I was referring to this:

“Further, have you fricking met Joe “Run At The Mouth” Biden? Because it ain’t exactly a cakewalk for him to debate cleanly. Between the gaffes, the inanity, and the blather?”

It’s just not necessary and it’s not even fair. I would not look for this from Christy, usually.

In this case, imvho, your well-founded admiration for Joe is causing you to very narrowly assess Christy’s article as dredging-up old issues, and possibly an attack.

However, I think it’s more the case that she’s doing two larger things:

- innoculating US from the cheap-shot attacks on Joe by the Right (being blasted out all over Hate-Talk Radio today), and

- making sure We take Sarah seriously and don’t get caught in an Over-Confidence Trap going into the Debate

It’s a Big Tent we’ve got here – and the Lake is a Safety Zone – where it’s okay for everyone to express themselves from their Heart, just like you!

But, rest assured, after all of our kibitzing and piles of peanut shells on the floor, We’re all in Joe’s Corner for this Debate!

This is a man who has done a whole lot for battered women, and who did everything he could to stop genocide in Kosovo, among other worthy things he has done. He deserves better than he is getting from you this morning, Christy. Would it astonish you to hear that some of the gaffes were less than meets the eye, and that people like Shailagh Murray and Jonathan Capeheart tried to make much out of very little? You linked to a post from 2006 with Joe in a tutu for not supporting Russ Feingold on something. It would be fair to link to his opposition to the FISA bill as well.

I hope Joe Biden will be the Vice President. The alternative is too horrid to contemplate. And I hope that if he does something worth criticizing, including a poor debate performance, that it will be written about fairly. But the dredging up of the same five themes that have passed for a summation of Biden’s three decades in the Senate on this blog and others is not what I am looking forward to reading.

Its relevance to the U.S. elections is obvious. Sarah Palin is Preacher Powell in the flesh.

On Palin as a Debater, I’ve watched the Alaska Debates from 2006 and read Halcro’s piece. Here are my thoughts -

- Halcro is a Weak Debater, so don’t put much stock in his analysis, other than to see where his skills fell short – he couldn’t handle her use of the Glittering Generality.

- Sarah is a One Trick Pony: Field a Question and Transition with Energy into her Vague but Positive Joan of Arc persona – see her Couric Video on the Question of What She Reads – she shows the Trick Clearly in that 90 second segment

- She’s a mere mortal – and not a very smart one either – when *persistently* confronted with facts. Biden can start a ‘dig’ and work it for an hour – something along the lines of “How about that Bridge to Nowhere Lie?” – her only coping mechanism is Passive Aggression – she’ll unravel over time and cook-off.

The key to her success on Thursday is Maintaining her Joan of Arc/Diana the Huntress Mythic Impression on the audience.

We should concede that Palin is going to keep 30% of the audience Enthralled, because they only See What They Want to See.

But, the Rest of US – who are also susceptible to the American Idol-atry Effect – can Watch Biden Open Oz’s Curtain over the course of the various topics by Introducing Cognitive Dissonance to the Viewers.

A small crack between Sarah’s Projected Image of Unblemished Purity, and the Facts of Her Greedy, Lying, Heartless Chaotic Career can be turned into the Marianas Trench of Lack of Credibility.

If done right, Biden can whittle-down her Appeal to just the 30% of US who Prefer to Believe in Fantasies. It doesn’t have to be a lone, devastating pounce – just a steady chip, chip, chip.

She’s going to be aiming at Obama. Biden is going to be aiming at her. Everytime she over-extends, the soft underbelly of her Lack of Qualifications is wide open for a Character Body Shot.

Speaking with Wisdom from the Stability of his Experience, Biden should leave her looking like a Cheerleader who Lost her Voice.

she should have thought about it instead of saying “yes!” without blinking

yes. she should have.

but i think the price she is going to pay is one i’d not give solely for stupidity.

-G

In me, she provokes a wierd combination of embarrassment and disgust.

By omission, it appears that he prefers Paulson’s approach purchasing banks “toxic assets” to take those off their hands.

In that regard, Dennis Kucinich has been circulating a letter by Emory Law Professor Frank Alexander, which argues that the government should only buy securities that leave the govt. in control of the underlying mortgage. That way they can do things to help out the owner, which helps the overall housing market.

IMHO, the govt. should only buy the mortgages themselves, which causes their derivatives to evaporate.