Right…cos homegirl did a *stellar* job with talking about the economy and domestic issues.

so…. if the Dems were to complain about a debate being unfair, then what? FOX would say what? and FOX is owned by a Bush family member. Maybe they should of thought this "VP thing" alot more throughly.

You have got to be fucking kidding me. This channel is a JOKE.

But it ain't funny.

shouldn't have to face foreign policy questions?!

are they JOKING?

what's she going to tell a foreign leader when a subject comes up that she knows nothing about?

"um, sorry, prime minister…I shouldn't have to face questions like that."

No, say what?, she's going to say "Well I'll find some answers and get back to ya!!!"

side note…

…that woman does some weird thing with her mouth when she talks. very distracting.

em, either that or "in what respect, prime ministeeeeeeeeeer?"

What IS funny, though, is they think she has a clue about economics.

she should be in the zone on foreign policy. i mean i think obama did a pretty good job and she's got loads more experience.

This bullshit does not suprise me. They couldn't come up with a way to keep her out of the debate, so now, even before the debate happens, it's unfair.

This bitch should be ready for any political question thrown at her. The only way it would be unfair is if they asked her fucking physics questions.

yeah, she's got loads of experience in foreign policy.

she can see russia from her house!

The doofus talking head is a McCain strategist representing the McCain campaign not a Fox News commentator giving an opinion. So how is this Fox News starting a bitch campaign?

Wtr, Steve Doocy doesn't work for the campaign. He is a co-host of Fox and Friends. He was the one who said the deck was stacked.

Uh, cos even though it's not a Fox News commentator, isn't that Fox News commentator (or "moron", whichever suits you) in the video agreeing with said doofus talking McCain head, therefore starting a "bitch campaign" by way of doofus talking head?

Oh, and Doocy's also the one who started the whole "What do you mean Palin's not well-versed in foreign policy? She's right there next to Russia!" thing, so it's safe to say that he's backing the "Palin isn't dumb even though she just claimed that she'd seen human footprints next to fossilized dinosaur remains" agenda.

Oh this is GOLD.

me: Professor Wagner, I'd like to not answer that essay question on the final because I don't know much about it

Professor Wagner: OK Maria, you fail

Me: bu-bu-but, I'm pretty and I wear lipstick!

wtr, because it's ON Fox News. DUH

speaking of, did anyone watch that thing on the history channel last night about cosmology and the universe and gravity? i thought it was going to blow my mind into tiny pieces, i loved it.

Sar, I didn't see that. However, just recently finished reading The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. String theory blows my mind.

Me too. What got me even better than that (which it shouldn't but it does) wa a youtube video I saw once about how to turn a sphere inside out.

I have a chaste, loving relationship with physics. I am totally in love with it but I don't "do" it.

My relationship is loving, but complicated. It understands me, but I only have small understanding of it. If anything, I admire it from afar.

That's kinda why I like Greene … he writes books that laypeople like me can grasp.

Presidential debates are a stitch-up

London Guardian
September 29, 2008

The idea that the presidential debates are “high-risk TV” in which the candidates can be questioned “on any subject matter” is laughable (90 minutes in TV spotlight that will make or break candidates, September 26). The debates are profoundly undemocratic. The “private” corporation that organises them, the Commission on Presidential Debates, was established by the Republican and Democratic national committees in 1986 and serves their interests.

Before the debates take place, the two-party organisations jointly draft debate “contracts” which define exactly what will happen during the “debate”. This includes screening which topics will be discussed, who can attend the debates, who can ask questions, how long each candidate will have to answer and that there be no candidate-to-candidate questions, no rubuttals and no follow-up questions.

Moreover, the CPD has set criteria that deliberately exclude third-party candidates from taking part. To join the debate, a third-party candidate must be able to demonstrate that they expect to receive 15% of the public vote. This is three times greater than the 5% political parties must achieve to receive major party status and receive public funds.

The polls used to determine expected support are not required to list candidates other than those from the two main parties. This stage management does not lead to a debate but a glorified press conference.
Dr. Maria Ryan
University of Nottingham

Maybe Doocy should get Palin lucky potato for the debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_gZN-VLEXU

He always did know how to get to the real issues.

"… it sounds like they're stacking the deck against her."
And just WHO is 'they'? The Repubs do have a say in the debate format. If the debate is 'unfair' because it's focusing on foreign policy - and not those domestic policies that Palin is such a scholar on - then the GOP gets a lot of the blame for that.

I think I cracked a molar watching that on the real.

lmao at The University of Nottingham! Yeah, um, thanks for that. *snicker*

let the spin begin…….foreign policy isn't important or fair (when it's Biden forte)…but it WAS a week ago when it was McCain's debate (and his forte)?

why is doocy still on the air?????

This woman looks like E.T.

Yeah Caroline, I'm gonna take the word of a country who's had democracy for about 25 minutes.

(i kid, i kid)

yes, kittenpaw! her poor neck is working overtime!

Yes, the debate will be unfair - to Joe Biden. Here's my issue with the upcoming debate, which this inane clip nicely foreshadows:

She refers to Biden as a skilled debater, insinuating that is his ability to move his mouth at the right times is what will win the debate, instead of his many years of Senate experience.

As stated earlier (see: poopy flag diaper), I think there will be no contest on who the winner will be. The problem with this however, is that Joe Biden's sound spanking will be perceived as sexist, especially if he reacts emotionally to Palin's statements (see: sarcastic smirks and quips from Friday's debate). With two men debating, those asides can be written off as simply not agreeing with the statement. With a man and a woman, the same reactions would be perceived as Biden discounting Palin - not as a candidate - but as a dumb woman, and will subsequently be blown up in the media to proportions that may overshadow the debate itself.

The media has to villianize someone, what a shame it has to be the guy that knows his shit simply because he knows his shit.

In other news, I am naming my new band "The Master Debaters"

"When millions of people are turning to these liars for their information about the world around them, maybe losing all our money and being forced to start over isn't such a bad thing"

A-fuckin-men

i'm waiting for a complete implosion of the mcsame/failin' campaign and the debate gets called off altogether.

btw since mccain didn't rescue the economy after all, does that mean his campaign is suspended again?

So the questioning will be unfair because Biden has the advantage in global policy?? How does Fox want to correct that imbalance? Throw in a few questions on sleds, moose hunting and engine block heaters?

Biden is going to have to be VERY careful and I think the best approach is to give Palin enough rope to hang herself, which she will. I trashed her on my blog, which is a non-politcal blog, and almost all the people who commented cannot stand her. I don't know where these hillbillies are who are pro Palin.

Here is an excerpt from an article I just read a few minutes ago, which may explain why automatons like Nancy Pfotenhauer are scrambling to paint this debate as biased (though the GOP has already succeeded in getting the format to favour Palin):

"Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin. The campaign has held a mock debate and a mock press conference; both are being described as "disastrous." One senior McCain aide was quoted as saying, "What are we going to do?" The McCain people want to move this first debate to some later, undetermined date, possibly never. People on the inside are saying the Alaska Governor is "clueless."

I'm ABSOLUTELY dizzy with glee. I really hope Biden does his best to allow her to dig her own grave.

hey gabi, what is the source of that article?

Oh and I do realize that these quotes could be, as Jeff Bercovici pointed out, a strategic maneuver by McCain's campaign to win the "expectations game" by lowering the public's for Palin (if that's even possible). Nevertheless, I think they are accurate indicators of what's going on within the McCain campaign, as evidenced by Pfotenhauer's tangible desperation. I wouldn't be surprised if Palin came down with the "flu" or some Alaskan emergency ("Putin's rearing his head!") the day of the debate.

Killorn: The original source is from Ed Schultz, a liberal talk-show host (yeah, I don't know) but I originally read it in this Chicago Tribune piece: http://blogs.chicagotribune.co.....-pain.html

Oh and here's a quote from the more reputable Wall Street Journal that basically underscores the quote from Ed Schultz radio show (because as much as I would like to, I didn't really know if I could trust its veracity):

"But in recent days, Gov. Palin flubbed quasi-mock debates in New York City and Philadelphia, some operatives said."

(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122265784614384667.html?mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy)

This quote refers to the mock debates they conducted for her last week but I doubt things have changed much since then (as evidenced by the Couric interview since those mock debates).

And if people are wondering why I've posted here so frequently in the past hour, it's because of my sheer, unbridled joy. I just hope that this isn't a ploy and that she makes like the Hindenburg on Thursday.

Thanks! The comments on those sources are eye-opening.

I agree with you Gabi. I hope that this is a good sign for the Obama team. You kind of have to wonder how "low" do they have to set expectations to accommodate Palin? Kindergarten? I would hope that even Republicans in favor of McCain can see how stupid this pairing is. But then again, I won't get my hopes up too high. Thanks for the data.

Oh this is funny in reading the article: " the McCain campaign aims to halt what it sees as a perceived decline in the crispness and precision of Gov. Palin's latest remarks .."

Crispness and precision? How about: "Sarah Palin: Operation Dimwit"

i haven't read all the comments yet so maybe someone said this already, but isn't the subject and format of the debate preset? i mean, the pres. debate was a foreign policy debate with the economy included on the basis that it's a global issue.

what do they want her to debate about? whether aerial wolf hunting is best done from a 747 or a cessna?

bitch, please.

…awesome!

Jemms. You are either a liar or a fool. Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who is not related to the Bush family! What a putz you are to post what you know to be a lie so that your rabid liberal friends will repeat it over and over and over again as the truth:

No. 2 jemms says:
so…. if the Dems were to complain about a debate being unfair, then what? FOX would say what? and FOX is owned by a Bush family member.

so, Fox isn't owned by a bush family member.

doesn't change the fact that they're a propaganda machine for the GOP. way to focus on ONE erroneous statement in a long list of comments that focus on the topic at hand. that's called "deflection".

care to stay on topic? because THIS rabid liberal friend of Jemms would like to know if you agree with Fox's take.

But John, what is FOX if not a platform for the spewing of misinsformation that rabid conservatives will repeat over and over and over again as the truth?

John Smith, I watched a show that stated that a Bush "member' does have FOX in it's wings. I believe they produce. Anyway, perhaps I misquoted, but at least I am not a dried up, bitter individual such as you seem to be. Dude, I can give a flying s*it about all your data about Fox. You being anxious to point out that Murdoch owns FOX. Really. You must have some kind of hobbies. So, maybe I am wrong! WHO GIVES A S*IT! Everyone still knows FOX is retarded and did photo "retouching" to those pictures of some New York Times reporter. Oh, wait did I get that wrong too?? uh-oh.

My friends are not rabid liberals; they are stable and normal. Perhaps a bit indifferent about all of this. I also do not go running to my"rabidly" liberal friends and annouce that Bush owns FOX. Remember, its "produces" now. Maybe I just do not care. Oh, well. Whatever.

oh. um just a reminder. Did anyone notice the first post about FOX? just saying.

the deck is stacked because the moderator is putting out an adoring book on obama. seems to me that she is biased.
just saying.

doug, the moderator doesn't come up with the questions.

so your argument is out the window. got anything else?

btw, doug, have you read the book or are you just repeating how Fox described it?

because, from what I've read about the book, it's about how black politicians benefited from the civil rights movement. Speaks about Obama and other black politicians.

but it's not exactly an "adoring" book on Obama. seems to me you're talking out of your butt. just saying.