Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Thursday Debate Preview

The much-anticipated VP debate between Sen. Joe Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin will be held on Thursday night.  It's been interesting to watch the run-up from both sides.  The Obama-Biden camp is doing their best to set low expectations for Biden (and high expectations for Palin), and Biden is apparently being instructed on how to not come across as smug, condescending, and obnoxious.  The McCain-Palin camp is doing their best to set low expectations for Palin (and really high expectations for Biden), and is apparently undergoing a crash course in debate prep.

We all know Biden is a gaffe machine.  The question for him is whether he can keep himself under control.  It's safe to assume that Palin is probably being instructed to take a few pokes at him to try to rile him - that's when he's at his gaffe-tastic finest, and that's when she'll be able to sneak in under the radar to proverbially stick a shiv in his ribs.  He is reported to be a formidable debater, so the forum will not be a problem for him.  This will be a supreme test of Biden's discipline and presentation more than anything else.

I heard an interview with a reporter who spoke of some extra resources being shifted over to Palin's training, which is taking place at McCain's ranch in Arizona.  Apparently, they feel that her latest appearance with CBS's Katie Couric was too wooden, and she sounded like she was just spitting back memorized answers.  They're now trying to get her back to being herself - the phrase the reporter used was 'more comfortable in her own skin'.  This is a good sign, since the Right has been clamoring for just that for a couple weeks now.  The charm of Sarah Palin is not that she's a slick and polished professional politician, but rather the fact that she's a normal, every day American, just like the rest of us.  They need to un-leash her to be herself in this debate.  If she comes across as weak and wooden, she'll get killed.

But, this isn't unprecedented.  Former rivals of Palin warn Biden not to underestimate her:

Her debating history in Alaska reflects some of the seemingly split personality we've seen from Sarah Palin during her first couple of appearances— breezy, smiling and devastating at the RNC and wobbly in later interviews.

In Alaska, she'd sometimes falter on policy issues early in her races only to get more comfortable by debate time, and deliver an RNC-reminiscent performance. Opponents were frustrated by the fact that her ability to connect with audiences and deliver pointed or funny lines often outdid their extensive preparation.

Here's hoping we see this Sarah Palin on Thursday:

Palin saved her most devastating riposte for the final question of the debate, when Persily asked the three candidates whether they would hire their opponents for a state job.

Knowles and Halcro offered halting jokes. But when it was Palin's turn, she pounced.

Smiling at Halcro, who recited reams of statistics by rote, Palin observed that the businessman "would make the most awesome statistician the state could ever look for."

As the debate audience laughed, Palin pivoted to Knowles, who had owned an Anchorage restaurant. "Do they need a chef down in Juneau?" Palin asked, smiling as she twisted the verbal knife. "I know Mr. Knowles is really good at that." ...

"When you try to prove she doesn't know anything, you lose, because audiences are enraptured by her," Halcro said. "And her biting comments give you a sense of how competitive she is. Anybody who doesn't take her seriously does so at their peril."

Mark Goldblatt offers a humorous suggestion for how Palin should open the debate Thursday:

Thank you for the question, Ms. Ifill — patronizing though it is. And, yes, if pressed, I could probably stand up right now, walk across the stage and name every country on that blank map of the Middle East you've so graciously set up for me. But I think I'll pass.

First of all, I'd rather not spend next week fielding questions about whether I saw Tina Fey doing another impression of me of Saturday Night Live, this time bending over to point out Yemen — during which, of course, she'll throw in a blank stare and gratuitous wiggle of her butt in order to suggest that the only reason John McCain picked me for the vice presidential slot was because I was once a beauty queen.

Second of all, I'd rather not log onto the Internet next week and discover that one of your producers has surreptitiously supplied Bill Maher, who two weeks ago called me a "category five moron," with a camera angle that shows a flash of cleavage — which, of course, he will freeze-frame and weave into an obscene rant.

The point, Ms. Ifill, is that ever since I accepted Sen. McCain's invitation to be his running mate, I've become an object of ridicule and derision among the media elites whose commitment to political correctness apparently admits an exception for howling, sophomoric sexism as long as it is directed at their ideological adversaries.

It's not that I expected a fair shake, Heaven knows. I realize that there's a deep-seated emotional investment among liberal commentators in the candidacy of Barack Obama. I watched them chew up and spit out one of their perennial darlings — Hillary Clinton — when she stood in the way of their group hug. I heard Senator Clinton called a "big f — -ing whore" by an Air America host; I heard one MSNBC host accuse her of  "pimping out" her daughter, another call her a "she-devil," and a third suggest that she needed to be taken into a backroom and beaten senseless to convince her to drop out of the primary race. And I heard a CBS News anchor — yes, the same one who turned a recent interview with me into a pop quiz — ask Sen. Clinton if she remembered being nicknamed "Miss Frigidaire" in school. Ugly stuff, isn't it? So it's no surprise that when Senator McCain began to surge in the polls after he selected me as his running mate, the liberal media would come loaded for bear every time I made a public statement.

Ever since Senator McCain made that selection, by the way, I've been working hard to get up to speed on foreign policy and global issues. The reason I wasn't up to speed beforehand is that, curiously enough, I'd been focusing all my energy on doing the jobs I'd been elected to do. When I was elected mayor of Wasilla, I tried to be a good mayor. When I was elected governor of the Alaska, I tried to be a good governor. I didn't regard either position as a stepping stone to anything else. I saw no need to go on fact-finding tours, at taxpayers' expense, to foreign countries in an effort to bolster my geopolitical credentials for higher office.

By the time John McCain and I take office in January, rest assured I will be up to speed on geopolitics. I will be altogether qualified to be a heartbeat from the presidency. And I'll surround myself with altogether qualified advisers and staff, not yes-men and yes-women. Because I know from experience — the very experience my opponent, Sen. Biden, lacks — what it is like to make an executive decision. I know what it is like, after the legislative wrangling is done, after the wheeling and dealing by party hacks who are determined to maintain political cover and plausible deniability, to have the buck stop at my desk, to enact a law by my signature, to put my name on the bottom line.

So no, Ms. Ifill, I think I'll keep my seat. You can take down your blank map. I came here tonight to discuss, to the best of my abilities, the international and domestic issues that confront the United States and to provide the American people with an insight into my governing philosophy. I didn't come to convince voters that I could be a Jeopardy champion. If that's the main qualification for the vice presidency, then I'd suggest both Sen. Biden and I step aside for Ken Jennings.

Not a bad idea, really.

Here's something that is likely to be a big, big problem with the debate: the moderator is openly in the tank for Obama.  From Michelle Malkin:

My dictionary defines "moderator" as "the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting." On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.

But there is nothing "moderate" about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She's so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.

The title of Ifill's book? "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama." Nonpartisan my foot.

Ifill's publisher, Random House, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:

"In The Breakthrough, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama's stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power…Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the 'black enough' conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history."

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the "Age of Obama." Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the "stunning" McCain campaign and its "bold" path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation's sole vice presidential debate?

Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale, too.

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? "The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family." A sample of Ifill's hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano:

"Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator's arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn't get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing."

During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis before Michelle Obama's speech on NBC News: "A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She's educated, she's beautiful, she's tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself…"

During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill's coverage of Sarah Palin's speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.:

"I was appalled by Gwen Ifill's commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin's speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin's performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill's complete disregard for journalistic objectivity."

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: "[N]o one's ever assumed a white reporter can't cover a white candidate."

It's not the color of your skin, sweetie. It's the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the "stunning" "Breakthrough" she's rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

Is anyone else seeing a conflict of interest here?  Palin's going to have to be really on her game, because she'll be going against not only Biden but also the moderator.  I hope she's up to the task.

Victor Davis Hansen hits the nail on the head:

The problem with the Ifill selection is not that she is for Obama (how could the media easily find any moderator who was not?), but that her Age of Obama encomium is, according to press releases, set to appear on January 20, Inauguration Day — the implication being that the book will sell far more copies as a timely analysis of Obama just as he assumes office. Yes, moderators are usually liberal, and yes, authors of books on contemporary politics usually try to find timing gimmicks to sell them; but in this case, the problem is that Ifill's book stands to do far better should Obama be elected, and her publishers seem in advance to have recognized, and thus counted on, that. That's the rub, and the result is that it will make it hard for her to seem unbiased when moderating a debate in which one side is trying to demonstrate to the nation why we should not have embrace an age of Obama. As a matter of ethics, this is a no brainer.

Bingo - the moderator has a significant personal financial interest in seeing Obama-Biden win the election.  That's the problem here.

So, what about serious advice?  I'm seeing a lot of suggestions that Palin just needs to be honest and herself.  Here and here are the best two I've seen:

[E]ven in the best of circumstances, [there will be] a few things she doesn't know. That's why she needs a straight-forward and/or self-deprecating way to occasionally say, "I don't know." People will be much more forgiving of that than round-about and very transparent attempts to try to talk her way through it, which are much more discrediting. Her potential ace-in-the-hole, of course, is Joe Biden. He'll very likely find a way to be an ass, whether he's confronting her or deferring to her.

As a media trainer, I tell CEOs that the worst thing they can do is try to fake it when they don't know the answer.  Better for Palin to say, "I don't know that detail, but I will be surrounded by people who do, and in the meantime, what I DO know is this.................."  Her goal should be to drive home the point that what counts is the philosophy and judgment she brings to the table, not the little [stuff].

This is key.  If Palin can do these things, she'll be all right.

Internet uber-blogger Glenn Reynolds makes the following point:

DEMANDING A SARAH PALIN PRESS CONFERENCE: Sure, bring it on -- right after Obama takes questions from Bob Owens, Stanley Kurtz, David Freddoso, the Powerline guys, and Hugh Hewitt on the Bill Ayers/Annenberg business.

Oh, and maybe a discussion of his Columbia and Harvard transcripts. Only one candidate is being sheltered from tough press questions with the active complicity of the press.

Yes, that's the laundry list of things that Obama and his followers have been hiding and avoiding for months now.  Where's the press inquiry there?  Related reading:


Seriously, go read the whole thing.  Obots: do you actually know your candidate, or have you fallen for the facade?  Do you care?  The answer to that question is what concerns me most about this election.

Regardless, let me make some predictions on how the debate will be reported on Friday.  The media will say that Joe Biden was the voice of wise experience, proving that his long tenure in the Senate gave him the right answers on a multitude of issues, especially foreign policy.  He showed great charisma and charm, and made it an ironclad case of why he's so much better prepared to be Vice President.  He will be a great asset to President Obama.  In contrast, former Mayor of Was...no, wait, former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin was shrill and sarcastic, trying to score political points but instead coming off as petty and childish.  Her arguments were shallow, and her positions often ran counter to McCain's, indicating either a poor ability to communicate or a lack of preparation.  Her woeful lack of experience was laid bare by the elder statesman, and the choice of Palin just proves that McCain has really poor judgment.  As the underdog, Palin had the most to prove, and she failed miserably.


Just wait and see.  Unless there's a total bomb or home run, this will be the narrative.  Never mind the fact that Obama had the most to prove last Friday, and the fact that he didn't totally bomb meant that he actually won the debate (to them).  Remember, two sets of rules, one for liberals, and one for everyone else...

There's my two cents.

No comments: