Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin accused Barack Obama of voting against funding for U.S. troops in combat Thursday night in their much-anticipated campaign debate and chastised his Democratic running mate, Joe Biden, for defending the move, “especially with your son in the National Guard” and headed for Iraq.
“John McCain voted against funding for the troops,” as well, Biden countered, adding that the Republican presidential candidate had been “dead wrong on the fundamental issues relating to the conduct of the war.”
Biden did not immediately reply to Palin’s mention of his son, Beau, the Delaware attorney general, who is scheduled to fly to Iraq with his National Guard unit on Friday.
Palin has a young son who is in Iraq with the Alaska National Guard, although she did not refer to it.
The exchange over Iraq was easily the most personal, and among the most pointed, as the two running mates debated across 90 minutes on a stage at Washington University.
They also clashed over energy, the economy, global warming and more in their only debate, with little more than one month remaining in the campaign and McCain struggling to regain his footing.
Republican officials disclosed earlier in the day that he was conceding the battleground state of Michigan to Obama. The state voted Democratic four years ago, but McCain had spent millions trying to place it in his column.
Biden was scathing in his criticism of McCain’s position on the Iraq war, calling him the “odd man out” for his refusal to accept a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.
But Palin countered that a timetable was tantamount to “a white flag of surrender in Iraq,” and at a moment when victory was “within sight.”
She also said Biden had once supported McCain’s view of the war, and noted that he had once said of Obama that he wasn’t ready to be commander in chief … “and I know again that you opposed the move that he made to try to cut off funding for the troops and I respect you for that.”
“I don’t know how you can defend that position now but – I know that you know, especially with your son in the National Guard.”
As for Obama, she said, “Another story there. Anyone I think who can cut off funding for the troops after promising not to – that’s another story.”
Biden’s reply was in clipped tones. “John McCain voted to cut off funding for the troops. Let me say that again. John McCain voted against an amendment containing $1 billion, 600 million dollars” for protective equipment that is “protecting the governor’s son and, pray God, my son and a lot of other sons and daughters. He voted against it.”
Palin, who has been governor of her state less than two years, was under intense pressure to demonstrate a strong grasp of the issues as she stepped onto the stage. Polls show the public has become increasingly skeptical of her readiness for high public office.
As is her custom on the campaign, she spoke in familiar terms, saying “betcha” rather than “bet you” and “gonna” rather than “going to.”
She also spoke to the home folks. “Here’s a shout-out” to third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School in Alaska. She said they would all receive extra credit for watching the debate.
“Can I call you Joe?” she asked Biden as they shook hands before taking their places behind identical lecterns.
He readily agreed she could – and she used it to effect more than an hour later. “Say it ain’t so, Joe,” she said as she smilingly criticized him at one point for focusing his comments on the Bush administration rather than the future.
She made only one obvious stumble, when she twice referred to the top U.S. general in Afghanistan as “Gen. McClellan.” In fact, his name is David McKiernan.
Biden’s burden was not nearly as fundamental. Although he has long had a reputation for long-windedness, he is a veteran of more than 35 years in the Senate, with a strong knowledge of foreign policy as well as domestic issues.
For much of the evening, the debate unfolded in traditional vice presidential fashion – the running mates praising their own presidential candidate and denigrating the other.
Palin said Obama had voted to raise taxes 94 times – an allegation that Biden disputed and then countered. By the same reckoning, he said, McCain voted “477 times to raise taxes.”
They clashed over energy policy, as well, when Palin said Obama’s vote for a Bush administration-backed bill granted breaks to the oil industry. By contrast, she said that as governor, she had stood up to the same industry, and noted that McCain had voted against the bill Obama supported.
Biden said that in the past decade, McCain had voted “20 times against funding alternative energy sources and thinks, I guess, the only answer is drill, drill, drill.”
“The chant is, `drill, baby drill,” Palin countered quickly, unwilling to yield to Biden on that issue – or any other.
On the environment, Palin declined to attribute the cause of climate change to man-made activities alone. “There is something to be said also for man’s activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet,” she said, adding that she didn’t want to argue about the causes.
Biden said the cause was clearly man-made, and added, “If you don’t understand what the cause is, it’s virtually impossible to come up with a solution.”
(LINK to CBS2 HD)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
18 Responses
Sara Palin said she was pro a dual state side by side. Did I hear right????
Heard a few minutes on the radio Didn’t think it was so impressive.
I think she was great! We need new energy in Washington and I for one do not see Obama/Biden as that energy. Both decent men but not for these difficult times. She does not scare me Obama does..He will not be good for the Jewish people here or in Israel or good for America in these times of severe problems.
Last night i voted 200 Times on CNN.com That palin Won the debate. at one point i turned 60 to 40 in Favor of biden To 52 to 48 in favor palin. But then i had to in to sleep. you would think i’d get some help.
You did, but she also said that she was going to put the embassy in Yerushalayim, which basiccly negates her first statement.
The debate didn’t prove much, but it wasn’t expected to.
As Nachum Segal & Malcolm Hoenlien discussed this morning, it’s the “politically correct” thing to say that the only solution is a 2-state one. However, what neither candidate mentioned (other than Palin’s reference to the embassy), is what the conditions of that situation would be. I’ll go out on a limb that McCain/Palin recognize that Israel is an important ally and will not push her into a compromising position.
As for Livni, that’s another story….
Words you will never hear from Barak Obama:
“Israel is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite, again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to destroy Israel, that that is what they would like to see.
We will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also, in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track record of being able to forge these peace agreements.”
Sarah Palin – VP Debate 10/02/2008
#7 tuviag
Obama/Biden have the same policy regarding Israel as McCain/Palin regarding a two-state solution. I don’t know why you quote this as a positive thing.
I also don’t know why you buy any false promise about building a US embassy in Jerusalem (which would be divided, of course, under this plan). If you believe that, I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you.
#7 tivuag
Here’s another quote you might enjoy:
“Let me be clear. Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper – but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided. ”
Barack Obama, 6/4/08
#8 justajew
Look at the whole quote. “Israel is our strongest ally in the Middle East…never allow a second Holocaust…” Can anyone seriously imagine Barak Obama saying such words??? And while moving the embassy to Jerusalem may or may not happen under McCain/Palin, it seems to show where her heart is.
“Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinians”. That’s a quote from Obama in March 2007 and I think it shows where his heart is. Obama’s ties to the Palestinian cause are strong and predate his time in the Senate.
I think most readers, perhaps most American Jews, feel it in their gut that Obama’s policies in the Middle East would put Israel in great peril.
Re 9: I believe Obama said that to a Jewish group that day, and then within the week (!) said something to another group that may have started with that, but was so modified as to be unrecognizable to his earlier statement.
I may be wrong and thinking of a different week when he changed his tune abruptly.
#9 justajew
that quote was at the AIPAC convention, and I think everyone in the world knows, that is except for you, that he RETRACTED that statement the very next day!
On CNN the following day he was singing a different tune. “Well, obviously, it’s going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues. And Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations,” he said when asked whether Palestinians had no future claim to the city. Obama said “as a practical matter, it would be very difficult to execute” a division of the city. “And I think that it is smart for us to — to work through a system in which everybody has access to the extraordinary religious sites in Old Jerusalem but that Israel has a legitimate claim on that city.”
What a difference a day makes! And what a difference an audience makes!
justajew, i think you’re justnaive. but i love you anyway.
#10 tuviag
“Can anyone seriously imagine Barak Obama saying such words??? ”
Yes. He can pander to Jews just as well as McCain. Is that what you’re looking for?
“I think most readers, perhaps most American Jews, feel it in their gut that Obama’s policies in the Middle East would put Israel in great peril. ”
Please explain how Obama’s policies in the Middle East differ from McCain’s.
Please also let me know which candidate would do more to destabilize the Middle East and create a more dangerous environment for Israel.
The bottom line is that both candidates will follow through on Bush’s policies – seek peace treaties with the PLO, work towards a two-state solution. Any other promises (an embassy in Jerusalem) or meaningless fluff (Israel is the greatest friend) should be swept aside as pandering and rhetoric.
Tzippi and Tuvia –
Yes – this is my point exactly. Regarding Israel, Palestinians, and the entire Middle East, you cannot trust either side. They will say what they need to in order to gain votes and placate their audience.
We have very short memories – see here:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/22/campaign.wrap/index.html
George W. Bush told AIPAC that he too would move the embassy to Jerusalem. He ended up being the first president to call for a two-state solution.
Palin promised that the Middle East peace process would be a top priority for a McCain administration. But McCain’s own advisors last week said that it wouldn’t.
I am naive? Au contraire – you are following conventional wisdom and voting on empty promises and fear.
Biden is clearly alot more experienced and knows the history alot better. People are saying Palin did well only because she held her head up and did not lose herself. She was expected to not be able to handle the pressure and she did. However if you look at the fundamentals of what they both were saying it is clear Joe Biden is alot more ready then she is.
If you want to base your vote on Israel, neither party is the one to fervently support. In fact, Obama has done much for Israel, but the link I provide will probably have many saying it’s all a lie, because it is out of line with the views you inherited that came down the pike formulated for you from otherwise righteous people.
http://origin.barackobama.com/pdf/IsraelFactSheet.pdf
I don’t know why people feel McCain is head and shoulders above Obama regarding the issue of Israel. ALL candidates parodoxically call Israel a sovereign state with defensible borders, but guess where they all propose a Palestinian state to reside? Within Israel.
Further, regarding the American embassy being in Jerusalem, which part? The GOP had their little conference in Bethesda, MD, not too long ago, to already divide up Jerusalem. Yes, that was Bush and Condoleeza Rice on that job.
A reality check would show there is not reason to be ebullient over any of the candidates regarding Israel.
Clinton supported a 2 State solution while in office. Please research the facts prior to making statements. This is easily verfiable in historic news reports. Once Clinton committed American policy to 2 state solution, a subsequent Administration (i.e. Bush II) could not simply reverse prior US policy.
#18 Joseph –
You are technically correct. Clinton was the first to propose a two-state solution:
http://www.peacelobby.org/clinton_parameters.htm
Bush W. was the one to implement it as official US policy and part of the “Roadmap”:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2003/20062.htm
I clarify my statement – Bush was the one to try to actively split up Israel, at the Annapolis meetings.