I found it disappointing that Biden finally had a somewhat hard interview (not the typical softball questions) and he didn't handle it well. And then for the Obama/Biden ticket to cancel all interviews with that station until the election was really being a poor sport. The Obama/Biden ticket has received mostly a free pass from the mainstream media. If they are going to hold office they are definitely going to be under more scrutiny after the election and they will have to answer questions they don't like. They are promising a lot and the economic situation is not going to change over night. He seemed to be in shock to finally have someone give him some tough questions for a change. Someone with all of his experience should of been able to capitalize on it and state his case.

owld_skipper wrote:
Same thing happening here in our little paper. A whole group of people are being intentionally misinformed. The Right is abusing their right to Free Speech.

 rosedraws wrote: 
Right-wing bloggers describe Biden as angry - if you bite back, you're angry. I thought Biden handled the situation well. People like Walker get their talking points faxed out to them and they go after the same things. Same things were said on Insanity and Foams and by Limbaugh. It's not about the issues, it's about disparage, divide and distress.

There are letters to the editor in our local paper today parroting all the came crapola attack arguments. These people wouldn't know a "socialist" if they were looking one in the face. They just recite the same crap to frighten and disturb.

owld_skipper wrote:
It's so sad that the right focuses on these ridiculous distortions.  There are enough real issues to talk about.

I thought Joe handled the questions well.  Someone described this as Biden getting angry.  I thought he responded well... it is ridiculous to compare Obama's policies to Marxism.

 oldviolin wrote: 
me too

 Southern_Boy wrote: 
I have better things to do than run around doing research for you.  Fortunately I've learned to choose my wording wisely.  You'll have to settle for that "nothing but" clause.

What?  Did you really think that I'd allow myself to get suckered into your nit-picking trap?

 Servo wrote: 
Just as I thought...

Southern_Boy wrote:

 Servo wrote: 
I know I shouldn't do this but...

Please show me where I had great praise for McCain and Palin.

 Southern_Boy wrote: 
Well you did reply to wooz's post, and you did go so far as to highlight a specific part of that post!  Are you now claiming that what you did before was by accident or something?

As far as your innuendo-filled "government servants" commentary, are you claiming that everybody treats all government employees with equal enthusiasm?  "OMG, it's the dog catcher!!!  I gotta get an autograph!"   I don't think that's realistic.


But what you wrote before was most certainly a political statement.  It clearly contains the word "politician".  Of course we're talking about human nature now, after I steered the conversation in that direction.

I still maintain that you're putting an undue amount of spin on the "servant" part of the oft-used term "civil servant".  Do you understand that public service is not the same as indentured servitude?

Have you ever had to work for someone else?  If so, do you believe that if someone made an offhand remark about your job that could possibly be misconstrued as being derogatory, that that comment itself is somehow license for your boss to mistreat you?  I'm asking you this because you seem to be implying rather heavily (albeit through weasel words) that Senator Biden does not deserve any respect or appreciation for his services and accomplishments, and should be seen as an inferior.  Frankly I find that assertion to be insulting.

I'm interesting in reading why you tend to reserve your negative commentary for Senators Biden and Obama, have nothing but great praise for McCain and Palin, and never hang around to justify those comments.  Speaking about human nature, I am...

 woozurbuddy wrote: 
This wasn't about Biden. It was about human nature. Not a knock on anyone. Just an observation and reaction I don't understand.

Southern_Boy wrote:

Southern_Boy wrote:
Here's the biggies: McCain's theatrics during the bailout... and choosing the campaign-boosting Palin instead of a qualified candidate. 

Joe Biden just misspeaks.

 rosedraws wrote: 
I haven't felt that thrill yet. Usually its "go away before you make me do something stupid".

 rosedraws wrote: 

Actually, he was referring to the state of the world - whoever wins will have to deal with the volatility of a 21st century world.  He's being realistic - no one out there is going to treat the American president with kid gloves.  Nor should they (or any world leader, for that matter).

 rosedraws wrote: 
Funny how Biden is perceived as overenthusiastic and McCain is dramatic and unpredictable.

Southern_Boy wrote:
It's a good question.  There is a thrill when you see someone famous.  But also, there is the thrill you feel if the CEO of your company stops by your office and says hello.  And there's a special thrill when you see someone famous who is also inspiring. 

Interesting stuff.

trekhead wrote:
Yeah, that was a classic Joe the GaffMaster comment.  He does get a bit overenthusiastic.  (I want to see the context, but haven't had time to look it up.)

Either president would get tested.  The real question is, which candidate do you think will best respond? 

As we've watched them through the campaign, Obama has been calm and thoughtful, studying issues, working toward consensus.  McCain has been dramatic and unpredictable, using scorched earth tactics to try to win. 

If you apply the same test to McCain/Palin... imagine something happening to McCain, and Palin being tested.