2008 ELECTION:

Palin stands her ground in VP debate with Biden

Associated Press

Published Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008 | 7:59 p.m.

Updated Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008 | 8:17 p.m.

Reader poll

AP Photo/Ron Edmonds

Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., speaks during a vice presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008.

AP Photo/Ron Edmonds

Republican vice presidential candidate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin speaks during a vice presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008.

ST. LOUIS -- Under intense scrutiny, Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin stood her ground Thursday night against a vastly more experienced Joe Biden, debating the economy, energy and global warming, then challenging him on Iraq, "especially with your son in the National Guard."

The Alaska governor also noted that Biden had once said Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama wasn't ready to be commander in chief, "and I know again that you opposed the move that he made to try to cut off funding for the troops and I respect you for that."

Biden responded that John McCain, too, had voted against funding, and said the Republican presidential candidate had been "dead wrong on the fundamental issues relating to the conduct of the war."

The clash over Iraq was the most personal, and pointed, of the 90-minute debate in which Palin repeatedly cast herself as a non-Washington politician, part of a "team of mavericks" that she said was ready to bring change to a country demanding it.

From the opening moments of the debate, Biden sought to make McCain out as a straight-ahead successor to an unpopular President Bush. "He voted four out of five times for George Bush's budget, which put us a half-trillion dollars in debt and over $4 trillion in debt since he got here," he said of McCain.

Palin merely accused Biden of reciting the past rather than looking to the future. "Americans are cravin' that straight talk" that McCain offers, she said.

The two running mates debated for 90 minutes on a stage at Washington University, their only encounter of a campaign with little more than one month to go.

Recent polls show Obama with a small but perceptible lead, and Republican officials said earlier in the day that McCain had decided to pull out of Michigan, conceding the state to the Democrats. At the same time, his own aides said the campaign may soon begin to advertise in Indiana - a state that has voted Republican in every presidential election since 1968.

Palin faced enormous challenges of her own, though. After five weeks as McCain's ticket-mate, her poll ratings had begun dropping and even some conservatives have questioned her readiness for high public office.

Her solo campaign events are few, and she has drawn ridicule for some of her answers in the few interviews she has granted - including her claim that Alaska's proximity to Russia gives her an insight into foreign policy.

After intense preparation - including two days at McCain's home in Sedona, Ariz., there was only one obvious stumble, when she twice referred to the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan as "Gen. McClellan." His name is David McKiernan.

Biden's burden was not nearly as fundamental. Although he has long had a reputation for long-windedness, he is a veteran of more than 35 years in the Senate, with a strong knowledge of foreign policy as well as domestic issues.

For much of the evening, the debate unfolded in traditional vice presidential fashion - the running mates praising their own presidential candidate and denigrating the other.

Palin said Obama had voted to raise taxes 94 times - an allegation that Biden disputed and then countered. By the same reckoning, he said, McCain voted "477 times to raise taxes."

They clashed over energy policy, as well, when Palin said Obama's vote for a Bush administration-backed bill granted breaks to the oil industry. By contrast, she said that as governor, she had stood up to the same industry, and noted that McCain had voted against the bill Obama supported.

Biden said that in the past decade, McCain had voted "20 times against funding alternative energy sources and thinks, I guess, the only answer is drill, drill, drill."

"The chant is, `drill, baby drill," Palin countered quickly, unwilling to yield to Biden on that issue - or any other.

On the environment, Palin declined to attribute the cause of climate change to man-made activities alone. "There is something to be said also for man's activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet," she said, adding that she didn't want to argue about the causes.

Biden said the cause was clearly man-made, and added, "If you don't understand what the cause is, it's virtually impossible to come up with a solution."

Discussion: 22 comments so far…

By Future2012

10/2/08 at 9:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Palin Right On Future Afghanistan Surge

PALIN:

OK, I'd like to just really quickly mention there, too, that when you look back and you say that the Bush administration's policy on Afghanistan perhaps would be the same as McCain, and that's not accurate.

The surge principles, not the exact strategy, but the surge principles that have worked in Iraq need to be implemented in Afghanistan, also. And that, perhaps, would be a difference with the Bush administration.

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.

That's not what we're doing there. We're fighting terrorists, and we're securing democracy, and we're building schools for children there so that there is opportunity in that country, also. There will be a big difference there, and we will win in -- in Afghanistan, also.

BIDEN:

With Afghanistan, facts matter.

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. And those leaders who are over there, who have also been advising George Bush on this have not said anything different but that.

BIDEN:

Well, our commanding general did say that. The fact of the matter is that again, I'll just put in perspective, Barack and I and Chuck Hagel and Dick Lugar have been calling for more money to help in Afghanistan, more troops in Afghanistan,
By gqbossing

10/2/08 at 10:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Both did well overall...

Palin is by far much more likeable and better communicating with the audience.
By thinkingwoman

10/2/08 at 11:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

McCain lost the VP debate the day he selected Palin. He put his campaign first and the American people last. Her choice was as much a gimmick as was her phoney folkie/oakie debate performance. Shame on us if we fall for that same schtick again. Look what that got us with W.
By FactFinder44

10/2/08 at 11:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Palin got it wrong. Per "Democracy Arsenal"

Palin Supports Debunked McCain Plan for Afghanistan

Posted by Patrick Barry

Palin just repeated John McCain's claim that the surge strategy from Iraq could be successfully implemented in Afghanistan. Yet in the past two days alone, the two members of the military working more closely on Afghanistan than anyone fundamentally disagreed with the McCain-Palin plan:

U.S. Commanders rebuff McCain's vision for the war in Afghanistan. Speaking in Washington yesterday General David McKiernan, head of the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan and former head of ground forces in Iraq, rejected McCain's plan for Afghanistan. McKiernan argued that more troops "are urgently required to combat a worsening insurgency, but he stated emphatically that no Iraq-style 'surge' of forces will end the conflict there." While McCain has often said that he wants to apply the same surge strategy in Afghanistan as in Iraq, the commanding general clearly stated "Afghanistan is not Iraq." General David Petraeus, now the head of CENTCOM and former commander in Iraq said, "People often ask, 'What did you learn from Iraq that might be transferable to Afghanistan?'... The first lesson, the first caution really, is that every situation like this is truly and absolutely unique, and has its own context and specifics and its own texture." [Washington Post, 10/2/08. New York Times, 10/1/08]

Afghanistan's strategic puzzle will not be solved by a surge in troops alone. NATO-ISAF commander General David McKiernan outlined Afghanistan's many challenges that cannot be addressed purely by an influx of troops: "A country that has very harsh geography. It's very difficult to move around, getting back to our reliance on helicopters. It's a country with very few natural resources, as opposed to the oil revenues that [Iraq] has. There's very little money to be generated in terms of generated in Afghanistan. The literacy rate -- you have a literate society in Iraq, you have a society that has a history of producing civil administrators, technocrats, middle class that are able to run the country in Iraq. You do not have that in Afghanistan"So there are a lot of challenges. What I don't think is needed -- the word that I don't use in Afghanistan is the word 'surge'"There needs to be a sustained commitment of a variety of military and non-military resources, I believe." Today's piece in the New York Times, covering Afghanistan's debilitating opium trade, which funds insurgents and produces instability, further demonstrates why a military solution alone will not be sufficient in Afghanistan. [General David McKiernan, Washington Independent, 10/1/08. NY Times, 10/02/08]
By katebuckingham

10/3/08 at 6:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

HAHAAHA Pitbull Palin was a disaster!!

"We're gunna get'cha, by darn dog'gone it!" She sounded a lot like Bush!!!

She couldn't stop regurgitating Republican verbal diarrhea--- such empty words, with no substance.

Seriously, this is who Americans want as the 2nd leader of their country? Ready to assume the presidency at a moments notice? Remember McBush is 72 years old, had cancer 3 times and is on 6 different meds.

BIDEN SPOKE ABOUT THE ISSUES and time and time again had to correct her lies and fabrications.

VOTE OBAMA
By katebuckingham

10/3/08 at 6:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

If you were the boss, who would you hire???

OBAMA: Harvard law professor, Juris Doctor of law degree, constitutional law expert, Senate committees: foreign affairs, homeland security, veterans affairs, family, education, health.

BIDEN: Juris Doctor of law degree, Senate committees: Foreign affairs (chair), economy, health, crime, women's affairs, education, technology, environment

McBUSH: graduated from the naval academy in the bottom 5% of his class, senate committees: economy, environment, official conduct (arguably the 3 biggest Republican failures!!!!!!!!!)

PITBULL PALIN: went to 6 different universities before finally getting a BA degree in journalism, no domestic or foreign policy experience but can see Russia from her house.

SERIOUSLY, THIS IS A NO BRAINER!!!!

If you vote McBush/Pitbull, the fate of your country will be in jeopardy. Everyone here in Europe is laughing at Americans--- America has become the butt of all jokes--- people are asking, how can they seriously consider voting for McBush and his Pitbull for another 4 years of Bush's failed policies? Don't they ever learn???

Remember the frontpage headline of London's Daily Mirror newspaper back in 2004 when Americans re-elected Bush: HOW CAN 59 MILLION PEOPLE BE SO DUMB?
By jfnance32

10/3/08 at 6:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama will not release his records from Columbia.

What is he hiding?
By Future2012

10/3/08 at 7 a.m.

Suggest removal

Palin said "counterinsurgency surge strategy" going into Afghanistan is to add troops to facilate:

-clearing,
-holding,
-rebuilding,
the civil society and the infrastructure.

Why would Obama add troops if not to accomplish the above counterinsurgency surge strategy? What are Obamas' troops for?

The over-the-horizion bombing approach has not worked in Afghanistan and would not require added troops.
By azsk8fan

10/3/08 at 7:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

So Palin got a crash course and Palin's got good memorization skills...and so what does that REALLY prove? She's been coached and she was a good student.....big deal.
By MichaelGreen

10/3/08 at 8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nance, I think if McCain would be willing to explain why he crashed five planes and didn't start loving his country until he was a POW--his words--then Obama would be expected to release his records from school. I'm still waiting for the details of George W. Bush's DUI!
By coronada_xv

10/3/08 at 9:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

We will never have victory in Iraq. We lost when Shock and Awe tragically began, when our invasion and occupation of the unfortunate Iraqi people bankrupted us and ruined our reputation. If McCain wins, the world will not soon forget.
By redferret

10/3/08 at 11:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Palin just creeps me out. Personally, I don't need someone like me in office who's all folksy and doesn't know/understand the "Washington Elite." While I don't want more of the same from the past 8 years, I don't want someone who's fuzzy on issues and relies entirely on charm and backwoods catch phrases. Sorry y'all but America doesn't need a beauty pageant person with no grasp of policy so close to the helm.
By LT2LV

10/3/08 at 12:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Well golly gee willikers, I thought Sarah did one heckuva swell job last night! Ya betcha she's doggone qualified to be Vice President... of her daughter's prom committee *wink*.
By bear

10/3/08 at 2:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

For those feeling confused after last nights Vice Presidential debate, please consider this.
Biden stated that Obama wants him in the room for decisions made. If Biden is busy, who is going to hold Obama's hand? Obama, for the short time spent in the Senate actually doing his job, voted present 131 times. He has voted party lines 100% of the time. He has not really done much to prove he is willing to fight for what he believes is right. This tells me he is afraid. Obama is a follower not a leader. Where was his voice before his big campaign?

McCain on the other hand has tapped Governor Palin to execute her knowledge in the area of energy. Palin has proven that she can get the job done there and has no ties to Washington. She is going to work for us, not to make friends, while having the proven ability to work across party lines and handle the task at hand. Does she have all the answers, no. I have full faith that she will do what is best for America given the opportunity.

Biden has already said he won't change"so you are voting for Obama the follower of Biden. Alternatively, will you vote for the real change McCain & Palin will bring to Washington?

Obama preaches hope and change"empty words with no proof to back it up. He as had ample opportunity to do some great things given his position"so where are they?

Give America a chance vote McCain/Palin 08'
By redferret

10/3/08 at 2:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

First that is completely, factually incorrect. Obama has never voted present in the Senate (with a big s). He did vote present... in the state senate of Illinois, but that is a common position of both parties. A present vote is a passive vote meaning a variety of things. One such thing is that it is a protest vote against the measure. So to state he voted present a bunch of times in the US Senate is completely misleading. Do some more research. Also how about Sydney the Third's voting record of 90%+ with W? Hmmmm, that doesn't sound like he voted along party lines....
By jfnance32

10/3/08 at 4:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

What is "Audacity of Hope"?

If you like that kool-aid then I got some land to sell you.
By JustTheFactsJack

10/3/08 at 5:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Palin is a cocktail party joke"".With lipstick
By PatriciaLV

10/4/08 at 5:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

So she refuses (by her own admission) to answer virtually any question, and this is considered "[standing] her ground"?

And I thought we had dropped the bar as far as it would go for Dubya.

The dumbing down of America is now complete.
By PatriciaLV

10/4/08 at 5:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Oh and Jim, can you please try to come up with your own words instead of using others' all the time? I'm truly embarrassed for you.
By DonSaf

10/4/08 at 9:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

This election is clear and simple. Its about Supply Side Economic Theory and Trickle Down verses Demand Side Economic Theory and Trickle Up. Its about war, more war, or less war. Its about increasing the power of the vice president verses abiding by and respecting the constitution. It is about ability.

This election is also about religion based ideals verses pluralism.

It is about who can make wise decisions and who understands the issues.

Stop making your decisions based on who winks at you on TV, who is pretty, who was a prisoner, who is a man or woman or who is white or black. After the debacle of the last 8 years, its time Americans sit back and really think this time.

Look at the issues. We all have differing opinions. Vote for whomever you believe will garner respect for the United States as a nation, who sincerely cares about the people of the United States, and who understands the issues.

Good luck in your decision. Vote wisely.
By spartacus84

10/4/08 at 2:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Let's face it - no one can be happy with the past eight blunder-filled years but nothing scares me more than President Palin.
By car_1

10/4/08 at 4:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

What is really scary for me is that most people can not even give a decent answer as to why they are voting for one candidate over another. Just a bunch of talking points with no substance.

Let's face it, how many black folks are going to vote Obama simply because he is black (or half black). Not because of his politics but because he is simply a hyphenated American. On the flip side, How many white folks won't vote for him because of his ethnicity. How many folks will vote for a candidate simply because of the little D or R by the name. That's scary. What's even more scary is that some of the folks commenting here are allowed to vote.

Neither one of these dolts deserve to be president of my HOA let alone of America. It is very sad that one of them will end up being POTUS.

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question