The Debate Circus – Moon of Alabama

October 1, 2008

The Debate Circus

Now the partisan election fight is not over politics, programs or candidates, but over the alleged partisanship of the TV moderator.

Today Michelle Malkin is bitching about the moderator of the Palin/Biden debate: A Debate ‘Moderator’ in the Tank for Obama

Also today a ‘recommended’ D-Kos diary is bitching about the moderator of the next Obama/McCain debate: Tom Brokaw Will Try To Sink Obama in Debate

It is telling that both headlines use ‘Obama’.

If someone cares to call me up after one of these debates to ask me who of those folks I’d vote for, I’d say "The moderator."

S/he is likely the least dangerous alternative.

Posted by b on October 1, 2008 at 19:17 UTC | Permalink

Comments

The Republicans have a perfect spin for Palin’s poor showing. She faced hostile questions from a prejudiced Gwen Ifill. Please help “cut them off at the pass” by warning of this very very real possibility.
Thanks

Posted by: tspears | Oct 1 2008 23:42 utc | 1

I’m firmly convinced that Palin is going to exceed expectations for tomorrow’s debate.The structure of the VP debates will allow for her to essentially memorize speeches and talking points to sound coherent. With expectations for her so low, it’ll seem like a triumph to her supporters and perhaps a few who would otherwise be somewhat on the fence. It won’t quite be a political masterstroke, but it won’t be a complete disaster either. And w/the bought and paid for media spinning and weaving she could even come out on top, like some kind of sports analogy of “the rookie held her own against a veteran”, or some such.
The air surrounding this debate of waiting for a Republican trainwreck might be setting up us trainwreck-lovers for a bit of a disappointment, and the result might make those predicting such a trainwreck look like a bunch of meanies to those who will either eventually support Palin or at least figure she’s not so terrible.
It reminds me of the expectations some people had in 2004 that Kerry would trounce Bush in the debates, turning the entire country into a cacophony of Bush-hatred. Didn’t happen,(remember jibjab? ).
Kerry was a better debater in some respects, but he was charmless, and Bush eventually recovered from his initial missteps on the level of pure delivery – after all, “you forgot Poland!” might make us giggle, but it didn’t come off as quite so ridiculous to a good chunk of the country. I also remember at least one political cartoon from the time trying to make the point that it was impossible for Cheney to triumph over Edwards, but I feel like Cheney got some surprised credit even from his enemies for how well he handled himself in a debate format, even if they otherwise found his ideas and presence odious.
Short of long, don’t hold your breath for a Palin crash & burn, it wont happen.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 2 2008 1:47 utc | 2

What Palin lacks (among many, many other things), going into the debate is the standard issue patina all career national level politicians come to acquire. This especially true considering she’s going up against such a politician – acquainted with every trick in the book concerning diplomatic language, media familiarity, an encyclopedic access to international and national lore along with the ability to sell the whole package to the rubes in a manner they find convincing. Palin, by contrast has no such chops. And will have only two options to fall back on;1) memorizing and spitting out the talking points they’ve been jamming down her throat. Which, as in the Curic interviews, inevitably spew out in a jumbled incoherent mess that manages to both, make her look like a rank amateur and at the same time, disingenuous. Or 2) attempt to fall back on a fake folksy joe six pac populism and paint Biden as an east coast elite. Unfortunately, this also would make her seem unprepared for the current complexities at hand. Not to mention that Biden is every bit as good at that game as she ever could hope to be.
Sometimes, (most of the time in fact) worst expectations are indeed confirmed. She’s in for the beating of her life, and there’s not a thing she can do about it.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 2 2008 4:32 utc | 3

let’s hope anna missed.
check this out
Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she’s met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

This is the testimony of Andrew Halcro, an independent candidate in Alaska’s 2006 gubernatorial contest in which Palin was victorious. It was in her debates with Halcro and former Democratic governor Tony Knowles that Palin gained her reputation as a “successful” debater, despite her seeming inability to string coherent arguments together even then. Halcro watched her style carefully, and close up, and he makes a convincing argument that Palin was unwilling or unable to actually answer most if not all of the questions put to her.

Posted by: annie | Oct 2 2008 6:20 utc | 4

Actually, I begin to suspect the GOP may have chosen her not to boost the female vote and win but to strengthen the existing prejudice and utterly discredit the mere notion that a woman can be a serious presidential candidate, by making an example with such a moronic nutjob. Won’t work with the progressive core, which has seen plenty of competent and clever women, but I don’t know how well it would work with the average guy.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Oct 2 2008 8:39 utc | 5

b, there’s something I tend to forget as I pore over the posts at our bar. Perhaps it’s even too simple to remember, or to think about, or to get one’s head around. It’s this: Obama, to judge from his words and his deeds, is intent on one thing, and on one thing only, and that’s to win the election. I hope he does, because I think he’s a remarkably able and energetic young man.
If he’s elected, the main danger would be a failure on his part to address the wreckage all around–a very great danger indeed. Further, the measure of “success” will be this one, and this one only: that he shall have started a process of repair that will take a good ten years (at least) to bring about.
How he comports himself between now and the election doesn’t interest me. And why should it? After all, I’ve been railing hereabouts from the start against the poverty of American political discourse, and I take it as a given that this poverty extends to all candidates for all offices, and to all commentators of all persuasions. Blindness is all. That Obama might prove to be less blind than most–this is the improbability that interests me at the moment.

Posted by: alabama | Oct 2 2008 11:39 utc | 6

Just go hereLink to ACLU“>My God she (Palin) is stupid!

COURIC: You’ve cited Alaska’s proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?
PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land– boundary that we have with– Canada. It– it’s funny that a comment like that was– kind of made to– cari– I don’t know, you know? Reporters–
COURIC: Mock?
PALIN: Yeah, mocked, I guess that’s the word, yeah.
COURIC: Explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy credentials.
PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our– our next door neighbors are foreign countries. They’re in the state that I am the executive of. And there in Russia–
COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?
PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We– we do– it’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where– where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. 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– to our state.

At the time Milosevic arranged for few total idiots to run for presidential election. He wanted to ridicule all of the opposition candidates by this. Sarah Palin bits all of them. She is simply naturally stupid person. Not just incoherent…I am speechless in front of her stupidity. If she comes anywhere near power then perhaps Americans deserve it …but does the world deserve to cope with another American moron?

Posted by: vbo | Oct 2 2008 13:35 utc | 7

here

Posted by: vbo | Oct 2 2008 13:37 utc | 8

Maybe Gov. Palin has been sitting at the feet of the masters of foreign affair and economics, but she sure as hell hasn’t learned a damn thing from any of them!
And her pretty looks might turn on a few men to vote Republican, but her ugly voice is such a turn off that it’s bound to keep any red-blooded American male from pulling the lever for the Republican ticket.
So I’d strongly recommend that as Team McCain is dolling up Palin to resemble Raquel Welch, they teach her how to talk like Raquel as well…;^)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_awEEA80uw
[Sorry B, I don’t know how to create hyperlinks on the blogosphere]

Posted by: Cynthia | Oct 2 2008 15:27 utc | 9

Palin is not smart or trained enough or even domineering and ambitious enough to be confident.
She is like the pretty high school girl who is faced with a ‘challenge’ – of course on that score she may gain approval, admiration, doing a fair or good job in a hot seat.
She has no comprehension of anything, so can’t judge properly when she is beyond her depth. She can’t understand or control herself, and can’t judge when she is sincere (never has been) or parroting, which is like, as they say, the first requirement for anyone over 12, and to the Nth degree for a politician. Also, beyond being famous, she has no aims at all, no opinions, no stake, nothing.

Posted by: Tangerine | Oct 2 2008 16:30 utc | 10

Palin Bingo!!

Posted by: beq | Oct 2 2008 20:04 utc | 11

Cynthia #9, this is your link
just copy and paste from the “link to ACLU” example above the comment space, then preview. You’re ready to groove.

Posted by: plushtown | Oct 2 2008 20:17 utc | 12

was talking w/ my neighbor just a little bit ago, who happens to work for the local electric co, and it ends up he drew the short straw & has to babysit the substation covering the veep debates tonite. not supposed to be any switches going off – the organizers don’t want even as much as a flicker interrupting their circus. laughed & told him either candidate would probably come across as looking more intelligent if the power was off. w/ the economy being as it is, though, i doubt we’ll get to test that hypothesis tonite.

Posted by: b real | Oct 2 2008 22:06 utc | 13

Iran on Alaska

Posted by: vbo | Oct 3 2008 0:46 utc | 14

I really can’t believe she’s going to be president… can you?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 3 2008 2:45 utc | 15

uncle
what a sea of shit they swim in – & the bloody terror behind their folksy phrases
again & again i am reminded of the america of the night of the hunter especially that scene in the park where the ‘community’ is conferring their ‘honour’ on the priest/demon, robert mitchum
quite frankly that film scared the fuck out of me – the reality is even more frightening

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 3 2008 3:02 utc | 16

I had a feeling when i read Uncle’s comments @2 that the proverbial nail had been hit on its mindless head, and after watching the hyped showdown between Joe and Sarah, I have to say that nail has been driven deep into the stupid wooden grain of the amerikan psyche.

Posted by: Lizard | Oct 3 2008 3:05 utc | 17

I’ll concede, she didn’t blow it in any fall down on the stage way, and some will see that as good as a win. However, I think the mood of the country (dread) is not going to be as sympathetic of her folksy ways (which sometimes seem foreign in themselves, unless you’ve been to Canada) or her endless and hollow Bush III type talking points, as much as they might have been. In terms of policy content, facts, and measured confidence Biden made her look like someone running for high school student council. I would imagine that is what people are looking for.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 3 2008 3:17 utc | 18

I practically fell out the chair when she said “the most IMPORTANT thing was for Americans to maintain their sense of EXCEPTIONALISM”.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 3 2008 3:21 utc | 19

She delivered the unassailable generalities. “doggone it!, we’re gonna say to these dictators who hate america, our freedoms, who spit on our beacon hill light, that we will defend our freedom, and bring liberty to the people of the world. mccain is a true-hero. we’re gonna clean up wall street. that’s what we do in Wasilla…” is a response to any imaginably horrific question “how does it feel to kill a wolf” or “when beating detainees, is it ok to electrocute their nutsacks?”she’s a cross between dick vandyke-era mary tyler moore and pol pot with barbed strap-on. hot fascist centerfold.
she kicked ass. and McCain is gonna win.

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 3 2008 3:31 utc | 20

And Joe Biden just looks & sounds like a sybarite with poor diction & a permanent government sinecure. he seems the kind oif person you appoint to investigate interstate cock-fighting.
what were they thinking?

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 3 2008 3:51 utc | 21

McCain is gonna win
bold, unconventional thinking that.
speaking as someone who despises both of these bought and paid for warmongering assclowns, it does appear that Obomba is pulling away from McMelanoma in swing state after swing state.
looks like it may not even be close enough to steal.
whence the confidence in grandpa’s triumph?

Posted by: ran | Oct 3 2008 4:32 utc | 22

The whole debate (on both sides) is pile of shit, empty rhetoric and nothing else. Classical politician bullshiting. In that sense she did not disappoint as well as Biden did not.
She did not blow it big time like she did in previous interviews but what exactly she said. Nothing. Nothing at all. They are going to stick to Bush’s “doctrine” in every single way. Tax cuts for rich so that they can create jobs (in China), endless wars. And she called it change.Pih…
On the other hand Biden did talk about things that would be slightly different if Obama wins…but even so does that make a change that is desperately needed? I don’t think so. And even if that’s so does anybody believe Biden? Hardly…
And not one of them said anything at all about how they are going to solve the economic crises in motion.
Looks like it’s not that important who is going to win in USA presidential election…at least for the world. Maybe Obama is even more dangerous for the world. Clinton was a big manipulator and Obama is Clinton for 21 century.
So not much of the choice there. Except that I don’t see what would make one vote for McCane/Palin unless one would have a gun put on his head.

Posted by: Anonymous | Oct 3 2008 5:08 utc | 23

anna missed: the sense of dread you mentioned in your “concession” post (ha ha) is why these two puppets wielding their respective talking points played out this faux opposition where nothing of substance could be broached. their theatrics reflect the truly precarious situation this empire in decline finds itself in; deviating from the talking points is too much to expect from any corporate automaton.
watching this charade is demoralizing for those of us who look beyond the talking points to the shit storm brewing on the horizon, and it’s meant to be. tomorrow i’ll go back to the homeless shelter/soup kitchen i work at as an Americorp VISTA (volunteer in service to america) and try to convince myself that strengthening one little band-aid will help minimize the damage of the sucking chest wound.

Posted by: Lizard | Oct 3 2008 6:40 utc | 24

that was me, vbo @23

Posted by: vbo | Oct 3 2008 7:07 utc | 25

Lizard,
“and try to convince myself that strengthening one little band-aid will help minimize the damage of the sucking chest wound.”
I would agree with that – and its my only raggedy dog in this presidential circus. Standing down the empire is no easy task, as obviously there are those that would attempt to resuscitate it with yet more blood sacrifice. And a McCain/Palin administration would do that in spades. With relish.
Generally speaking, what worries me most is how the course of history, given a sequential sequence of anomalous events chain reacts into a global catastrophe – archduke Ferdenand notwithstanding. As for some time I’ve had the sense the USA is indeed on such a course of counterintuitive contingencies, that the net result of which is a series of events that net the worst possible conclusion or circumstances, given all the potential possibilities.
The McCain/Palin choice, simply because it exists in serious contention, represents that the ultimate dark side of a cultures consciousness – its death wish – is fully at hand.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 3 2008 8:07 utc | 26

Arvo Part
Arvo Part
GNOSSIENNE n.3 SATIE
Fret, weep and drink…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 3 2008 9:56 utc | 27

Posted by: Lizard | Oct 3 2008 13:44 utc | 28

whoops, not sure how that got double posted.

Posted by: Lizard | Oct 3 2008 13:45 utc | 29

Jesus loves winners

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 3 2008 14:21 utc | 30

Looking back, the two most revolting comments in the debate were produced by Biden: Pakistan’s dangerous possession of nukes which threaten Israel (!) and his revisionist tale of how Hiz was “driven out of Southern Lebanon.”
I know it’s the fashion among leftists to assume these trivialities of human communication known as campaigns necessarily operate by foucauldian discursive production of “subjects” who placate the monstrous stupidity of the electorate. In order to remain sane, we have to convince ourselves that these people do not mean at all what they say.
We’re fooling ourselves.

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 3 2008 14:48 utc | 31

she’s a cross between dick vandyke-era mary tyler moore and pol pot with barbed strap-on. hot fascist centerfold.
lol sloth

Posted by: annie | Oct 3 2008 14:54 utc | 32

Sloth, I was literally beating the side of my head with my knuckles at that point. I still have the headache, so presumably the ‘debate’ I watched last night wasn’t a fever dream.
We’re fooling ourselves, they’re fooling themselves, they’re fooling us, we’re fooling them. There doesn’t seem to be a shred of truth left.
But perhaps I’m fooling myself about ‘truth.’

Posted by: Tantalus | Oct 3 2008 15:09 utc | 33

You wanna see some ‘truth’, check out the youtube vid I just posted in the Counterparty Risk Increases thread…
Just as we were terrorized into WAR we are now literally being terrorized into this bail out!
Welcome to the THE ROYAL SCAM.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 3 2008 15:24 utc | 34

Uncle Scam wrote: I really can’t believe she’s going to be president… can you?
Hitler was a crank. Few important liked him much.
He revered the novels of Karl May and loved Wagner (apologies to Wagner fans) and fancied himself a painter.
Hitler counted on buddies, shared atti-tudes . Central command, coordination, was lacking, and *all* the outposts complained about it. Hitler often quoted the Brits in India as a model – so few ppl dominating so many — but hadn’t a clue about how it was done.
The German empire, such as it was for a short time, had little central admin. Colonialism was never very successful..wiki Hitler continued on that path.
I haven’t seen the debate yet and realise that my musings aren’t too terribly relevant.
Cheers! A round for all.

Posted by: Tangerine | Oct 3 2008 19:29 utc | 35

If Biden and his wife were ignoring a subpoena do you think cable news shows would be ignoring it?

ANCHORAGE: An Alaska judge has refused to block a state investigation into whether Governor Sarah Palin abused her power when she fired her public safety commissioner.
Judge Peter Michalski yesterday threw out the lawsuit filed by five Republican state legislators who said the investigation was manipulated to damage Ms Palin before the presidential election.
“It is legitimately within the scope of the legislature’s investigatory power to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the termination (of) a public officer the legislature had previously confirmed,” the judge ruled.
The probe is looking into whether Ms Palin, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, and others pressured Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire a state trooper who was involved in a divorce from Ms Palin’s sister and then fired Mr Monegan when he refused to sack the trooper. Ms Palin says Mr Monegan was ousted over budget disagreements. snip
The independent investigator, Steven Branchflower, still plans to report his findings by Friday. His report will not include the testimony of Ms Palin’s husband, Todd, and several top aides who refused to appear.

Good question, however the answer would be much more complicated than what can be conveyed by the inference, don’t you think?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 4 2008 15:06 utc | 36

uncle, mcCain’s team has already filed an appeal which will be reviewed on wednesday.
mudflats We had a little surprise today with the Supreme Court deciding to hear the appeal on quashing the Legislature’s investigation into the Troopergate scandal. I’m going to assume that our competent Supreme Court will come to the right decision on Wednesday when they hear arguments. So we march on and urge the members of the Legislative Council to release the report.

Posted by: annie | Oct 4 2008 15:59 utc | 37

Rude Pundit has the definitive post debate analysis;
No, no. Let’s take this further. Joe Biden kicked Sarah Palin’s perky ass from one end of that stage to another. It was humiliating, watching the bizarro display of Palin, this talking points automaton set on “spunk,” absolutely failing to impart any cogent thoughts or cohesive answers or even string together the surprisingly full sentences she spoke into anything like a policy….
It goes on, and on, and on.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 5 2008 0:13 utc | 38

Back to Main