Betcha By Golly Wow

Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations. As we read the analyses of the Vice Presidential debate, the consensus is that Sarah Palin turned in a great performance because she didn't respond to questions with silence or jibberish. Well, complete jibberish. Because if you look at the transcript of what she said, you will see a great deal of jibberish, or Sarahspeak, as we like to call it. Let's go to the video tape.

"It is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting Wall Street (Or maybe the other way around?)

"And as for who coined that central war on terror being in Iraq, it was the Gen. Petraeus and al Qaeda, both leaders there and it's probably the only thing that they're ever going to agree on, but that it was a central war on terror is in Iraq." (That's not English.)

"And Secretary Rice, having recently met with leaders on one side or the other there, also, still in these waning days of the Bush administration, trying to forge that peace, and that needs to be done, and that will be top of an agenda item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration." (Still waiting for a transitive verb.)

"Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are." (Alright, forget the English. How about a basic grasp of the Constitution?)

I could go on and on. The point is, there has to be more to a political leader than the ability to seem just like us. It shouldn't be who can say 'betcha by golly wow' better. And that's what we're dealing with in Sarah Palin.

The question everyone, regardless of political ideology, (that means, you David Brooks and Pat Buchanan) should ask themselves after last night's debate is: if the President were out of the country, and we were hit by a terrorist attack, who would you want to step in and lead at that moment. Sarah Palin? Or Joe Biden?

Let's be honest. It's not even close. Joe Biden knows what he's talking about. You may not like him. He's not perfect. But he certainly acquitted himself in the only way he could last night. He was respectful of Palin. He never corrected her mistakes (McCiernan instead of McClellan, for example). He never showed her up. He never lost his cool. And he didn't make any gaffes. Plus, if everyone wants to be honest and not partisan, he had the moment of the night when said that as a one time single Dad, he knew the pain average Americans were going through.

As for Palin, we know she has strengths. As a hockey mom, I'd love to have her kid on my kid's team. (Although I know a lot of mothers who hate seeing 8 year old Piper toting around Palin's infant). As the mayor of a small town, I guess she was wonderful--although she did stick the residents with a load of debt from the building of a new hockey rink. As a governor of a culturally outlier state, with a population the size of Memphis, TN, which receives virtually all its revenue from two sources, (oil and the federal government), she seems to be doing a great job.

But we're talking about a potential POTUS. So why are we holding her to the standard of "Just don't embarass yourself"?

I'm sorry, we have all gone mad.

And speaking of that, Gwen Ifill was awful. Clearly the questions of her impartiality affected her performance. She never insisted that Palin actually answer a question posed and she never asked the obvious questions that are important in a VP discussion. Such as: "If Roe v Wade were struck down and the Senate rewrote the law to outlaw abortion in every case, no exceptions, and it was a tie vote, would you cast the deciding vote to make that bill the law of the land?"

The questions all lent themselves to pre-recorded answers, which obviously worked in Palin's favor. And one last question: when I was growing up, the GOP was the party of law and order, follow the rules, respect institutions. How is it that now a Republican is applauded for openly defying protocol as Palin did when she said, "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. " Actually, re-reading this, it doesn't make sense, either. Forget it.

The fact is, if you thought she didn't embarass herself you were right. If you thought she was kind of appealing and spunky, you're right again. If you thought she didn't bury the McCain campaign once and for all, correct once more.

But if you think that makes her qualified to be Vice President, please...think again.

Do you feel good about Sarah Palin as a potential POTUS after last night's debate and why? Talk about this or anything else by hitting the 'comments' button below, bypassing the Google sign-up and hitting the anonymous or nickname button.