Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Non-Debate
It was not a debate. Just as television in prime time has been largely emptied of drama and innovative comedy, with a few exceptions, in favor of empty-headed "reality shows," so the political debates have mostly been gutted.
Judging "how the candidates did" is rather like weighing in on the wittiness of the libretto of "Big Brother" or the pace of character development in the latest episode of "Keeping up with the Kardashians." The genre of the political review assumes that both candidates are credible in their roles. It becomes self-parody when one candidate is a ditzy nonentity cynically foisted on the public in the same way a 'reality show' is, based on a targeted demographic and without regard to quality.
It reminded me of the excruciating first episodes every season of "American Idol," when a single candidate is found who has the voice of an angel and then everyone else auditioned sounds like fingernails on a blackboard.
The news organizations and civic groups that sponsor political debates have allowed the campaigns to push them around so vigorously that nothing like a debate is any longer possible. The Bushies even tried to force the networks to hide the fact that John Kerry was taller than his rival in 2004. It is not about debating but about how your candidate looks on television.
Not only was there no debate but Sarah Palin was not required actually to answer any of the questions put to her, and she announced before she began that she was just going to throw up on us all the talking points that she had binged on in Arizona for the past few days.
She mugged for the camera, winked like a bar fly, and just went on talking and talking and talking, oblivious to whatever anyone else said. Not only did she ignore most of Gwen Ifill's questions,she paid no attention to what Joe Biden said. When he choked up over the loss of his family, she did not have the decency to express any kind of condolences. It is almost as though she is autistic and unable to connect with human beings.
Not only was it not a debate and not only did Palin answer virtually none of the questions put to her, but the whole idea of such an event was ridiculous.
Joe Biden has been either the chairman or the ranking minority member on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years, and is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging.
Palin has revealed her real self in the Gibson and Couric interviews, and clearly knows nothing and offers only rubbery expressions and glib repetition, for all the world like a rasping myna bird, of a stream of memorized slogans that sound as though they were disinterred from a time capsule originally buried in William F. Buckley Jr.'s back yard several decades ago.
It was not a debate, and pretending that it was and judging "performance" is to fall into the trap set by the campaign spinmeisters and talking point pimps.
77 Comments so far
Show AllThe system has become so corrupt we don’t pause to wonder that a phony debate might be decided on style points, or that conveniently having her child in the spotlight afterwards was the role of a fine actress putting on a good show. But how does such an image—the ultimate mother, heroic and sweet—square with persistent lying in the debate itself, or with over-simplification and distortion worthy of a Joe McCarthy?
The essential contrast = slickness, side-stepping, and over-prepared (wearing a wire?) vs. plain-speaking and authenticity, including actually trying to answer the questions raised.
The debates are media events, benefiting the sponsoring corporations, not us. No reason to expect more than a show. Someone should take Palin's baby gimmick (not her baby) and turn it upside down. Anyone who's mothered children, with or without a partner in support, knows just how much deep energy and attention are needed by an infant. A normal, healthy infant. It's grossly contradictory to campaign on a flamboyant show of family values while leaving a Downs syndrome baby to someone else to nurture. Nobody dares to open their mouths about it, but it's another elephant in the room.
"The debates are media events, benefiting the sponsoring corporations,"
I heard that the debae drew the largest audience for a vice-prez debate IN HISTORY: 70 million, compared to a comparatively paltry figure for prior debates, I thought I heard 2.5 million. That pretty much confirmed my suspiscion that that's ALL this was for.
No gods, no kings
The inconsistencies displayed by Polin, i.e. the sweet mother figure who also lies on cue, represent to the American people the ironies of life on this "dangerous planet" while we wait to reach the "promised land". To the American people, indoctrinated by the elites, the ironies are a confusing, tangled thicket, extremely difficult if not impossible to navigate.
But in the progressive reality there is only one fundamental irony so navigation is actually a piece of cake. That irony is that to reach the ethical peak the people do have to confront the elites because all the elites understand is confrontation. To confront the elites we don't have to set bear traps or anything dangerous like that. We simply need to "vote third party" in all of our exchange/association, to deprive the elites of our support. Very simple. Try localism and "third party" exchange/association.
The non-essay.
Why does CD allow these kinds of partisan essays from partisan essayists ? Why not just sum up this essay in4 words and save some space: Biden good, Palin bad.
Come on CD, we deserve more intelligent reading material.
While most everyone else debates the debates, Juan Cole made the very valid point that there was no debate there to debate. What more exactly would you have liked to read? The byline of CD is News & Views for the Progressive Community, not doctoral disseration central for progressive and/or regressive communities.
But we all know this already ! We've known it for decades ! The same is true of political ads and convention speeches, and in many cases interviews with the media.
I want to learn something when I come here. I consider myself rather politically ignorant compared to many of you. If I'm not learning, I know there are plenty of others who also are not.
Well, I don't hear many pundits making Juan's point, so in that respect I appreciate his article. On the other hand, you are correct that so much of his and really many articles you read and pundits you hear are getting very repetitious. I used to read the books about the Bush admin, like Fiasco, etc. It got boring because it just became variations on a theme.
Not to mention it is the most hilarious truth I've read or heard on the subject.
Y'know the sheer volume of information and opinion that circulates on the net assures that it gets repetitious. If you're reading a piece and it begins to sound like old news, move along. Maybe 20% (maybe less) of what's out there gets thoroughly examined by me. The rest is been-there-done-that or rank fluff. A lot of folks are chattering and speculating on the ramifications of this debate, and Cole's point is that it really doesn't matter. That's a valid point that not everyone's making.
Education consists, in large measure, of learning to discern the new and the illuminating from the overexposed and the mundane. I don't want to sound judgemental, but if you're not learning, that's your responsibility, not this website's. Anyway, you don't sound all that politically ignorant :B^)
And by more intelligent reading material you must mean: Palin good, Biden bad, no doubt.
There, you've read it.
From this essay i learned that Juan Cole watches American idol and the Kardashians!
:-)
I am glad I watched the Canadian debate in the same time slot. It was great with the gloves or mitts off and the one liners were right on the mark and funny at times. Harper didn't look good it was real any question was on the table debate. Not some controlled fake orgasm for the masses including Common Dreams.
Americans should have watched it as it was real politics 2 hours no ads none stop. Any topic was wide open with some fixed topics like economy, jobs, free trade. Us politics was also mentioned. At one point Jack Layton from the NDP party calling PM Harper President Harper because of his wnnwbee bush views.
.If what was said during the Canadian debate during the US debate the networks would have shut it down.
Two people bashing each other with sound bites for an hour and a half is not a debate. Prof. Cole is right on this here.
_______
There's a glory in the morning because the earth turns 'round and a promise in the evening when the sun goes down
Kane Jeeves is right. And this time so is Cole.
It's a great essay and it belongs on CD.
Obviously these TV farces are not debates, but P.T. Barnum would have loved it, the rubes lining up to see the pretty rural air-head, innocent in the ways of the bigger world, thrown into the pit to face — well Barnum would have had Biden show up in a gorilla suit or something.
Most American probably couldn't follow a real debate anyway. Don't have the attention span for one.
there is an old saw..
"you made your bed.. now sleep in it.."
i think i prefer to sleep outside in the open on the ground, than in the bed of horse shyt, bull shyt blankets, and pillows of debt, the americans now find themselves in, scared and cowered .. waiting for the money'd elite to sneak into their rooms and rape them again, without even giving them a kiss...
president palin
fat cat wall streeters driving their limos through the homeless
no health care
fema prisons
residential murder rates that outpoint war zones
toxic chinese food products
murderous military continuing to wipe the peasants off the face of the earth
billo
right wing christian killers whose blood of the lamb is now anyone's blood
the us is one seriously fucked up place
did i mention president palin
you make me sick
cheers, b
Katie Kouric should have hosted the debate and made Biden and Palin answer the questions, like she did with Palin on CBS. If you asked Palin what time it was, she would have gone into her canned monologue. Not Presidential material.
Believe it or not! I actually watched the non-debate.
The 'moderator' parroted the questions, gave an inordinate amount of time to Palin's non-answers with not one 'rules of order' reproach for 'off topic, shorted Biden's time even as Biden was the exemplar of 'Gentleman' to the lipsticked Ms. Piggy Palin.
Even my kids could see right through Palin's truckload of BS. I thought a debate was an event where two individuals with contrasting viewpoints could argue intelligently and civilly about a variety of topical issues. I also thought that a minimum requirement of participation was the ability to answer the questions posed, and the ability to respond directly to your opponent's claims. As noted by Mr. Cole, Palin failed on both of these counts. Most of what she said was gibberish. Of course, that type of nonsensical prattle is very soothing to the brainwashed idiots here in Amurka.
Of course it was a non-debate. This was inevitable from the moment that the major parties joined hands to punish the League of Women Voters for letting Ross Perot participate.
They weren't really debates before, but they have descended to the level of self-parody ... and below. The "debates" provide the same illumination as a Verizon Wireless commercial, and to much the same end.
The 1992 debate with Bush I, Clinton, and Perot had nothing to do with the League of Women Voters.
By then, the debates were controlled by the "Commission," that is, by the two "major" parties.
The only reason Perot was included was because both parties agreed to his participation.
Don't ask me why they did so.
You're absolutely correct. My apologies for the error.
Repimplican and Germ-o-crat politicians quickly shuffle in and out at the top of the national scene like the wait staff at a scuzzy restaurant. Only their approach is different. One is rude and spits in your food, yet you give him or her a 25% tip. The other is at least civil and you don't tip him or her at all. They wonder why is it that they are "nicer" but get the short end of the stick. Either way, the food stinks and increasingly the neighborhood is getting truly rundown and dangerous. America has to go eat somewhere else but refuses to do it and when you ask Americans why, they'll just shrug and say they don't know.
Spot on.
However, Biden deserves extra points for not blurting out:
"What the f**k are you babbling about you f**king moron?"
It's fun to imagine all those GOPathologicals who have spent their lives clawing their way to the top now having to treat Palin as their professional and intellectual equal.
I wonder whose idea it was to pick Palin ? Rove is not so stupid.
Athiest [October 3rd, 2008 7:00 pm], Gov. Horse-Hockey Mom was picked by the wingnut Christopublicans [1] and an unverified story I heard was that the Bush Franchise wants McCain and Palin to lose in a landslide so that Brother Jeb can come riding along on his white horse and save the party. The deal is to tag Palin and the Religious Right for the electoral disaster and put them in their place, then have what's left of the GOP in Congress make President Obama's life a living hell for four years while he's blamed for all of Junior's incompetence and treachery.
Then Jeb emerges in 2011 as the party's savior, making up for Dubya's perfidy and failure -- which they hope by then will be nearly forgotten -- and fulfilling the family wish for a presidential dynasty that includes Jeb. (He was supposed to be first and then Dubya.)
[1] "Last week, while the media focused almost obsessively on the DNC's spectacle in Denver, the country's most influential conservatives met quietly at a hotel in downtown Minneapolis to get to know Sarah Palin. The assembled were members of the Council for National Policy, an ultra-secretive cabal that networks wealthy right-wing donors together with top conservative operatives to plan long-term movement strategy.
"CNP members have included Tony Perkins, James Dobson, Grover Norquist, Tim LaHaye and Paul Weyrich. [...]
"The members of the Council for National Policy are the hidden hand behind McCain's Palin pick. With her selection, the Republican nominee is suddenly -- and unexpectedly -- assured of the support of a movement that once opposed his candidacy with all its might. Case in point: while Dobson once said he could "never" vote for McCain, he issued a statement last week hailing Palin as an "outstanding" choice."
-- Max Blumenthal, "Secretive Right-Wing Group Vetted Palin," The Nation, Sept. 1, 2008.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/352178
My wife is usually circumspect on non-debates. I can't remember the last time she showed so much disgust for a member of her own sex:
"She didn't answer the question."
"Politics has closed its own circle with tits and ass."
"She didn't answer the question."
"She's wearing a wire!"
"She didn't answer the question."
"She didn't answer the question."
"The earth is cooling? Yeah, and dinosaurs still roam the planet, eating the polar bears."
"She didn't answer the question."
"Oh! Look, her pregnant daughter is holding her child to cover being pregnant. Aren't we clever/dumb?"
"What a bitch."
Having listened to Palin numerous times since she was popped out of nowhere and into our living rooms, and watching the "debate" and listening to her responses last night, I'm constantly reminded of someone I used to know who was only able to talk about self, and entered all conversations with a personal experience they believed was relevent to the conversation at hand. Anything happening that didn't directly affect them personally was completely ignored or passed over as unimportant - even 9/11. What a great president this woman will make!
The so-called "Commission on Presidential Debates" is wholly run and controlled by the Republican and Democratic Parties.
In fact, the two men in charge were the respective chairmen of the two parties when the "Commission" was set up in 1987, taking the debates away from the truly non-partisan League of Women Voters.
These two guys still run the thing. One is a chief lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry, and the other a chief lobbyist for the "gaming" industry, in other words, big time gambling interests.
These are your political debates in your democracy today.
Oh, please. It's hard to debate when everyone agrees on imperial wars, sucking up to Israel, and bailing out Wall Street. What's left? Biden choked up about his family? He didn't choke up when he cut families off bankruptcy relief at the behest of his usurer pals. Didn't choke up when giving Bush a blank check to kill families in Iraq. As for Gibson and Couric, Sarah pulled their ratings out of the toilet for them, and got trashed for the favor. She didn't need them. Nobody watches CBS or ABC except people who still use rabbit ears or a coathanger antenna for reception. C'mon Juan; you really hate Sarah because she doesn't sport a buzz-cut hairdo and boxcar pantsuits.
My wife is usually circumspect on non-debates. I can't remember the last time she showed so much disgust for a member of her own sex:
"She didn't answer the question."
"Politics has closed its own circle with tits and ass."
"She didn't answer the question."
"She's wearing a wire!"
"She didn't answer the question."
"She didn't answer the question."
"The earth is cooling? Yeah, and dinosaurs still roam the planet, eating the polar bears."
"She didn't answer the question."
"Oh! Look, her pregnant daughter is holding her child to cover being pregnant. Aren't we clever/dumb?"
"What a bitch."
Ugliness frequently rears it's jealous head!
Yeah, it is a strangely emasciated format. Basically two people who are delivering statements side by side. "Debate" is a great misnomer.
Let me tell you how it can be done: At the last French presidential elections, Nicolas Sarkozy and Ségolène Royal were debating each other for something like 240 minutes (!!) NONSTOP, sitting at a table, facing each other, and the journalist present only interrupted very occasionally to either remind them that one of them had used up a lot more time than the other or to ask them to maybe change the topic gradually. They had a real conversation, a real debate.
Similar formats are used in other countries, it might get unintelligible at times when both talk at the same time, but at least it's not as sterile as these exercises in the pretension that this is democracy at work, I think.
As regards that "debate" last night, one had the feeling that Biden could have ad-libbed any topic whereas Palin had to rely on the topics she had be briefed on.
I don't know why "Washington insider" is a four-letter-word,BTW. Anybody who works at any place for half a year becomes an insider. And builds up much-needed experience. I definitely feel more comfortable with people who are experienced than with overrated rookies who only the day before they need to are able to find places where their country stations troops on a map. I've never found ignorance refreshing.
I have to agree, especiallly with this last part. Anyone old enough to remember the colossal failure of the Carter administration was due chiefly to being an outsider both with Capitol Hill AND his party. A little bit of insider knowledge would have gone a long way to better results during that time.
Palin is either very naive to think she and McCain can ride up to Capital Hill and "set things right", or a consummate actress who masks the fact that she has been told how to look and act, and will be told even more so should she and McCain be elected.
Personally, I think it's the latter. The puppetmasters knew exactly what they were doing when she was placed on the ticket.
This was expected. The bravehearts were all slaughtered in the primaries. That's what primaries are for and the corporatist press knows that damn well. Just ask former Senator Ralph Yarborough, god bless his soul in heaven, who faced a primary defeat by then neoconservative Lloyd Bentson.
Palin is a dangerous woman. She doesn't know that she doesn't know.
Don't miss my blog post to this effect!!
www.dangerouscreation.com
I never noticed before how truly phony is Sarah Palin. Until last night, I regarded her as just a naïf out of her element, a high school player accidentally sent up to the Big Show. Not now; what I saw in the debate was a calculating hick, a two-faced Lonesome Rhodes "Face in the Crowd" type, who, I wouldn't be surprised, probably muttered something like "That oughta hold those dumb bastards" when she was safely off stage. It was all there: The cornball "Gosh, golly, gee" patois, the overcooked Church-Lady-Meets-Lily-Tomlin's-phone-operator voice, the cutesy winks, the camera mugging, the self-satisfied smile. It makes her even more dangerous than she was before; Junior with a craftier brain.
In their post-debate commentary, MSNBC's Chuck Todd, the Politico's Roger Simon and the Other Usual Media Miscreants once again strained credulity by attempting to speak for the Working Class out there in the Fly-Over Country of the Midwest. These guys inhabit offices in New York and Washington – besides the building doorman or the valet who parks their luxury car, how many actual members of the hourly-wage Drone Culture do they really know? In their omniscient view of the Biden-Palin encounter, Palin was likable and sharp and those downtrodden Soccer-Hockey Moms out there counting quarters to do the laundry were sure to swallow her guff whole-hog and rally to the GOP. Victory for Palin! Then Todd started running through the poll numbers from independent voters showing they thought Biden won – he didn't really have an explanation for why Mr. and Mrs. Joe Six-Pack didn't buy the adorable Palin's pandering guff as predicted; it was just one of those, shrug, anomalies. Hint to Chuck and Company: I live out in that part of America you think you know so well; I can't find anyone – not a single person -- who likes Palin, even after her cynical performance last night.
I think she fits the description of the "Accidental Candidate" or a female Chauncey Gardner character out of that 1981 film "Being There"
Why is Juan Cole considered Left-Wing? He's a hawk.
COLE wrote: "Joe Biden has been either the chairman or the ranking minority member on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years, and is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging."
Are you joking? I'm sure Cole is aware of Biden's record. So Cole is either a hawk (after all,he did support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and calls our troops "brave warriors) or he's knowingly piling on the BS because he's such a rabid Obama supporter. I think he a hawk and piling on the BS.
BIDEN: "He insisted on elections on the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, "Big mistake. Hamas will win. You'll legitimize them." What happened? Hamas won.
When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."
Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel."
"And speaking of freedom being on the march, the only thing on the march is Iran. It's closer to a bomb. Its proxies now have a major stake in Lebanon, as well as in the Gaza Strip with Hamas."
Cole, how can you stand by your statement that "his acumen and expertise are wide-ranging"? How many factual errors in the above?
In the beginning of August 2002, Scott Ritter stated that "Sen. Joe Biden is running a sham hearing. It is clear that Biden and most of the Congressional leadership have pre-ordained a conclusion that seeks to remove Saddam Hussein from power regardless of the facts, and are using these hearings to provide political cover for a massive military attack on Iraq."
In 2002 as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee he stated that Saddam Hussein was "a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security" and that United States has "no choice but to eliminate the threat".
In 2005 Biden said, "We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq (but) I think that would be a gigantic mistake, or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out--equally a mistake."
He supported partitioning Iraq into seperate areas for Kurds, Sunnis, and Shia.
He supports expanding the war in Afghanistan.
On invading Pakistan: "It's already the policy of the US, has been for four years, that if there was actionable intelligence, we would go into Pakistan. "
Biden favors an American deployment of troops to Sudan.
Biden is a self-described Zionist.
Biden co-sponsored the Jerusalem Embassy Act.
He supported the Israel invasion of Lebanon and the use of US-made cluster bombs. he also supported the Israel bombing of Syria, and Israel's entire policy against the Palestinians.
During a conference call to members of the Jewish media on September 3, 2008, Biden stated, in regard to a potential Israeli military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, that it “is not a question for us to tell the Israelis what they can and cannot do, I have faith in the democracy of Israel. They will arrive at the right decision that they view as being in their own interests.”
Biden strongly opposes the Fidel Castro regime in Cuba and supports the continuation of the trade embargo as well as the democratization of the island in post-Castro era. In 2006, Biden stated, "We should be putting together a plan as to how we are going to play a positive role in moving that country, after the Castros are gone, to—more toward democratization and liberalization in their society."
Voted YES on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.
Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.
Status: Conf Rpt Agreed to Y)74; N)22; NV)4
he's a long-time supporter of Plan Columbia.
http://www.cipcol.org/?p=658
Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe.
H.R. 3167; Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act of 2001, To endorse the vision of further enlargement of the NATO Alliance. Vote to pass a bill that would support further expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, authorize military assistance to several eastern European countries and lift assistance restrictions on Slovakia.
Voted NO on limiting NATO expansion to only Poland, Hungary & Czech.
Voted YES on $17.9 billion to IMF.
Under Clinton, he pushed for intervention in Bosnia, and supported NATO's bombing of Kosovo.
Supported Georgia and condemned Russia.
“When Congress reconvenes, I intend to work with the administration to seek Congressional approval for $1 billion in emergency assistance for Georgia, with a substantial down payment on that aid to be included in the Congress' next supplemental spending bill.”
His record is clear and extensive, I could go on and on...
But to switch to domestic issues for a second, this quote is a wonderful display of his more Palin-esque "acumen and expertise",
""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,"
sierra7
With Obama we will get a "choice of wars;" With MCCain we will have war in perpetuity! (I'm a registered non-partisan voter)
Why is it that this potentially "great" nation is always led by presidents that have to show they are "tough in foreign policy," and that "toughness" always includes war as the primary tool?
Juan Cole is a sort of "hawk." I've been reading him for years and after the invasion of Iraq he has gotten more hawkish....
Biden is part of the problem. Like too many in the Congress/Senate they've been there too long and no longer have any credibility left whatsoever......A handful of these croakers control our financing, foreign and domestic policies......The rest are like sheep, bleating in protest but led to slaughter...like the American (Idol) people.
Matt Gonzalez would have had something to say that could have made that 'debate' come alive -- but he didn't get the chance.
We heard in the two 'debates' so far the two corporate parties agree on continuing and expanding the wars of illegal aggression, they don't mourn the loss of our civil rights and democracy or express any concern for the poverty caused by the 'off shoring' of all our manufacturing. They agree on a massive bail out to assist the scoundrels on Wall Street to continue their greedy behavior. Both seem unconcerned that the cost of the wars and the bailout are bankrupting our nation.
Our future doesn't look good for the people or the health of the earth.
Two more of these phony 'debates'. Why have we allowed the two corporate parties to dominate our government for the benefit of the wealthy few? Vote for either McCain or Obama and get a continuation of the Bush legacy. I heard the word 'change' but no plans to change anything.
Dafoe
A Canadian writer, Heather Malick wrote a piece for the CBC online about our fair lady from the alaskan out back and when published CBC received some complaints among other things and they pulled it, cowards. I am sure Heather would agree with this article. No substance, superficial, amoral out of her depth. Poor soul, probably convinced that God sent her to this role, all I can say is she will feel right at home with those dinosaurs she is surrounded by. Another planet?
It is a terrible shame..... I remember in my youth that I would go to Washington Park in Quincy, IL and look at the pictorial monument of Abraham Lincoln, and Stephen A. Douglas in the 6th Debate, October 13th 1858 for the Illinois US Senate seat. Lincoln lost the election. However on the back of the monument, the words inscribed which were spoken on that day had more meaning, and dedication to our great nation than what has been said for many many years.....
Part of Abes Speech;
"We have in this Nation this element of domestic slavery, We think it is a wrong not confining itself merely to the persons or the States where it exists, but that it is a wrong in its tendency to say the least, that it extends itself to the existence of the whole Nation".
Abraham Lincoln
What we have today, is NOT a debate! It is a Circus! TODAY we have more issues at stake of our Nation than ever before, these men in the past spoke for not minutes, but HOURS! They were well versed in all aspects of WHAT is going on in the entre country,,,,,, but yet we have today a spectacle of what, I have no idea!
Coffeelover,,,,,,
Paul Siemering
the entire political process in the u.s. has been taken hostage by the trivialities of the show biz gossip mentality.What's wrong with all this is the infernal wars rage on while we sit entranced by the silliness, and never a thought for the dead and wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq. and the silliness is not all Palin's either. Nobody can say anything real anymore.
so just to remind us how scary this can get, here's Juan Cole, a really sharp guy who is rarely fooled, drifting off to la la land, and telling us Joe "is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts....is acumen and expertise are wide ranging"
say it ain't so Juan. you know damn well who Joe Biden is- quick wake up before it's too late
I think I learned about the absurdity of Biden's partition proposal from reading Juan Cole's blog. How could Cole take Biden apart for being so clueless as to recommend cutting Iraq into three pieces and then call the guy an "expert".
Oy veh!
Sarah Paleolithic looked like a parrot in the debates: physically beautiful, dutifully repeating what she'd been taught to say verbatim, and understanding absolutely nothing. We've had 8 years of leadership by an intellectually deficient, fundamentalist Christian, anti-science, vindictive, petty, crony-appointing, climate-change denying, warmongering, tax cutting, big-spending governor, and the results have been disastrous.
Alex
gtree61,
"I think I learned about the absurdity of Biden's partition proposal from reading Juan Cole's blog"
Good point.
Cole wrote (various sources),
"The most prominent proponent of carving Iraq into three major ethnically based provinces, with regions for the Kurds, Sunni Arabs and Shiites under a weak federal umbrella, is Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware."
"The US Senate voted for a soft partition of Iraq on Thursday. First they messed up Iraq by authorizing Terrible George to blow it up, now they want to further mess it up by dividing it. It makes no sense to me; the US Senate doesn't even have the authority to divide Iraq. Wouldn't that be for the Iraqi parliament?"
"This is a very bad idea for so many reasons it would take me forever to list them all. But here are a few:
1. no such loose federal arrangement would survive very long (remember the post-Soviet Commonwealth of Independent States?), so the plan leads to the dismemberment and partition of Iraq. This outcome is unacceptable to Turkey and Saudi Arabia and therefore will likely lead to regional wars.
2. The Sunni Arabs, the Da`wa Party and the Sadr Movement are all against such a partition, and together they account for at least 123 members of the 275-member parliament. Some of the Shiite independents in the United Iraqi Alliance are also against it. I would say that a slight majority in parliament would fight this plan tooth and nail. The US cannot impose it by fiat.
3. The Sunni Arabs control Iraq's downstream water but have no petroleum resources. If the loose federal plan ends in partition, the situation is set up for a series of wars of the Sunni Arabs versus the Shiites, as well as of the Sunni Arabs and some Turkmen versus the Kurds. Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia will certainly be pulled into these wars."
(good summary)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/10/30/iraq_partition/