What the Media Hasn’t Told Us About the Vice Presidential Debate

After a record breaking number of viewers tuned in to watch the Vice Presidential Debate between Senator Joe Biden and Governor Sarah Palin, the media had a field day with the Republican candidate, Sarah Palin.  The pundits, the talk show hosts, and even SNL had a great time lampooning Mrs. Palin for her “can I call you Joe?” statement as well as some of the other things she said (official debate transcript pdf). 

Yes, the media had a great time dumping on Sarah Palin for pretty much everything she said despite the fact that they never really found much fault with the actual facts she referenced or the things she said.  It was more about the way she said them.

What the media didn’t do, however, was take a hard look at Joe Biden and some of the things HE said during the debate.  In fact, the media pretty much awarded Biden victory for the debate simply because he didn’t “screw up” and utter any of the insane comments he’s been known for over the past 30 years or so.  Of course, had the media taken the time to actually do any research on what he said, they may have found differently.

Some of Biden’s spoken “mistakes” were relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of things.  However, other things he said were arguably less forgivable.  I’ll let you be the judge.

• Biden said, “Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie’s restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time, and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years.”
   
  The Problem – The Katie’s restaurant Biden was referring to has been closed for 20 years.  It’s hard to see how Biden is keeping up with the current pulse of the American people in a restaurant that hasn’t existed for 20 years.

 

• Biden said about Hezbollah: “When we kicked — along with France — we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon… I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.’”
   
  The Problem – Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebanon.  Even if they had been the statement wouldn’t make any sense because Lebanon isn’t a NATO country and Lebanon had not attacked a NATO country so NATO would not have been involved in filling a vacuum left by a vacated Hezbollah.

 

• Biden was also very adamant that Obama never said he would sit down and talk with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions.
   
  The Problem – Where do I start?  Biden must be deaf, dumb, and forgetful if he actually believes what he was actually saying. 
   
  During the CNN/YouTube debate in July of last year Obama made it perfectly clear what his position on the matter is. 
   
  Barack Obama was asked by a video questioner: “Would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea?…..”

  “I would,” he answered.

  You’d think Biden would remember that Obama said that considering he was actually at that debate.  Not only was Biden there, but in August of 2007 Biden attacked Obama’s answer, telling the National Press Club: “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely, positively, no.”

  I guess Biden didn’t remember that episode.  Nor does the media.

  Of course, you’d think both Biden and the media would be able to use their mouse to click on a few links to find the link on Barrack Obama’s official campaign website where it says: “Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.” (emphasis mine)

  I found it here: http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/foreign_policy/ .  It took about half a minute.

 

• Biden also gave a lengthy diatribe on vice president Dick Cheney’s “dangerous” belief that “he’s part of the legislative branch.”  Biden cited Article I of the Constitution as proof that Cheney “works in the executive branch” and has “no authority relative to the Congress.”  Biden huffily added: “He should understand that.  Everyone should understand that.”
   
  The Problem – Biden shows his ignorance of the Constitution in a very scary way.  Seriously, how long would it have taken the media to check out his facts on this one?  I guess the media either considers Joe Biden a constitutional authority incapable of making mistakes or they think they know what the constitution says and didn’t feel the need to whip out a copy for themselves.  Either way, I never heard a single peep out of anyone in the news about Biden’s statements.  But he was seriously confused.

  First of all, it’s Article II of the Constitution that describes the Executive Branch.

  Secondly, Article I of the Constitution describes the Legislative Branch which Biden should know since he’s actually a part of that branch of the government.  Furthermore, there’s a section of Article I that describes the Senate (Biden’s domain) and in that description it very clearly defines the Vice President’s duties as related to the Senate:

  The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

  How does the “President of the Senate” not have any “authority relative to Congress”?  He’s the President of the Senate.  All the time.  Just because he doesn’t vote doesn’t mean he doesn’t have any involvement.  In fact, the framers of the Constitution thought the position important enough that they even said this:

  The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

  So, apparently, they thought it was important that there always be a President of the Senate.  You’d think that Joe Biden, who has spent 36 years in the Senate, would know that!  Has he not been paying attention all this time?

 

• Biden had some issues with math calculations as well that no one in the media seemed to notice.  Biden stated with some authority: “With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen. … We spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.”
   
  The Problem – It’s not even close to being true.  The Congressional Research Service calculates that we’ve spent $172 billion in Afghanistan and $653 billion in Iraq since 9/11. 

  The most money in Iraq has been spent in 2008.  So far this year we’re spending less than $3 billion a week.  So, using Joe Biden’s calculations, we haven’t spent more than $9 billion in Afghanistan (which is suddenly the most important front in the war on terror according to Democrats) since 9/11. 

  He was only off by about $163 billion.  Where did he learn to do math?

 

• Biden must have been feeling pretty good about himself around that time in the debate because in the same answer he went on to claim that “John McCain voted against a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty that every Republican has supported.”
   
  The Problem – Joe was making up more facts.  The last nuclear test ban treaty the Senate voted on was the one Clinton signed back in the ’90s.  As The New York Times editorialized on the Senate vote: “Last week, Senate Republicans thundered ‘no’ to the nuclear test ban treaty, handing the White House its biggest defeat since health care in 1994.”

  Forty-nine Republicans voted against the treaty; only four liberal Republicans voted for it.  Yet, that’s the treaty Biden had to have been talking about and the same treaty Biden says “every Republican has supported.”

 
I don’t know about any of you, but I haven’t heard the mainstream media report on any of these goofs, blunders, or lies (whichever you prefer to call them).

Do you think they would have let Sarah Palin get away with making such outrageous statements?  Do you think they would have let a Republican off the hook without so much as a cursory investigation as to whether or not any of the things that were said were actually true?