care, she did OK with defense of the $5,000 tax credit and the plan to erase state lines for competitive pricing, but she struck pure Klondike gold with pointing out that Obama's health care plan . . .

"is to have universal government run program and unless you're pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds."

Predictably, the Alaskan Governor really hit her stride when talking about energy. She pointed out that she oversaw the construction of "a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline which is North America's largest and most you expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets." She then talked knowledgeably about the amount of available oil and natural gas, explained the environmental footprint of extraction, chided Biden's comments about "raping the outer continental shelf," rebutted Biden's call for "clean coal" by reminding him that he had previously said there was no such thing, and even took the time to correct the Senator's misquote of the rally chant "Drill, baby, drill."

But the true challenge for Sarah Palin was foreign policy. She could not hope to match Biden in knowledge of the topic; she just had to move the focus from knowledge to ideology. After all, everybody knows she wasn't added to the McCain ticket because of her friendship with Angela Merkel. She was selected for her executive experience, reputation for reform, conservative ideology and female genitalia.

Admittedly, Joe Biden gave a strong showing on foreign policy, much stronger, in fact, than the primary on the Democratic ticket did last week. But Palin went toe-to-toe with him and scored several sound points using conservative ideology. She spoke about winning the war in Iraq. She referenced the heroic leadership of General Petraus who the left attempted to demonize not so long ago. Palin praised Israel, promising to protect them from another holocaust and work toward a two-state solution in the region that includes building an embassy in Jerusalem. And when it came to the endless Obama/Biden references to Bush, she provided the best take I have heard from any member of the McCain team, including the man himself.

when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time when Americans are going to say, "Enough is enough with your ticket," on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and doing the blame game.

There have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration. But for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going.

Then came back later with:

Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You preferenced your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future.

You see, strong as she was on substance, it was style where she scored the win and will create a bounce for Republicans. And based on the fact that Biden was hucking Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, we can safely assume that style trumps substance this election cycle.

Biden was pure Washington. He talked about his record, spoke the language of the hill, and attacked by parsing votes and bandying beefy buzzwords. Even references to his own biography seemed staged . . . with the exception of those few moments when he discussed being a single father.

Palin, on the other hand, was intelligent but approachable. She was Abe Lincoln in heels. She even pulled herself outside of current political morass by turning to Biden and saying.

Oh, yeah, it's so obvious I'm a Washington outsider. And someone just not used to the way you guys operate. Because here you voted for the war and now you oppose the war. You're one who says, as so many politicians do, I was for it before I was against it or vice- versa. Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it when it was a war resolution.

I believe she struck a cord with most Americans. She said things the way we want them to be said. And she said things that most politicians frankly wouldn't even have the courage to say. Including my favorite moment of the debate:

Darn right it was the predator lenders, who tried to talk Americans into thinking that it was smart to buy a $300,000 house if we could only afford a $100,000 house. There was deception there, and there was greed and there is corruption on Wall Street. And we need to stop that.Again, John McCain and I, that commitment that we have made, and we're going to follow through on that, getting rid of that corruption.

One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit ourselves just every day American people, Joe Six Pack, hockey moms across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars. We need to make sure that we demand from the federal government strict oversight of those entities in charge of our investments and our savings and we need also to not get ourselves in debt. Let's do what our parents told us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're taking personal responsibility through all of
this.

It's not the American peoples fault that the economy is hurting like it is, but we have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through this and say never again will we be taken advantage of.

UPDATE: Post debate fact-checkers are beginning to examine the claims of both candidates from the debate and Joe Biden has already been found in an extraordinary number of lies: 14 at first swag. Check them out at The Michigan Republican Party Blog.

UPDATE #2: Just when I thought that I was a fair and balanced moderate, I found part of my VP debate analysis on the liberal blog All Facts and Opinions with the following introduction: "Obviously, this is from a hard-spinning right-wing blog. Must admit — it’s fun to watch a Republican spin so hard in support of a woman. Ah, the times…" Time for me to get a Michael Moore infusion.

The Obama Bracelet Scandal

Remember that poignant moment in the first debate when John McCain pointed to the bracelet that had been given to him over a year ago by a fallen soldier's mother? The mother, Lynn Savage, asked the senator to wear the bracelet and to make sure her son's death was not in vain.

That moment was followed by Barack Obama pointing excitedly to his wrist with a "I've got a soldier's bracelet too, see, see" followed by stumbled stuttering until he remembered the soldier's name, Sergeant Ryan David Jopek. It was a proud moment for the junior senator from Illinois. The only problem is, the family of Sergeant Jopek had asked him not to wear the bracelet.

According to a NewsBusters Report:

Radio host Glenn Moberg of the show "Route 51" asked [the soldier's father, Brian] Jopek, a man who believes in the efforts in Iraq and is not in favor of Obama's positions on the war, what he and his ex-wife think of Obama continually using their son's name on the campaign trail.

Jopek began by saying that his ex-wife was taken aback, even upset, that Obama has made the death of her son a campaign issue. Jopek says his wife gave Obama the bracelet because "she just wanted Mr. Obama to know Ryan's name." Jopek went on to say that "she wasn't looking to turn it into a big media event" and "just wanted it to be something between Barack Obama and herself." Apparently, they were all shocked it became such a big deal.

But, he also said that his ex-wife has refused further interviews on the matter and that she wanted Obama to stop wearing the reminder of her son's sacrifice that he keeps turning into a campaign soundbyte.

Ah, but what is the wish of a sacrificed soldier's family compared to the unbridled ambition of Barack Hussein Obama?

H/T: geeeeeZ!

John McCain: Blessed by Misfortune

Pundits will spend some time examining his convention acceptance speech as well the should. It was remarkable in several ways. He focused on his maverick image, his non-partisan mentality and his willingness to fight corruption wherever it exists -- including in his own party. But I don't care about any of that tonight. You see, tonight John McCain gave his lengthiest description of his time as a POW in the Hanoi Hilton. And he did so with grace and humility: admitting his woeful pride at the beginning and how he eventually became a broken man who needed others to regain health and dignity.

I'm sure millions of Obama supporters rolled their eyes at the story before giving one another a here-we-go-again wink. But for me . . . for me, I am awestruck every time I hear it.

John McCain was shot down, captured, then spent a couple of years with broken bones that would never fully heal, subjected to physical and emotional torture.

When his captors discovered who he was (or more importantly, who his father was) they offered to release him. McCain admitted that he thought about it. He wanted to leave hell and return to the people and country that he loved. But McCain knew the code. He refused release until all those who had been captured before him were released and was rewarded for that decision with four more years of daily torture.

Tonight John McCain said that he was blessed by this misfortune. He explained how it transformed his world view from self-love to duty. But when I think of the circumstances I wonder if I would have suffered this "blessing" when offered early release. Would you?

God Bless America. And God Bless John McCain.

Georgia On My Mind

It started as a dispute over South Ossetia, which has been claiming independence from Georgia since Georgia claimed independence from the old empire of evil (who never recovered from the miracle on ice . . . thanks again, Mike Eruzione). While Russia officially recognizes the South Ossetians as Georgians, they still took the opportunity to dust off the KGB playbook and roll out some tanks when Georgia decided to crack down on some pesky separatists. The problem is that Russia hasn't stopped with peace keeping.

According to FoxNews:

U.N. officials B. Lynn Pascoe and Edmond Mulet in New York, speaking at an emergency Security Council meeting asked for by Georgia, also confirmed that Russian troops have driven well beyond South Ossetia and Abkhazia, U.N. diplomats said on condition of anonymity because it was a closed session. They said Russian airborne troops were not meeting any resistance while taking control of Georgia's Senaki army base.

In fact, the Georgian ambassador to the UN claims that "A full military invasion of Georgia is going on." And Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili claims that Russian forces are "cleansing Abkhazia of ethnic Georgians."

Ah, but . . .

By late Monday, Russian news agencies, citing the Defense Ministry, said troops had left Senaki "after liquidating the danger," but did not give details.

Now, pardon me for saying so, but this is not the time for Russia to display super-power envy. Their bloody foray across an American ally's border could have serious repercussions concerning relations between Putin's purgatory and the U.S. -- and perhaps that is part of their intent.

Even as Saakashvili signed a cease-fire pledge Monday with European mediators, Russia flexed its military muscle and appeared determined to subdue the small U.S. ally, which has been pressing for NATO membership. "The bombs that are falling on us, they have an inscription on them: This is for NATO. This is for the U.S.," Saakashvili told CNN.

And no, I don't know how Saakashvili read the inscriptions before the bombs went boom.

The point is that Georgia is our ally. They supply troops to Iraq, land for our bases and an Eastern European name that seems strangely familiar. Putin may try to draw comparisons to the American liberation of Iraq, but only at the cost of conveniently forgetting that his signature was (metaphorically) on the UN resolutions condemning Iraq and allowing for military action.

Speaking of condemnation, where is America's leading nitwit on the subject? Shouldn't Jimmy Carter be coming to Georgia's defense?

Barack Obama: Insanity Concerning Iraq

This is a must see ad from the McCain campaign concerning Barack Obama's view of Iraq. It'll never play in its entirety on the Tube, so check it out on the YouTube.



H/T: To Nikki for finding this one!

What Does "Winning In Iraq" Mean For Obama?

Even the folk at the Washington Post found they could no longer view the war in Iraq like Helen Keller viewed ROY G BIV after a rainfall. In a recent editorial they had to open blind eyes and declare, "Don't look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war." Yes, Virginia, there must be a sanity clause in their newsroom. The editorial went on to explain:

There's been a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."

Of course, all of this begs the question: if the rest of the media begins treating the war with a thimbleful of honesty, what is Barack Obama supposed to do? The lamb from Illinois has built his campaign on the folly of Iraq and even Husseined Hillary with his own liberal WMD by repeating that she once supported the war while he always knew it would fail. Could we see yet another Obamanable flip-flop?