After the essential non-event that was the first Presidential Debate last week, this week we have the potential Veeps taking the stage. Obama and McCain gave us little to go off of other than what we already knew about them and essentially left the stage in a draw, though as days have gone by and more scrutiny has been placed on the debate many would point to Obama as the winner, much of which could be due to McCain’s obvious disdain for his opponent. Though a continued smolder and tight grimace is arguably better than the explosion of temper that could’ve happened as McCain has displayed in his past. So the Reps have to be happy about that at least.

So now it’ll be Biden (who made an appearance after the debate to lend to the discussion) and Palin (who rarely makes any sort of an appearance except in restaurants where she can occationally be found to make statements that go in direct opposition to her running mate’s positions) taking to the podiums.

What kind’ve strategy (or would it be tactics?) do the Vice Presidential candidates need to employ to win this election? Well, Palin has a few things going for her- no one expects anything good from her, she’ll have a chance to do her “pitbull” attack directly in her opponent’s face which is exactly what her base desires of her, and should Biden go from defense to offense in return he’ll be seen as bullying (you can ask Hillary Clinton all about that… gee, seems sexism can run in favor of the very people who claim it from time to time, can’t it?). So basically Palin needs to keep her answers short and sweet, stick to what she knows, and do her best to be funny and biting with her criticisms. Biden won’t be able to do anything in response to the latter, and as for the answers to questions- she needs to stay away from riffing, because that tends to be when she proves just how little she actually knows (sounds a little like our current Prez doesn’t it?).

Biden on the other hand is not exempt from making verbal slips himself, and will need to do much the same in the short and sweet answer vein. If anything, Biden needs to keep from overexposing himself and overplaying his hand. When asked a question, show that he has a grasp of the topic, express the policy choices that he and Obama are making, and leave it at that. He also needs to keep from adressing Palin too much, especially in the way that McCain was addressing Obama. No comments of inexperience, no comments of being naive, and don’t go on the attack when she’s brutally wrong and floundering. The reporters and commentators and analysts will handle that more than enough when the debate is over. If Biden plays too heavy handed he could come across as a bully, and that’s the last thing the Dems need right now, because it would give Palin a free pass.

If anything Biden needs to attack the man who won’t be there, and that’s McCain. Obama was too reserved to score a KO punch on any of the opportunities he was given.

So what will be the result of this Debate? Well, if Biden comes out ahead, no one will be shocked or surprised, but it’s likely more of the undecided middle will lean towards Obama and Biden as McCain comes across as prickly and arrogant after his last appearance, and it’s likely that Palin’s (I’m sorry, I have no other word for it) cattiness and lack of understanding of questions or answers will prove too frightening a combination. If Palin somehow managed to recover amazingly from past media Q&A sessions and is suddenly eloquent and well informed on all things Executive Branch related it will be a major coup for the Reps and could calm the fears that even many in their own base have about Palin.

Part of me is almost hoping for a complete train wreck in this week’s Debate to prove just how much of a farce this whole thing has become, but at the same time, no one will really benefit from that. Rather, I hope everyone can get their shit together and we can get past the bluff and bluster and the American public can actually learn something about the people who could potentially be a last breath away from being the President themselves.

Watch the debate Live from Washington University in St. Louis on Thursday, October 2nd at 8pm CST.

It was fun laughing at Sarah Palin for a few weeks.   She essentially writes her own jokes.  Just ask Saturday Night Live.

But when it comes to answering questions about the Middle East, you’d think every politician with interest in holding a high ranking Federal position could AT THE VERY LEAST be able to answer questions fluidly about three things; The Israeli/Palestinian conflict, Iran, and Iraq.   Those are the big three.  You should know your shit.  Especially if you’re running for Vice President.

Then WHY is it so hard for Palin to communicate clearly about Hamas?  We all know she doesn’t support the Palestinian government labeled as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.  Then why does she give shit-ass answers like this?

Couric asked, “What happens if the goal of democracy doesn’t produce the desired outcome? In Gaza, the U.S. pushed hard for elections and Hamas won.”

“Yeah, well especially in that region, though, we have to protect those who do seek democracy and support those who seek protections for the people who live there. What we’re seeing in the last couple of days here in New York is a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and express such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends, Israel … and we’re hearing the evil that he speaks and if hearing him doesn’t allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, especially there in the Mideast, then nothing will.”

WHAT?  The question asked to Palin was her opinion of Hamas as a democratically elected government and she answered with a shpeal about protecting those who seek democracy?  (And then jabbers on about the Iranian President visiting New York to boot.)

It’s quite easy to interpret her answer as encouraging the terrorist organization Hamas.  I know that’s not what she meant by the answer, but that’s exactly what it sounds like.

The confusion results in articles like this:  Sarah Palin Endorses Hamas.

You won’t find either a Republican or a Democratic candidate come out right and say that they support Hamas.  This is a no brainer.

What you do get (as with Sarah Palin), are misinformed or simply ignorant politicians with little experience in foreign policy spouting random answers to questions they simply don’t understand.  These ill formulated answers then evolve into politicians like Palin sounding, well, completely stupid.

Yeah, it’s true, we’ve had several posts about the $700 billion bailout plan on this site and I’m expecting to post several more in the future.  Why?  First because it’s THAT huge for the American economy. Second because it’s drastically effecting my exchange rate in Israel and I need my hummus.  (Let’s be honest here.  The closer to home this thing hits, the more we pay attention.)

Everyone was all excited for this damn thing to pass so that we could finally start walking on the road to financial healing.  But why didn’t Congress pass it bill?

Politicker gives an interesting theory as to why the majority voted no:

There are 41 incumbent House members on Politicker.com’s The Pindell Report of the nation’s most competitive House races. Of that group 31 voted against the bailout, possibly proof that that a yes vote might be politically toxic just a little over a month from Election Day. Of the four House members running for the Senate only Maine’s Tom Allen voted for in favor.

Ok, so it’s because the politicians don’t want to make a mistake that would jeopardize their reelection. Because who wants to vote for the guy who had a hand in the bankruptcy of the United States?

Let’s be sure that we acknowledge that there are MANY reasons besides reelection that effected the vote:

Even Congressional leaders admitted on the House floor that this was less than a perfect bill for any member. Conservatives said the bill would was basically socialism. Liberals said the bill didn’t do enough to protect the Middle Class.

The bill simply doesn’t sit well with most Congressional leaders; both Liberals and Conservatives.  Maybe it takes a crisis like this to finally create bipartisan leadership.

See also Anatomy of the Bailout Breakdown from Time.

If you’re like me then you’ve been hearing all sorts of mentions about the Bailout but not finding many explanations (even from our Presidential Candidates, because they didn’t seem to be able to answer any questions about it on Friday night either).

It’s hard to find a single coherent description of what it actually is (aside from it cost $700 billion).

Apparently Congress has come to an agreement on one of the biggest government involvements in the financial market since the Great Depression, and here’s what I have been able to fathom…

The Treasury will get the previously mentioned $700 billion in smaller portions one at a time to purchase mortgages from failing lending companies either at a predetermined price, or in a bid with the market itself. Once the Treasury buys up the debts, they will then sell them in an attempt to make the money back. I’ve heard there’s a provision in the event the gov’t doesn’t make it’s money back, but haven’t heard anything about what it might actually be. Not sure who we’re selling it to in the effort to make the money back too. Aaaannnnd… yeah, that’s about all I’ve got right now.

The only other thing I’ve seen is that pretty much no one in government seems happy about the Bailout; McCain, Obama, Pelosi, etc… and they’re only going through with it because they all somehow came to the same agreement that it had to happen, because if it doesn’t happen, the whole U.S. will suddenly collapse or something.

I guess we’ll see what happens.

UPDATE: 29 Sept 08 Afternoon

I suppose it doesn’t matter now what the details of the Bailout are, or should I perhaps say were… as the House of Representatives voted against the bill 228 to 205, with 2 non-votes.  As a result, stocks are plummeting and the gov’t going right back to the drawing board.

UPDATE:  30 Sept 08 5:13 am (from Ms. Missive)

Kevin Drum over at Mother Jones muses why the financial crisis still isn’t 100% clear to the public:

Our current financial crisis has never been explained well to the public because (a) it’s mind-bogglingly complex and (b) even the experts don’t entirely know what’s going on. And the Paulson plan was never sold well because (a) the initial draft was indefensible and (b) the theory underlying it was uncertain and complicated.

Yes, I know, we’ve all heard Sarah Palin claim foreign policy experience due to Alaska’s proximity to Russia. Watch her reinforce that reasoning during her interview with Katie Couric:

Now, compare it to Miss Teen USA 2007 South Carolina as she answers the question, “Why do you think 1/5th of American’s can’t locate the U.S. on a world map?”:

9 out of 10 “U.S. Americans” will agree, reasoning isn’t exactly their strong characteristic.

I’ve deactivated IntenseDebate for the time being.  I simply can’t get it to work as I’d like.  The folks at IntenseDebate are working hard to correct it though.  They have a great product but the WordPress widget just isn’t up to speed yet.

They were recently bought by Automattic which means improvements should move a lot quicker.  Once the WordPress plug-in comes out of Beta, then I’ll give it a try again.

Although not nearly as flashy as Intense Debate, I’m breathing a sigh of relief for the reliable commenting system I’ve re-implemented.

- The Patriot Missive Vets

It’s clear now that the Bush Administration won’t give the green light for Israel to attack Iranian nuclear facilities (I think that might be the one thing Bush and myself agree on).

But what we have done is provide kick-ass military equipment.

After several months of teetering back and forth about what weapons to provide Israel, the United States overwhelmingly decided to allow Israel use of the X-band radar system.  It’s not run-of-the-mill radar by any means.

The x-band can “track an object the size of a baseball from 4,700 kilometers away” essentially protecting Israel from an Iranian missile attack:

It would allow Israel’s Arrow missile to engage a Shahab-3 ballistic missile about halfway through what would be a 11-minute flight from Iran, or six times sooner than Israel’s “Green Pine” radar can.

The decision to deploy the radar in Israel was finalized during Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s recent visit to the US.

The radar, according to the magazine, will be linked to the US Joint Tactical Ground Station (JTAGS), which receives and processes threat data transmitted by US Defense Support System satellites.

The ever amusing DEBKAfile reported yesterday that the U.S. Air Force delivered the equipment and American military personel on a C-5 Galaxy and C-17 Globemaster III (that translates to ginormous airplanes).

DEBKAfiles’ ever elusive “military source” who’s identity is never, ever named:

Commenting on the FBX radar deployment, a Pentagon source said: First, we want to put Iran on notice that we’re bolstering our capabilities throughout the region, and especially in Israel. But just as important, we’re telling the Israelis, ‘Calm down; behave. We’re doing all we can to stand by you and strengthen defenses.’”

Right.  I’m sure Israel LOVES that you’re insinuating that they’re children who needs babysitting.

[video]

ABC straw poll asks 500 uncommitted voters : “Who wont the debate?”

• 39% of uncommitted voters thought Obama was the winner
• 24% of uncommitted voters though McCain was the winner
• 37% thought it was a draw.
• 46% had a better opinion of Obama after the debate
• 32% had a better opinion of McCain after the debate.
• 66% thought Obama would be better handling the economy.
• 42% favor McCain to handle the economy.

Who do YOU think won?

[poll]

P.S. How do you pronounced “Ahmedinejad” again?

Because the United States military doesn’t kick enough ass.

It appears that we’ve found the replacement for the M4 (assuming field tests go well, of course). If these stats don’t make your jaw drop then it’s lethality should least makes you nervous:

If the XM25 does what its developers hope, it will be able to fire an air-bursting round at a target from 16 meters away out to 600 meters with a highly accurate, 360-degree explosive radius.

The XM25 is about as long as a collapsed M4, weighs about as much as an M16 with an M203 grenade launcher attached and has about as much kick as a 12-gauge shotgun.

A Soldier can aim the XM25 at a wall concealing a sniper, for example, but “dial in” or adjust the distance by an additional meter above the target. When fired, the Alliant Teksystems-built round will explode above the enemy’s position, essentially going around the obstruction, Muldowney said.

“It’s so accurate, that when I laze to that target I’m going to be able to explode that round close enough that I’m going to get it,” Audette added.

The service hopes to field several types of 25mm rounds for the XM25 — for breaching doors, piercing armor, even non-lethal air burst and impact rounds, and an anti-personnel round

Let’s go to the slides:

[hat tip: defensetech.org]

Four question are all she allowed, but Vice Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin spoke to the press corps yesterday after 29 days as McCain’s Vice President:

Speaking to a small pool of reporters following a visit to Ground Zero in lower Manhattan, Palin made a statement and then answered four questions, addressing the war on terror, the re-election bids of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young, and the bailout legislation currently in front of Congress.

1.

CNN reporter: On the topic of never letting this happen again [9/11], do you agree with the way the Bush administration has handled the war on terrorism, is there anything you would do differently?

Palin: I agree with the Bush administration that we take the fight to them. We never again let them come onto our soil and try to destroy not only our democracy, but communities like the community of New York. Never again. So yes, I do agree with taking the fight to the terrorists and stopping them over there.

2.

Politico reporter: Do you think our presence in Iraq and afghan and our continued presence there is inflaming islamic extremists?

Palin: I think our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan will lead to further security of our nation, again, because the mission is to take the fight over there. do not let them come over here and attempt again what they accomplished here, and that was some destruction. terrible destruction on that day. but since September 11, Americans uniting and rebuilding and committing to never letting that happen again.

3.

Politico Reporter: Do you support the reelection bids of embattled Alaska Republicans, Rep. Don Young and Sen. Ted Stevens?

Palin: Ted Stevens trial started a couple days ago. We’ll see where that goes.

4.

Jersey Journal reporter: What do you think of bailout package before congress?

Palin: I don’t support that until the provisions that Sen. McCain has offered are implemented in Paulson’s proposals.

Honestly, she didn’t do half bad.  Precise in her responses.  Decisive.  And she couldn’t have done it at a better time with the first Presidential Debate looming (whether it continues as scheduled or is moved to a different date).  Nor could she have chosen a better location next to the World Trade Towers.

Don’t you feel better now, Sarah?  I know I do.

Watch the video here courtesy of CNN.

UPDATE:

Let’s get ready to rumble! McCain FINALLY confirms that he will attend tonight’s first Presidential debate.