Click on flowchart to enlarge.
If Sarah Palin cannot speak to the American people with a profound knowledge and complete understanding of the issues facing our nation, how can we possibly trust her to speak to foreign leaders in these most delicate times of war and nuclear proliferation.
She cannot rely on a script, change the subject or avoid the questions. And one thing is certain, a wink will not help her.
Truth in Politics NOW 
Some talking heads have suggested that there was one point in the debate where Sarah Palin bested Joe Biden. I would just let this go, except that it involves an important issue.
In responsed to the question on the powers of the VP, Biden made two mistakes. He referred to Article I instead of Article II of the Constitution, and he misused the word ‘preside’. These are not trivial, although he was of course in the middle of a debate. Overall, Biden’s answer was on the mark, displaying a clear understanding that as VP, Cheney has tried to twist Constitutional interpretation in order to avoid accountability. In particular he said,
“The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he’s part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive”
This is basically correct, although it would have been clearer (but difficult in such a debate) to state the real issue: Cheney is trying to avoid accountability for his mishandling of secret documents. Of course, Cheney must not believe his own nonsense either; it is just a ploy to avoid accountability. (And this country has let him! Very dangerous!) For example, in litigation around his energy task force Cheney invoked Article II (!) of the Constitution to defy Congressional and private demands for information. In other words, he clearly recognized that the VP is part of the Executive Branch. Which of course, it is.
In contrast, Palin avoided clear mistakes of Constitutional interpretation only by avoiding all specifics (as usual), and she completely failed to address the core issue. She said:
“Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we’ll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation. And it is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as a governor, but earlier on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to good use in the White House also.”
So she backs Cheney on the idea that the VP is a member of the Legislative Branch by referring to the importance of her executive experience?? Even neglecting her tone of a school child struggling with an exam question beyond her comprehension, the answer is nothing short of bizarre, and full of dodging around her ignorance. Sheesh, “flexibility”
indeed. That recalls her infamous questions about “just what does a VP do anyway”?!
The VP is a obviously a member of the Executive Branch, whose method of selection is correspondingly stated in Article II. The VP has both a duty and a privilege with regard to the Senate. (This does not “define the role” of the VP.) The Senate also has duties and privileges with respect to the Executive. (See e.g. Article II and Article XX.) This is not mystifying. The only places I know of to find other views is the current office of the Vice President and right-wing talk radio. (I do not say *conservative* because real conservatives criticize him: Cheney is not *conserving* our long established traditions, nor is he protecting our country with his bizarre intransigence. He just wants to wield power as he chooses without accountability. Very dangerous!) Libertarians have been on to Cheney for a long time, recognizing the danger in his strategies. The American people have yet to understand his outrageous accumulation of power without accountability. This is the opposite of constitutional intent, which places the VP in the Executive Branch but without executive power (which resides in the President). Is it any wonder that Cheney chafes under this?
More important than debating constitutional interpretation, however, is Biden’s clear display of an understanding of the core issue behind the question: Cheney has twisted the constitution for his personal aggrandizement, to the detriment of the country. This was what really mattered in the answer. Palin showed no such awareness. If she in fact had an awareness, which I strongly doubt, that is frightening because it demonstrates a willingness to pursue the same kind of abuses as Cheney. I suppose I should add that, should she acquire an awareness, I imagine she will pursue such abuses. Ambition exudes from her like steam from a cow patty. But then, she will likely not have to wait long to have the Presidency, since McCain seems likely to die in office, given his health history and standard actuarial tables.
LikeLike
Great comment from aisaac which provides a wealth of information and clarity. We don’t have to sit around and hope that Obama can win, notwithstanding the Bradley Effect, we can volunteer from own home. Sen. Obama, as many of you already know, has set up a state of the art website making it very easy for anyone to make volunteer get-out-the-vote phone calls. You are given a script and a list of phone numbers generated for you. Go to http://www.barackobama.com
LikeLike