Political Punch

John: All the networks are pro-obama and listening to Obama in North Carolina is a farce. He isn't going to change anything in Washington because he doesn't know how. He will have to be trained by Biden who will be running the country while Obama sits back.

Ryan C: And where is Obama's other birth certificate from Kenya which I understand on the internet he has two. Which one is real? Was he born in Kenya and registered in Hawaii? There is some doubt about his birth certificate. There is an idea that he wasn't given a birth certificate in Kenya so she can get on in Hawaii. And don't tell me it can't happen.

Ryan C: IWe all know that Obama associated with crooked underhanded people like Rezko and now Larry Walsh who is being investigated. All the dirst is coming out now. Father P, Wright and Farrkhan. Who else is going to turn up.

Grey Matter: Palin never faced any difficulties taking care of her family plus becoming a mayor then a governor. Not many women in her field could handle. Their children would probably to to day care like thousands of children today. And I do not believe in head start. Children should not start school until they are 5 years old when they are in kindergarden. And there are mother's that put their children in head start so they can flaunt around.

Gee, you can have a good look at Obama's birth cert on FactCheck if you're not convinced that his website didn't photoshop it. They even took a photograph that shows the raised seal and the signature.

Palin seemed programmed, Biden, informed. And I felt she was rather callous the way she just went back to talking about "John the Maverick" right after Biden almost teared up talking about the day his wife and daughter were killed in a car accident. She could have taken that moment to also talk about the difficulties she faced raising a family as a mother, it would've made her seem so much more authentic and able to emphathise with people.

She came across as just sticking to her talking points, not a down-to-earth and real person. And what was with all her winks, EXACTLY?

McCain finally, totally lost me - due to Palin.
It was too obvious that she survived the debate due to coaching, cramming and crib-sheeting, not real knowledge; too often she just bluffed and yammered emptily, like a junior-high kid who was 'WAY out of her league.

My feeling really jelled: McCain's choice of Palin indicates contempt -- for the VP's office (which McCain doesn't care spit about), and for the American people (since that office is a heartbeat away from the presidency, and this woman isn't qualified - at all).
It also shows contempt for women, as if the guy said, "Women voters are so dumb that they can't tell Dem from GOP, so ANYTHING female can replace Hillary," and-or "The job is so worthless, I'm tossing it to a Girl Nobody - who also won't pose a power/competition threat to me, as a 'real' (male) VP might."

It's as if McCain chose her as a joke, on whim, or in a fit of pique when pressured to choose a VP candidate, and is somehow saying "F--- you!" to (and laughing at) everyone involved: Palin, his own party, and all U.S. voters.

I don't want any more "maverick" whims, or rotten judgment, like this. McCain can count me out -- because I care about this country.

Joe Biden was substantive, thoughtful and in command. Sarah Palinignored virtually every question and stuck to generalities andplatitudes. Yes Palin didn't stumble as she did during the Katie Couricinterviews. But she didn't impress, either. It was all boilerplate--like she was giving a scripted pep talk, not proving she could handlethe toughest job in the world. Biden kept his cool, even though he clearly had a much greatermastery of virtually every subject discussed. He kept the heat onJohn McCain--where it should be--and forcefully defended Obama whenPalin made ludicrous claims about transferring the surge toAfghanistan or "waving the white flag of surrender" in Iraq. I'm a little surprised to see the talking heads on TV talking aboutwhat a great job Palin did. Maybe they just want this race to becloser than it currently looks. But most swing voters, in an instantsnapshot, thought otherwise. According to a CBS poll, 46 percent of uncommitted voters who watchedthe debate tonight thought Joe Biden was the winner. 21 percentthought Sarah Palin won, 33 percent thought it was a draw. According to a CNN poll, 51 percent of voters though Biden won,compared to 36 percent for Palin. (Only voters polled by Fox, surprise surprise, gave it to Palin.) Before the debate, 54 percent of CNN voters said Palin wasunqualified to be vice president. After the debate, that number (53percent) only changed by a point. Maybe, for once, substance prevailed over style. Joe Biden was chosen for VP, for his honesty free spirit and his experience!
He’s supposed to make a point when is needed. Sarah Plain was chosen for the position after only one meeting .The decisive factor was only the women’s vote and the prerequisite to be the John McCain cheerleader. She makes only scripted interviews and has very thin Resume. Sarah Plain VP? Thanks but not thanks!

Ryan, is common-tater up there close to po-tater?

She was on auto pilot, very well coached , bravo to the coaches, but I don't think you can get away from the last few weeks.
She could not allow herself to get off her rehearsed lines. Is there anybody out there who did get aqn emotional clutch when Biden talked about loosing his family, she did not pause, just went straight on with her talking points, even though this had been in response to her talking about her family and implying that she had cornered the market on understanding families and problems.
SO couldn't she take a moment out of touting her experience and feel for the guy who was sharing the stage with her. If she could not do that in that moment, how are the American people she was talking to supposed to bealive that she feels for them?

I thought they both did very well at the debate. Gov. Palin seems alot more comfortable in a situation like that than doing interviews, and showed that she is in fact a very sharp person. Joe Biden is someone who I have always liked and admired, he was as usual a great debater, some facts were a little fuzzy, but the same can be said for Palin. One thing did strike me though as I watched them spar, why isn't Biden on the top of the ticket? Seeing Obama and Biden together always reminds me of how Bush/Cheney were elected in 2000. Senater Biden stated last night that he will be "sitting in on all major decisions with Obama" does this sound familar to anyone else or is it just me? I don't think VP's should be involed in every major decision, Bush/Cheney has proved that true over last 7 years. McCain/Palin strikes me as better ticket, the person with the most experienc on the top of the ticket. This setup has always worked best in the past.

"If you google" 2003 barney fannie mae" a few hits down is another query.nytimes article regarding the republicans attempted legislation and democrats' resistance"

You mean the toothless regulation from the Bush admin which Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac welcomed?

Funny thing is I would be happy to concede that this was a bipartisan screwup with many chances missed to fix the situation.

Obama intro'd a mortgage fraud bill twice in the Dem Congress and it went nowhere.

However, you sought to blame the Democrats and Democrats only and that was not true.

"If you google on "1999 Fannie Mae" the first hit is for a NYTimes article talking about the Fannie/Freddie deregulation."

Um that article talks about easing credit requirements by Fannie Mae under pressure from the Clinton admin, not regulation of the industry.

""Ryan the slience on many of these issues I countered and have asked you about is deafening"

Really?

I've asked you repeatedly to back up your claim on how the Democrats blocked regulation and you cannot.

Posted by: Ryan C"

Last post since I have to go. I'm not paid to blog.

I provided a quote directly from Barney regarding democratic opposition to this legislation. Consult the regulation or do some basic google searches like I provided search criteria for and you'll find the answers. It is that simple.

"Ryan the slience on many of these issues I countered and have asked you about is deafening"

Really?

I've asked you repeatedly to back up your claim on how the Democrats blocked regulation and you cannot.

"Thank you. I wanted you to be the one to post that democrats had an advantage in the senate in 2001 since if I forwarded that notion that republicans were not in charge of congress in 2001 you would have refuted it."

Why would I have? I know the Democrats had a power sharing agreement in teh Senate for about a year and half before the 108th session of Congress took over.

"So how again is it that "democrats didn't block Fannie/Freddie deregulation?""

The regulation was first intro'd by Chuck Hagel as S1058 in 2003 (ie when the GOP was in full control). It went nowhere.

Hagel intro'd it again in 2005 (S190). It died in committee.

In may of 2006, McCain became a cosponsor of S190 and gave a floor speech on it. The bill went nowhere.

Able thanks for the debate. You seem like a level headed person. We disagree but both appear to have logical based assertions behind our belief.

If you google on "1999 Fannie Mae" the first hit is for a NYTimes article talking about the Fannie/Freddie deregulation.

If you google" 2003 barney fannie mae" a few hits down is another query.nytimes article regarding the republicans attempted legislation and democrats' resistance.

Figure I'll provide this info since you sound generally interested in examining the situation regardless of who is at fault.

I'll talk straight with ya whether I answer the question the moderator or you wants a crap sandwich on the e-bay. I make my diverse family mad waving the white flag at the creeping gay-lesbian agenda but if I wink the pundits will get back to ya. Charlie.

"I would say yes otherwise its messed up that average citizens have more responsibility when applying for a job than a president of the united states."

Well you woudl be wrong then.

Part of the application process is the 4th estate.

The 4th estate has reviewed both candidates Constitutional qualifications and have found that they meet them.

Instead of worrying about Obama and his bc, can you make a plausible case why a man born in the Panama Canal Zone is a natural born citizen?

I only ask as an innocent bystander ;-)

Good luck on this thread all. Ryan the slience on many of these issues I countered and have asked you about is deafening. Are the google searches not pulling back an effective argument? Lol.

"5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate."

Clean coal and coal are not the same thing.

Looks like you source (the McCain campaign) is full of it.

"Everyone in the country who owned property was benefiting from property value inflation over the past 15 years or more and happy to have it. No one in leadership from either party was trying to put the brakes on this thing. Bush bragged about how his administration was fostering the "ownership society".

I just don't agree that the mortgage mess can be layed on the Dems. I fault them for buying so heavily into flawed Republican economic policy -- "Government isn't the solution to your problems; it is the problem." - R Reagan. All of a sudden Repubs in Congress are for more regulation and have been all along? I don't think so."

I agree with the beginning of this post that both republicans and democrats looked the other way. Homeowners also knew it was a bubble but thought they were benefitting so didn't question it.

Republicans usually are not for regulations but in this case they were. And in hindsight republicans were correct and Barney, Dodd and other prominent democrats were wrong and showed a lack of foresight. Even Bill Clinton admitted democrats dropped the ball in blocking Fannie/Freddie regulation since his efforts to regulate were fought by democrats also.

"4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage."

So McCain voted against funding the troops because he did not want them to have a schedule to come home. He woudl rather have them out on their 5th tour.

That's even better than I hoped for.

Thanks Palin Wins.

""Nice try yet again. Since it is a presidential requirement it shouldn't take Joe Citizen to demand it; it should be a matter of course."

Is there an application that the President fills out before he is sworn in?

Are all Presidents required to provide the birth certificates to prove not just natural born citizenry but also the age requirement?

Posted by: Ryan C"

I would say yes otherwise its messed up that average citizens have more responsibility when applying for a job than a president of the united states. When I want employment I have to produce a valid ID and an ORIGINAL birth certificate or social security card.

So I should have to produce this documentation but the most powerful position in the country should not? Hmmm interesting stance.

Actually if you look at statistics the foreclosure rate is MUCH HIGHER in "low income" areas than others.

Posted by: Cryos
***************
I'm sure you're right, though in the end, by far most of the loss in real estate asset value is not going to be at the bottom of the market.

Everyone in the country who owned property was benefiting from property value inflation over the past 15 years or more and happy to have it. No one in leadership from either party was trying to put the brakes on this thing. Bush bragged about how his administration was fostering the "ownership society".

I just don't agree that the mortgage mess can be layed on the Dems. I fault them for buying so heavily into flawed Republican economic policy -- "Government isn't the solution to your problems; it is the problem." - R Reagan. All of a sudden Repubs in Congress are for more regulation and have been all along? I don't think so.

"It was 50-50 (Cheney tie break) before Jeffords split.

That made it 50-49 with Jeffords a true indie. That led to a power sharing agreement between the Dem & GOP given the tenuous nature of the Dems "majority"

Thank you. I wanted you to be the one to post that democrats had an advantage in the senate in 2001 since if I forwarded that notion that republicans were not in charge of congress in 2001 you would have refuted it.

So how again is it that "democrats didn't block Fannie/Freddie deregulation?"

"Amazing how you go post to post and think people can't put 2 and 2 together. It was only a dead bill because PEOPLE LIKE BARNEY AND DODD KILLED IT"

How did they kill it when they did not control the chair or committee?

The GOP had a firm majority by 2005.

"Nice try yet again. Since it is a presidential requirement it shouldn't take Joe Citizen to demand it; it should be a matter of course."

Is there an application that the President fills out before he is sworn in?

Are all Presidents required to provide the birth certificates to prove not just natural born citizenry but also the age requirement?

"Yeah that's right by 2003 it went back to a republican majority the 49-49 was in 2001 after Jeffords went independant"

Still not correct.

It was 50-50 (Cheney tie break) before Jeffords split.

That made it 50-49 with Jeffords a true indie. That led to a power sharing agreement between the Dem & GOP given the tenuous nature of the Dems "majority"

"Cryos,

For your analogy to work, it would have to be perfectly acceptable for Joe Citizen to demand people produce their insurance documentation."

Nice try yet again. Since it is a presidential requirement it shouldn't take Joe Citizen to demand it; it should be a matter of course.

"10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie."

McCain voted for the Gramm bill for deregulation of the banks in addition to having a long career based on his efforts at deregulation.

Jumping on a dead bill a year and half after it was intro'd is not calling for more regulation.

Its called political posturing.

Yeah that's right by 2003 it went back to a republican majority the 49-49 was in 2001 after Jeffords went independant. However only 40 seats are required for a fillibuster so my point is still proven correct. Democrats ARE ON CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OPPOSING FANNIE/FREDDIE REGULATION. I'd like you to refute that FACT not dance around the issue.

Cryos,

For your analogy to work, it would have to be perfectly acceptable for Joe Citizen to demand people produce their insurance documentation.

"As for the polls you seem to worship, Ryan, they are only as good as the pollsters and their methods."

Which is why I posted all of them.

And ALL of them show Obama WINNING.

"Lol missed this post early. Sounds like you're the "genius" since you don't realize there were 49 republicans and 49 democrats. When it comes to the "majority" the independents are classified with whichever party they caucus with."

in 2003, there 51 Republicans, 48 Democrats and 1 indie.

In 2005, there were 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats and 1 indie.

The indie was Jim Jeffords.

In 2007, Jeffords had retired and two indies were part of the Senate, Bernie Sanders & Lieberman.

In short you were wrong. Twice.

""If I got pulled over by a cop and he/she asked for my insurance, why would I refuse to produce the insurance and instead drag it out to a court date?"

So right wing nuts on the internet are now cops?

Stay away from the analogies. You don't do them very well.

Posted by: Ryan C"

I personally think this is a good analogy so would like input from others on it (logical minded people please).

You are asked to produce a legal document that is a requirement for your activity (driving in this case instead of presidential eligibility). You claim to have a valid document and could nullify the issue simply by producing that legal document. Instead you decide to delay the issue and go to court proceedings to "prove" what you could have proved in the first place.

As an addition it would then be like going to court and asking the judge to just take you on your word and dismiss the proof of insurance ticket without simply showing the judge the insurance you claim to have in the first place.

Gotta admit that I missed that one, too Cryos.

I guess Ryan was taking "former Democrats" like Lieberman into the Obama fold.

Fact check, again.

You can do better, Ryan.

The Obama payroll demands more.

So, once again, the 14 (count'em 14) lies told by Joe Biden during the debate. This list does not take into account half-truths.

JOE BIDEN’S 14 LIES IN DEBATE LAST NIGHT

1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false. McCain's only reference to "de-regulation of the heath industry" is his support to allow us to buy insurance across state lines- period.

8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan. In fact, taxes will average close to 35% similar to the Clinton years.

Remember 2000, Ryan.

"So much for the polls."

Yeah who cares what voters think when we have conflicting editorials from newspapers to tell us who won!

Much like your namesake Palin Wins, once you get past the talking points, there is much there.

"Drive around your friggin neighborhood and look at the for sale signs. Are those all low-income people that Dems forced banks to finance?"

Actually if you look at statistics the foreclosure rate is MUCH HIGHER in "low income" areas than others.

""Lets see the senate has been 49-49 much of the last 6 years regardless of the impression given that "republicans control congress." "

49-49 equals 98, genius."

Lol missed this post early. Sounds like you're the "genius" since you don't realize there were 49 republicans and 49 democrats. When it comes to the "majority" the independents are classified with whichever party they caucus with.

Daily newspapers on Friday differed sharply in scoring the vice presidential debate between Republican Sarah Palin and Democrat Joe Biden, suggesting that neither candidate clearly won over public opinion.

According to The Wall Street Journal Sarah Palin "more than held her own" in debating foreign policy with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and "won on points at least on Iraq and Afghanistan."

The New York Times gave a scalding review of Palin's performance.

The Washington Post gave both sides a tepid review.

So much for the polls.

And, meanwhile, Ryan remembers 2000.

"Actually yes they did. Fannie/Freddie were the primary agencies responsible for packaging the mortgage into securities and putting them into the market."
*****************

Fannie/Freddie are said to hold half the mortgages in the country, but what about WaMu and other huge banks which held much of the rest and have failed? These banks wanted the business and rushed to get it. They bent their own standards all by themselves. And there is just no way this is primarily a low-income problem. Those loans are a drop in the bucket compared to the standard market over-building and over-valuing properties.

Drive around your friggin neighborhood and look at the for sale signs. Are those all low-income people that Dems forced banks to finance?

"Let's see, it's very early in October."

Yes it is.

You were wrong about Kerry's poll numbers.

BTW didn't you just accuse me of only responding to parts of a post and how wrong that was?

Hypocrisy thy name is Palin wins.

Fact check on the debate

# Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to "pre-surge" levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.
# Biden incorrectly said "John McCain voted the exact same way" as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. The two were actually on opposite sides.
# Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on "families" making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.
# Biden wrongly claimed that McCain "voted the exact same way" as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it. Biden was referring to an amendment that didn't address taxes at that income level.
# Palin claimed McCain's health care plan would be "budget neutral," costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.
# Biden wrongly claimed that McCain had said "he wouldn't even sit down" with the government of Spain. Actually, McCain didn't reject a meeting, but simply refused to commit himself one way or the other during an interview.
# Palin wrongly claimed that "millions of small businesses" would see tax increases under Obama's tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

"Gore enjoyed 5pt or better leads in some polls very early in Oct but by the end of the 1st week of Oct he was tied or losing."

Let's see, it's very early in October. Or, perhaps Ryan has poll results to show that it's actually December.

Good job, Ryan.

That was 2000, and you are remembering.

"If I got pulled over by a cop and he/she asked for my insurance, why would I refuse to produce the insurance and instead drag it out to a court date?"

So right wing nuts on the internet are now cops?

Stay away from the analogies. You don't do them very well.

"You can infer that I say he's guilty until proven innocent but that's not the case. I'm just asking a very simple question as to why he won't do the easiest thing and get it over with"

Exactly, why doesn't he prove his innocence, he must be guilty!

That's the problem when you start out with a dishonest premise.

You would like to push the birth cert story but you realize its kooky and that could damage your cred so you pretend to be some bystander.

"As I remember, a lot of polls favored Gore and Kerry at one point or another."

Kerry never had a 5 pt lead, let alone in Oct.

Gore enjoyed 5pt or better leads in some polls very early in Oct but by the end of the 1st week of Oct he was tied or losing.

"IOW he's guilty until he proves his innocence.

Thanks for admitting you were full of it."

Once again nice deflection but I don't buy into Obamalogic. You can infer that I say he's guilty until proven innocent but that's not the case. I'm just asking a very simple question as to why he won't do the easiest thing and get it over with. I don't think that's too complicated of a question to ask.

If I got pulled over by a cop and he/she asked for my insurance, why would I refuse to produce the insurance and instead drag it out to a court date? I wouldn't I would simply pull my insurance card out of my wallet and resolve the issue right then.

For all the B.S. that people write, I still cannot justify Palin anywhere close the White House, and so far I do not see any valid arguments to support her. Is she qualified? if so why? because she can talk to Joe Six Pack and hockey moms? so can Larry the cable guy, and I like the guy, but I would not invite him to my house, and much less to be in charge of a public office where the present and future of the nation is at risk. The republicans have had eight years to do the right thing, and they have not. We need change and McFart/Flo-Palin are not any different, same old B.S.

As evidenced in his comments, Ryan always opts to attack a specific portion of a post and never the entire post.

Like most of the paid Obama bloggers, Ryan works from the "pick and choose a snippet" format.

Simple, but ineffective.

"Polls, for what they are worth, vary from depending on which poll you are looking at.

And, no, Ryan. Just because you choose to quote a poll that supports your position, that source is not necessarily valid or the only credible source of information."

So my quoting sources is wrong even when providing multiple sources.

But "Palin wins" can just post opinion and that should be accepted.

ROFLMAO!

Would you like to see all the polls?

Gallup Tracking Obama +7
Rasmussen Tracking Obama +7
Hotline/FD Tracking Obama +6
GW/Battleground Obama +3
Marist Obama +5
CBS News Obama +9
Associated Press/GfK Obama +7
ABC News/Wash Post Obama +4
Pew Research Obama +6
Ipsos/McClatchy Obama +3
Time Obama +7

"Nice try to turn around the issue Ryan but don't think you've fooled me. You still can't answer why Obama simply won't provide the documentation because you can't. "

IOW he's guilty until he proves his innocence.

Thanks for admitting you were full of it.

Although it was not a runaway win, CNN gave Palin a B+ on the debate performance and Biden a B.

Polls, for what they are worth, vary from depending on which poll you are looking at.

And, no, Ryan. Just because you choose to quote a poll that supports your position, that source is not necessarily valid or the only credible source of information.

As I remember, a lot of polls favored Gore and Kerry at one point or another.

Speaking of Gore, remember 2000?

Nice try to turn around the issue Ryan but don't think you've fooled me. You still can't answer why Obama simply won't provide the documentation because you can't.

You can try to add all the fluff you want but it is easy to see through the facade. Nice try though you probably fooled some people.

"I see this argument on the blogs, but I have to say, I don't see this "it's the poor people's fault" in my area. "

That's the first problem that the MSM refuses to air this issue but they air the "republicans and deregulation" which is much less relevant to the situation in hand. Barney is on record saying the following (pulling a quote from a website I can't link on a 2003 statement)

"''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.'"

"They didn't force Wall Street to buy and sell blocks of mortgages."

Actually yes they did. Fannie/Freddie were the primary agencies responsible for packaging the mortgage into securities and putting them into the market.

"Even if you're right and the Dems relaxed the regs, they didn't force banks to make bad loans -- not to poor people, or contractors, or flippers, or investors."

Actually yes they did. Citing racial discrimination these agencies FORCED PRIVATE BUSINESSES TO IGNORE LOAN STANDARDS AND LOWER THE LOAN STANDARDS. Although greed caused these companies to expand these bad loans further than they were forced to the companies were forced to make bad loans. Fannie/Freddie underwrote them and guaranteed them in return.

"the debate won by Sarah Palin."

Post debate polling says otherwise.

CBS: Biden won by a 2 to 1 margin.

CNN: Biden won 51% to 36%

Some other polling for you

Gallup: Obama +7
Rasmussen: Obama +7
Hotline/FD: Obama +6

Very funny to see right wingers so ecstatic that Palin did not humiliate herself.

Ryan C you have tried changing the subject on the documentation issues. The Obama issue is NOT like the Bush issue.

The Bush and Kerry issues are similar as they have no real legal implications it just applies to "character" of the candidates. The Obama issue has much higher stakes since it DETERMINES THE ELIGIBILITY OF OBAMA FOR THE PRESIDENCY.

Bush and Kerry's military records do not have that same impact. If serving in the military was a requirement for the presidency I would agree with you however it is not. Being a natural born citizen is.

Anyone primarily concerned with the economy should not be voting for democrats since democrats mostly caused this mess.

If democrats had regulated Fannie/Freddie in 2003-2005 instead of blocking votes and refusing to regulate the agencies to hold up the "low income housing" ideal, we might have had a soft housing market downturn around 2006 when capacity was reached, but we would not be where we are now.

*********
I see this argument on the blogs, but I have to say, I don't see this "it's the poor people's fault" in my area. I hang out with contractors who are going out of business in droves or just barely hanging on. Maybe in Mich. loans to low-income people has been a problem, but California, Las Vegas, Florida? Even if you're right and the Dems relaxed the regs, they didn't force banks to make bad loans -- not to poor people, or contractors, or flippers, or investors. They didn't force Wall Street to buy and sell blocks of mortgages.

It seems weird that the Repub ticket this year is running so hard as populists and for regulation. Actually, I thought Palin was confusing on this last night. On one hand she was for more regulation and on the other she wanted government to leave business alone. I liked it better when I knew what Repubs were for.

"Lets see the senate has been 49-49 much of the last 6 years regardless of the impression given that "republicans control congress." "

49-49 equals 98, genius.

GOP enjoyed a 51-49 advantage in 2002, extending to 11 seat margin in 2004.

"Well guess what in 2005 democrats could fillibuster every bit as much as republicans can now."

Someone has forgotten the gang of 14, who worked to stop the Republicans from removing the option of fillibuster when the Democrats tried to stop Bush's right wing judges.

BTW, Ryan,

Time for you to get back on the subject of this post--the debate won by Sarah Palin.

Fourteen Biden lies at the debate (or, mistatements, in Democrat lingo) were listed.

You responded incoherently to one.

Get busy.

And, while you flounder, remember 2000.

'Except John Kerry did release all his records.

There was a partial release during the election and then a full release in 2005.

But I love your citing a bs right wing conspiracy theory and admitting it was a lie while trying to prop up a new one coyly playing disinterested bystander.

Posted by: Ryan C "

My bad I forgot Kerry did actually release the records AFTER THE ELECTION. And I already said the attackers were disproven with or without the records. It's just interesting he refused to produce them during the election.

I'm not "coyly" playing anything. As evidenced by my previous posts I believe in fair treatment on both sides and am not a party hack who tries to enforce double standards.

"Who was in charge of Congress and the executive branch from 2003 to 2005?

That would be the Republicans.

How did Democrats block votes on reform when they controlled no committees and could call no votes?

Lets see the senate has been 49-49 much of the last 6 years regardless of the impression given that "republicans control congress." I believe I've seen you complain about republican fillibusters. Well guess what in 2005 democrats could fillibuster every bit as much as republicans can now.

"Your argument is akin to John Kerry having to produce his military records to disprove the swiftboat accusations. BTW Kerry NEVER produced his military records. Regardless that the swiftboat attackers were disproven I love the fact he would never release his records."

Except John Kerry did release all his records.

There was a partial release during the election and then a full release in 2005.

But I love your citing a bs right wing conspiracy theory and admitting it was a lie while trying to prop up a new one coyly playing disinterested bystander.

"If Obama is in the right and could take the time to produce a scanned copy WHY COULDN'T AND WOULDN'T HE SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL? Its a very simple question."

Its the same argument regarding Bush's time in the TANG.

If he can't produce the paperwork in my hand, why it must be a forgery/conspiracy!

Its stupid.

There's a scanned copy for all to see.

"Your argument is akin to Bush must produce physical evidence of his TANG deployment or the internet rumors are true."

Actually the Obama issue in question is much much more relevant since it involves a necessary requirement to become president.

Your argument is akin to John Kerry having to produce his military records to disprove the swiftboat accusations. BTW Kerry NEVER produced his military records. Regardless that the swiftboat attackers were disproven I love the fact he would never release his records.

Amazing that you took so long to pick up on the electoral college procedure, Ryan. Fact check must have been experiencing high volume from the Obama camp.

Once again, Ryan, try reading instead of reading into.

Never was it posted that the question of Obama's place of birth was on the docket of the Supreme Court, only that if an Obama election win should occur (which is unlikely) that it would come before the court.

All you have to do is remember 2000.

"If democrats had regulated Fannie/Freddie in 2003-2005 instead of blocking votes and refusing to regulate the agencies to hold up"

Who was in charge of Congress and the executive branch from 2003 to 2005?

That would be the Republicans.

How did Democrats block votes on reform when they controlled no committees and could call no votes?

How are Democrats responsible for the staffing of executive branch agencies and the oversight of those agencies?

"The framers of the Constitution are dead. They won't be voting in Nov. They're also not worrying about the price of gas or the stock market."

Anyone primarily concerned about the war should not be voting for republicans since it is supported by many republicans.

Anyone primarily concerned with the economy should not be voting for democrats since democrats mostly caused this mess.

If democrats had regulated Fannie/Freddie in 2003-2005 instead of blocking votes and refusing to regulate the agencies to hold up the "low income housing" ideal, we might have had a soft housing market downturn around 2006 when capacity was reached, but we would not be where we are now.

It's unfortunate the media lets democrats get away with passing "feel good" policies and then not taking responsibility for the actions of those policies when they blow up. However it does match the democratic party ideal of no one should be responsible for their own actions; point the finger at someone else, sue someone, blame government etc.

Fannie/Freddie are at the root of the mortgage issues.

"Obama has been delaying the court proceedings and has not produced an original copy."

Delaying? He called for a dismissal.

The only people trying to delay proceedings are Republicans dealing with troopergate.

Their latest gambit has failed.

Your argument is akin to Bush must produce physical evidence of his TANG deployment or the internet rumors are true.

Its the argument of idiots and conspiracy theorists.