informed comment- the non-debate
"Not only was it not a debate and not only did Palin answer virtually none of the questions put to her, but the whole idea of such an event was ridiculous.
Joe Biden has been either the chairman or the ranking minority member on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years, and is one of our foremost foreign affairs experts and legislators. His acumen and expertise are wide-ranging.
Palin has revealed her real self in the Gibson and Couric interviews, and clearly knows nothing and offers only rubbery expressions and glib repetition, for all the world like a rasping myna bird, of a stream of memorized slogans that sound as though they were disinterred from a time capsule originally buried in William F. Buckley Jr.'s back yard several decades ago.
It was not a debate, and pretending that it was and judging "performance" is to fall into the trap set by the campaign spinmeisters and talking point pimps."
3 comments:
I can't believe there are people around that have the balls to say she did well, let alone won.
At least our round table debate last night was full of rockin' good name calling and arguments. It reconfirmed my opinion of our illustrious leader as a corporate shill, and a pompous ass with a self-satisfied smirk rivaled only by GWB's. I watched ours first, then a repeat of yours.
Yours was scripted and practiced to death, and it showed. Nothing new here other than I'm surprised by the fact that Sarah Palin can memorize and read. Yup, what Juan Cole said.
What debate is right. And it always bugs the hell out of me when, in any recent debate, one debater is deemed by pundits as the winner based on "points". What are the criteria for these points, exactly? Certainly telling the truth isn't one of them, if Palin was declared the winner based on these arbitrary points.
Palin is so much like Bush. That arrogance, superiority and smugness. And the irritatingly defensive tone.
Post a Comment