Sarah Palin abused the 'parameters' of the Moderated Debate

I found the moderation of Gwen Ifill more than gracious, while a prospective Republican Vice President used the 'propaganda' about the 'book' Gwen is writing, as an opportunity to abuse the 'spirit' of the debate. I also don't appreciate Palin's anger over HER interview with Katie. Katie Couric did a first rate interview. There isn't anything to complain about and Palin is beginning to whine like a spoiled child.



I found there were more times than not that Sarah Palin simply dismissed the question asked of her to talk about any subject she wanted to talk about and used the debate as a forum to promote a gas pipeline from Alaska to the 48 contiguous states.

Old Reference :: Election 2004 Extensive Rules Govern the Presidential Debates (click here)

No one 'caught' all that?

At least when Joe Biden went 'off topic' he first requested that of the commentator AFTER his answer to the question. I believe when asked about the 'polarized DC;' Joe Biden spoke first of his long record which speaks for itself and then asked Ms. Ifill if he could depart from the subject. That gave license to nothing but a Sarah Palin who was going to portray herself as a 'media victim.'

IFILL: You both would like to be vice president. (click here)
Senator Biden, how, as vice president, would you work to shrink this gap of polarization which has sprung up in Washington, which you both have spoken about here tonight?
BIDEN: Well, that's what I've done my whole career, Gwen, on very, very controversial issues, from dealing with violence against women, to putting 100,000 police officers on the street, to trying to get something done about the genocide in -- that was going on in Bosnia.
And I -- I have been able to reach across the aisle. I think it's fair to say that I have almost as many friends on the Republican side of the aisle as I do the Democratic side of the aisle.
But am I able to respond to -- are we able to stay on the -- on the topic?
IFILL: You may, if you like.

Palin has since appeared on Right Wing media, well rehearsed stating, in not so many words, that she is the victim to the 'liberal media.' That is simply nonsense.

Palin took opportunity to be hostile and aggressive toward Ms. Ifill while disregarding the 'spirit' of the debate when she stated she would 'speak to the American people' regardless of the answers expected of her.

Initially she stated :: "PALIN: Thank you, Gwen. And I thank the commission, also. I appreciate this privilege of being able to be here and speak with Americans." I think that was a lead in to what would follow. I think her 'venture' into 'off topic' content was premeditated. Part of the aspect of debates is to test candidates in their ability to be concise in answers to questions. They aren't suppose to use debates to meander through issues to win approval while wasting people's time. 90 minutes is a very narrow window to address so many issues.

Was it that the Republicans weren't going to participate if they couldn't have the debates on their own terms? I have questions. I don't appreciate the high handed attitude that was exhibited by Palin as if she should be above rules and pertinent questions that were asked of her. If Palin feels 'chocked' by organized venues of evaluating people vying for elected office than she should step down. These are legitimate public forums and not a Republican play toy for exploitation of propaganda.

IFILL :: Now, let's talk about -- the next question is to talk about the subprime lending meltdown.
Who do you think was at fault? I start with you, Governor Palin. Was it the greedy lenders? Was it the risky home-buyers who shouldn't have been buying a home in the first place? And what should you be doing about it?...
…IFILL: Would you like to have an opportunity to answer that before we move on?
PALIN: I'm still on the tax thing because I want to correct you on that again. And I want to let you know what I did as a mayor and as a governor. And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also....

You'll exuse me. But. Why then debate?

I have a complaint. Even though Joe Biden did well. I mean he couldn't do anything else. What the heck was that mess with the back drop to his camera view? I didn't appreciate it. I thought it was distracting.

So. Long about now, is everyone feeling as though they are SPECTATORS to their government?

Its called "Violation of the Public Trust."

From Wiki :: The concept of the public trust relates back to the origins of democratic government and its seminal idea that within the public lies the true power and future of a society; therefore, whatever trust the public places in its officials must be respected.
One of the reasons that bribery is regarded as a notorious evil is that it contributes to a culture of corruption in which the public trust is eroded.

I am still waiting to find out if this mess is Constitutional. I believe it is not. The bill seeks to bailout a 'special interest' group while turning its back on the citizens of this country. The Democrats in the Senate may have even provided enough of the 'interest of the people' to save the bill from Constitutional scrutiny.

I don't want to hear how Democrats are Big Government Spenders. I don't want to hear how 'good for America' conservative fiscal policy is. I don't want to hear how the last 30 years of Republican rule has improved the lives of Americans and I especially don't want to hear how regulation is BAD for this country or how we can afford more tax cuts.

The Narcisstic Republican Assault against the United States of America is OVER.

Anyone willing to put up with this and support a government whereby elected officials simply turn their backs on the very constituency that elected them, while making trillion dollar deals with companies are out of their minds. Whatever makes anyone believe that cutting taxes and removing regulations to PROTECT the interests of Americans is good government, is beyond me.

If you ever thought that cutting taxes to put more money in your pocket was a good economic strategy while giving huge tax breaks and incentives to corporations would create jobs; I hope you have FINALLY learned what reality that actually brings.

I do believe it is more than corrupt. I believe it is a form of treason. Call it incompetency if you will, which brings its own reality to the judgement of the American voter, but the fact of the matter is the legislation from 1999 through 2003 inflicted harm on this country in a way it never should have. That is complete disregard of the trust placed in the hands of those elected.

You like being a spectator to your vote? I don't !



House Passes 700-Billion Dollar Bailout (click here)
By Gina Mangieri
Some lawmakers who voted "yes" say they still have reservations.
Hawaii's two house delegates first voted "no" on Monday's version, then both voted "yes" today -- drawn to added tax benefits for the middle class but still wary about oversight for wall street.
What was a three page white house proposal went through a capitol hill buffet line to come out with 451 pages of tax breaks, credits and incentives on top of the 700 billion dollars the treasury wanted for the financial industry.
Representative Neil Abercrombie says, "I warned these guys right straight through this bill is not going to get at fundamentals. People watching stock market are looking at a yoyo."So why vouch for it?...