Image 01 Image 03

Preview of VP Debate

Preview of VP Debate

Paul Ryan is expected to do well in the VP debate, essentially the reverse of what was expected for the presidential debate where Obama was favored going in.

The expectations are high, I think too high:

Ryan does, however, have a lot of non-debate debating experience dealing with all the Democratic talking points

And no one is better positioned to take on Obamacare:

Biden is an emotional flame thrower, and the trick will be for Ryan to rebut Biden with facts and talk directly to the American people.

I don’t expect many “gaffes” from Biden. He was fairly controlled in the 2008 debate (full 2008 VP debate is here)

Biden also has debate experience from his prior run for president in 2008, and he was good at relating to people:

I think there is a possibility Ryan could clean Biden’s clock, but don’t make that the expectation.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I’ll repost what I posted earlier today:

The VP debates are usually seen by 10-20 million less people than the initial presidential debate. Since we saw 70 million people at the first debate, the second debate may see as little as 45 million (generous) or nearly as much as 60 million people.

Now Palin-Biden was an exception to the rule, they had nearly 70 million people watching and it was MORE than the first presidential debate between McCain and Obama, which was at around 52 million according to Nielson.

Will we have that this year? I don’t know. But if Ryan does well, then we may see yet another bump or solidified lead for Romney going into the second presidential debate.

    LukeHandCool in reply to heimdall. | October 7, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    I think the ratings will be high because we don’t have two ho-hum, run-of-the-mill VP candidates here.

    We have a whiz kid seen as the future of the GOP, and a once-in-a-lifetime gaffe czar with an IQ higher than everyone else, if he may say so himself.

    By the way, it’s “fewer people,” not “less people.”

    Sorry, I hear smart people making this grammatical mistake all the time, and it just drives me nails-on-a-blackboard crazy.

      heimdall in reply to LukeHandCool. | October 7, 2012 at 5:47 pm

      HA! You’re right! Didn’t catch that.

      I think the ratings will definitely higher than in previous years because of the horrible bombing of the debate by Obama. People will “tune in” to see how Biden-Ryan do.

      Most prior VP debates, where there is a contentious election, will get more viewers than in years which have a president cruising to reelection.

        LukeHandCool in reply to heimdall. | October 7, 2012 at 6:14 pm

        “I think the ratings will definitely higher than in previous years because of the horrible bombing of the debate by Obama. People will “tune in” to see how Biden-Ryan do.”

        Absolutely. I was going to say that but forgot.

      nomadic100 in reply to LukeHandCool. | October 7, 2012 at 6:24 pm

      The mistaken use of “less” for “fewer” is an error not of grammar but of diction.

      BannedbytheGuardian in reply to LukeHandCool. | October 7, 2012 at 6:46 pm

      I would not say Ryan was a Whizkid & The Future of The GOP .

      Unfortunately Paul is a career politician & hopefully the future does not belong to career politicians . He must be given full credit for at least trying to come up with a long term budget plan that addresses some looming pitfalls.

      I have not seen a full breakdown analyses of his voting but I am under the impression it is good obedient Republican. Please correct me if I am wrong. He was also very cool & did not weigh into the crises in his home state iirc.

      But he is what he is & is very honest & does not try to be anything he is not. I expect him to put in an excellent performance .

we rarely disagree, but this time I do. Biden’s taking 6 days off the campaign trail to prepare and that’s not enough. He’s got to sell unpalatable policies in a format where his opponent has the facts at his fingertips.

I wonder how well Ryan will do on foreign policy questions? Supposedly, that’s Biden’s strong point. It will definitely be interesting because Biden’s such a loose canon, and he seems to be getting worse.

    heimdall in reply to Rosalie. | October 7, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    Yeah it is his strong point. /s

    Remember when he said the US and the French kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon in 2008? The only reason he has any gravitas on that subject was that he was on the foreign affairs/relations committee for so long. But, he doesn’t have command of the facts.

    The only problem for Ryan is that Biden can make it sound like he has command of the facts when he is compulsively lying out through his teeth. He has a folksy charm to him to the uninformed voter and Ryan needs to take him seriously. Not everyone knows how bad this demagogue can be.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Rosalie. | October 7, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Paul Ryan + foereign policy . I have seen that referred to elsewhere as a possible minus. However Ryan is an on the ball rep & has thus voted FP for 14 years. I believe he understood what he was voting for .

    Biden has been in the Senate for 30 years & he does not strike me as someone who understands anything.

      That is the point (that he is a buffoon), but the media likes to talk up that he was on the foreign affairs committee in the Senate and actually headed the committee on an occasion.

      I think the FP area is the place where Ryan may surprise people.

        BannedbytheGuardian in reply to heimdall. | October 8, 2012 at 12:22 am

        You are right Helmdall. I was replying to Rosalie -& I concur Ryan knows FP & why he voted as he did on the things that did come to Congress.

        Not that voting in the House has any relevance to this Admin’s FP.

Biden is a fool, but in this kind of format he can be channeled by his handlers. His folksy aw-shucks routine seems to connect well with audiences. He’ll hold his own enough so that even without Ryan making mistakes the MSM will be happy to trumpet a Biden win.

The media will do anything/everything to justify calling Biden the winner, of course. Doesn’t matter what’s said by either, unless Joe has a total flameout like BO, in which case no amount of lipstick will suffice. Having none of BO’s character flaws and a confident command of the facts, however, Ryan is unlikely to stumble in any major way. Of the four men, Ryan is probably the coolest under fire.

Nonetheless, the most minor of Ryan stumbles (if any) will be seized upon by all the usual suspects, now lying in wait at heightened alert with teeth bared and ready to pounce. Absent a Joe meltdown or major facepalm, there will be a post-debate shark-feeding frenzy of Ryan criticism and the media will claim Biden won. You can count on it. The people watching, fortunately, will be able to make up their own minds.

I dunno. Biden might be nervous because of the pressure on him to do well. This might result in some odd statements.

I am cheered by the fact that Ryan has been prepping with Ted Olson.

I’ve seen a number of conservative pundits I admire like Jonah Goldberg say that Obama didn’t have an “off night.”

This is who he is without a teleprompter.

Last night I saw Democratic partisan and former Howard Dean manager Joe Trippi say the same thing. He said what you saw was the usual Obama in a debate. He may be capable of giving great teleprompted speeches, but he’s nothing special when it come to debating.

I think the next format is a townhall style one, so that may facilitate a better showing for Obama.

    heimdall in reply to LukeHandCool. | October 7, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Sorry, wall of text coming.

    Joe Trippi is right though. Obama ONLY does well giving scripted speeches with teleprompters attached to his head. He cannot think on his feet and cannot debate well. People have this obsession about how well he speaks from what the media has fed them over the last six years.

    You saw the real Obama in the debate. Mitt Romney was so good that an average political debate opponent like Obama looked really off his game that night. People were expecting them to be equals, so therefore, Obama had an “off night.” Everyone needs to remember that in 2008, Obama was debating John McCain, who looked old and like Obama, can’t debate very well at all.

    Obama will be more animated for the town hall debate, but that is because he will not want to look like he did the other night. The only problem is that he may look arrogant and pull an Al Gore. I think he will go too far in the other direction. It may help him that “average Americans,” AKA Democrat plants, will be asking questions of him and Romney. It will also help that the media is keyed in on how Romney is going to debate and will be more forceful with him next time.

    Time for Romney to pull a Newt I think, and just answer what he wants or rephrase the question that is less slanted in the Democrats favor.

      LukeHandCool in reply to heimdall. | October 7, 2012 at 6:25 pm

      Excellent analysis. You articulated all the vague feelings I have about their next debate.

      Obama will be in danger of overcompensating, especially because his confidence is likely very shaken.

      He’s never faced a debate opponent as competent as Romney before.

      I think he’ll feel more comfortable in the townhall style format because it lends itself to emoting and his fake folksy approach, but then Romney will have his magic handkerchief, too.

        heimdall in reply to LukeHandCool. | October 7, 2012 at 6:38 pm

        It does lend to his fake folksy approach, but people always forget that Romney does very well in these types of settings too. He does/did these events all the time on the campaign trail now and in 2008. He used to have question and answer sessions with his congregations in the Mormon Churches, which could potentially be about any topic. Not to mention board meetings with shareholders. Does anybody think these meetings would NOT be difficult? He will be fine.

        Obama however, like Newt Gingrich, feeds off of his audience and needs the approval to feel like they are winning or getting their point across. As much as I liked Newt in the primaries, this point really showed up when they had the debate in Florida where the audience was asked to remain silent the whole time. That is when Gingrich would falter. The crowd effect makes his points sell better, like Obama. When he doesn’t get adoring fans, Obama starts to flounder and go off on wild tangents BECAUSE he is so used to getting the opposite on the campaign trail.

        The only way Mitt loses the second debate is if he is unprepared and the only question he was unprepared or stumbled with THIS ENTIRE SEASON was the tax question. That is the ONLY question that got him hemming and hawing. Now it is a moot point.

        If he performs like the other night again though, it will be lights out for Obama.

        Rosalie in reply to LukeHandCool. | October 7, 2012 at 6:45 pm

        Thank goodness for that hanky. It’s done wonders.

Biden’s unpredictable, so who knows what he’ll do?

Ryan is as capable a young man as any around and has the ability of explaining complex financial matters in a way that is understandable to laymen. As long as he’s somewhat respectful of the OFFICE of VP, but NOT deferential, he’ll do fine.

    BrendaK in reply to AmandaFitz. | October 7, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    Beg to differ. I find Biden entirely predictable, at least in style. In fact, I expect him to employ Biden Persona 133(a), ‘Stern and Serious, With Condescension For The Sadly Inexperienced Whippersnapper To My Right’ — with a side order of Folksy Closing Statement.

    The only real question is, what specifically will Biden lie about? Note that I do not wonder if he will lie, that’s a forgone conclusion; he will have prepped lies on tap, however, and Ryan will have to be ready for that.

Henry Hawkins | October 7, 2012 at 5:48 pm

Biden has more experience on foreign affairs, but it isn’t a debate on foreign affairsin general – it’s about the Obama administration’s first term record on foreign affairs, an entirely different prospect.

Obama is a sock puppet, unable to adlib or speak well extemporaneously, and saddled with a horrible record. Unable to address the past four years, he has to look forward, and any ideas he presents as solutions to our nation’s problems are met with the obvious question – then why haven’t you done that yet?

Biden is a better extemp speaker, but brings a high risk of gaffes. He has matched Dan Quayle’s ability to render himself a comic icon as opposed to any sort of statesman. Commander Jacobson is correct – Ryan needs to just hit the policies and numbers plainly and concisely, and speak to the camera. Let Biden be Biden – that usually works to our favor.

Name the times Biden said something that hurt the Obama campaign. Had to choose among many examples, right? Now name the last time Biden said something that really helped the Obama campaign. Right. Nuthin’. Biden won’t help, and he’s currently bunkered down for 6 days practicing and cramming just to make sure he doesn’t hurt the campaign. They’re already in defensive mode.

Ryan need only make sure he doesn’t come off as picking on a cripple.

My apologies for being off topic. President 0bama suggested after his debate with Romney that the person he was debating wasn’t the real Mitt Romney. Does Romney get to address that, and pull out copies of his Birth Certificate, Drivers License, fingerprints and Passport to verify that he, indeed, is the person he says he is? For a number of years I have had to produce my Birth Certificate, Passport and Drivers License before I could be employed.

I agree that expectations are too high (including my own, come to think of it). I love Paul Ryan and think he’s incredibly intelligent and articulate, and on the likability front, he’s massively likable (but then, so is Slow Joe).

The worry I have is that they’re going to focus not on Ryan’s strong suit (fiscal issues) but on foreign policy. Yes, Biden is almost always wrong about foreign policy, but I don’t know how much Ryan knows about details, numbers, stats, etc. (not that he doesn’t have the brain to wrap around that. He does.). That said, anyone who reads this blog would be well-prepared to debate general foreign policy with Biden; the Obama admin’s foreign policy is as proven a disaster as his domestic policies. But Biden’s not the total clown we always think he is, and he’s not going to be a mumbling mess like his boss was.

    heimdall in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 7, 2012 at 6:14 pm

    They won’t try to focus too much on domestic policy because the president is now the Foreign Policy President (TM). Also, Martha Raddatz is the moderator for the debate and is a foreign policy correspondent for ABC news. She has talked up a good game on television but I do not think she should be a moderator for ANY debates with these candidates.

    She has a SERIOUS conflict of interest and has a clear benefit to seeing the current president and Democrats remain in control of the US Gov. She is MARRIED to the FCC chairman Julius Genachowski who as an OBAMA appointee, is trying to end run around the constitution to establish controls of the internet, radio, and television. This is the man who has been told by the courts that he is overstepping his bounds and has been slapped down on several occasions. He was floating bringing back the “Fairness Doctrine” early on in the Obama term.

    Martha Raddatz should not be setting ONE FOOT into that building to “moderate” a debate with an strong motivation to make one of the two parties there lose!

      BannedbytheGuardian in reply to heimdall. | October 7, 2012 at 7:12 pm

      Excellent tying in there. I am a fan of a guy called Higley (now I believe at UT) who specializes in analyzing elites in modern nations .

      You might find his work fits your theories & vice versa.

Paul Ryan is expected to do well in the VP debate, essentially the reverse of what was expected for the presidential debate where Obama was favored going in.

The expectations are high, I think too high:

If Biden exceeds expectations, the MSM will spin it as a victory. They may be trying to set that scenario up.

Overconfidence is a Republican disease. I don’t expect Ryan to get infected; I expect him to take the debate seriously and prevail, but the outcome is not a foregone conclusion.

    ALman in reply to gs. | October 7, 2012 at 7:37 pm

    Highly anticipate all of the remaining debates, yet moderate one’s expectations.


DINORightMarie | October 7, 2012 at 6:23 pm

I cannot dispute what you say – over confidence in anything is a sure way to get slammed on your blind side.

But something has happened to Biden over the last 4 years. He seems to have some form of dementia or something…… He is making gaffes all the time, and he doesn’t seem to get why the gaffes are a problem, either.

He is a BS artist. Ryan, hopefully, will be more than prepped, come in with his “A” game, and show his broad knowledge on every area. He is more than a numbers guy or policy wonk; he knows the dangers our nation faces, domestically and internationally.

The examples you linked, Professor, are great. And, as Ryan said not too long ago, the Congress debates EVERYTHING, all the time – so he enjoys that format, and has to think on his feet in the House; unlike the Senate, where they usually speech-ify everything! 🙂

It’s a big mistake to underestimate Biden. He has caught a lot of kidding in the MSM and from comics because, given their reluctance to knock Obama, they needed a Democrat to make fun of to pretend they were evenhanded.

Actually Joe is an experienced, skillful pol, equally capable of being charming, delivering jokes, or savagely attacking. He knows his policy stuff and for whatever reason, he does have a sort of blue collar appeal (at least compared to Obama). He may have taken too much for granted vs. Palin. He won’t make that mistake here.

I’m not so sure that Biden is all there anymore, just a thought.

Just my two cents, but I don’t think we need to worry too much about what the MSM has to say about the debates. They have lost all credibility. I think that after that astounding presidential debate last week, there will be higher than usual viewership for the VP debates, and people will make up their own minds without the aid of the MSM.

Biden isn’t bad at a debate, but he is totally predictable. Unless Ryan has incompetent handling, he’ll be ready for Biden’s ‘folksy’ style.

BTW, $50 says Biden trots out his signature, “C’mon now, let’s get real…” Any takers?

I wouldn’t be surprised if the audience exceeds the presidential debate. That’s good. Not as many people have seen or know Ryan as they have or do Biden. Ryan wins just by being on the stage and holding his own.

But he’ll do far more. I think this debate could offer one of those mask-slipping moments we rarely see in politics. Biden will come loaded for bear. He’ll be prepped with sleazy zingers and slick lies like nobody’s business. It’s what he does, and he’ll be feeling the burden of expectations – to redeem Obama’s debacle. I think he’ll over-reach. Ryan, with his unflappable decency and mastery of detail, will “zen” him into spluttering excess.

Biden represents the worst of American politics — the dangerously stupid combined with the arrogantly bullying and the downright sleazy. Somehow over decades of stupidity and arrogance and sleaziness he has escaped his reckoning. It’s coming.

Ryan will present the facts but sadly the Media will be rooting for Uncle Joe and he’ll get the soundbites.

I don’t expect Ryan to come off looking very good but then Joe will be lying through his teeth or making stuff up as he goes along with no one to call him out on it.

I don’t see it as a problem. It’s the 2nd R vs O debate that we need to be concerned about. Obama (actually his handlers) now knows what he did wrong so they will tighten that up. Plus the media now knows that Obama needs more protection and he’ll get it.

Ain’t it great that we conservatives have to fight 2 opponents/battles for every one that the liberals fight?

I just read over at Redstate that Axelrod has taken over Biden’s prep training. They must be panicking.

    Browndog in reply to Mercyneal. | October 7, 2012 at 7:46 pm

    Refining the art of: “tell a lie so absurd, no one in their right could believe it’s a lie-who would tell a lie so absurd?”

Ryan is articulate, passionate and knowledgeable! Biden will appear imbecilic by comparison!

Biden: a tempest in a crack pot. (veepy creepy)

Jacobson: “The expectations (for Ryan) are high, I think too high:”

I disagree for the following partial list of reasons…

News Item: “Biden Takes 6 Days Off Campaign Trail”
…yeah it will take that long to pull his feet out of his mouth from his MOST RECENT verbal blunders.

News Headlines during the DNC:
“Dick Durbin Will Replace Joe Biden Tonight in Prime-Time Speaking Slot”
“They just didn’t trust Joe not to screw it up.”
…even his pals know he’s a verbal time bomb

Don’t forget: bumbling Bite-Me biden is the one who didn’t want OSAMA taken out !!!! Yep, he’s the “intelligence” behind the d-cRAT socialist foreign policy!

The Bite-Me biden: “Summer of Recovery”

What do you call a person who is so stupid and out-of-touch with reality that he ignores the good, constructive advice of everybody and continues on his insane, destructive path of embarrassing himself with both feet in his mouth, while wreaking political havoc on a national level?
1. bumbling Bite-Me biden, 2. Todd Akin, 3. BOTH.

Paul Ryan is to bumbling Bite-Me biden as Einstein is to Forrest Gump – with a mentally debilitating brain aneurysm.

Bite-ME biden has been described as “the ill-informed, tactless, obnoxious, loudmouthed, bloviating rhetorical time-bomb gift that keeps on giving to the Romney/Ryan campaign.”

Bite-Me is a “special” case….the extra mental handicap of Biden is his multiple brain aneurysms have made him incapable of operating heavy machinery (like a car or a screwdriver) — or preforming most normal tasks, like flying on an airplane – and this is also is responsible for him constantly putting his foot in his mouth. Of course, as with dingbat pelosi, those constant Botox injections Bite-Me gets have probably destroyed quite a few braincells as well – and we all know that lunatic-left extremists have VERY FEW braincells to begin with.

Biden in Virginia Speech: ‘With You, We Can Win North Carolina Again!’

Joe Biden: “No Chance” Jill And Michelle Would Have Succeeded In Life Without Government Help

“Biden Suggests Republican Opposition To Dem Bill Will Spur Domestic Violence”

Bite-Me biden: “Raising taxes is patriotic”.

..where would Plagiarist-joe “Bite Me” biden be today if he hadn’t stolen hundreds of speeches from others and presented them as his own words ? Or if this 30+ year Beltway politics-as-usual parasite and the poster-boy for all that is rotten with Washington hadn’t lied about his education ? Totally lacking in ethics, in his third-rate, mediocre law school Bite-Me was only able to graduate 76th in a class of 85 – i.e., he was in the lowest 10.5%! Of course, while campaigning, he lied and said he graduated in the “top half” of his class.

Here are some choice quotes from Bite-Me biden – one of the least qualified people for ANY elected office in America (EXCEPT “You Lie!” hussein, of course):.

Biden: “…right now I don’t believe he (hussein) is (ready to be president). The presidency is not something that leads itself to on-the-job training”.

Biden: ” I would be honored to run with or against John McCain. He’d leave the country better off.”

Biden: hussein is “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean.”

Biden: the OBOZO recession is “the greatest recession in the history of the American Republic.”
(Actually, the Great Depression was worse for America.)

Biden: “Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America.” “Quite frankly it might have been a better pick than me.”

Biden: “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt (1) got on the television (2) and didn’t just talk about, you know, Princes of Greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.'” (3)
THE REAL FACTS: (1) Hoover was then President, not Roosevelt. Hoover addressed the nation by primarily by newspaper. (This was well before the lunatic-left socialist media turned most newspapers into left-wing propaganda sheets.)
(2) Television wasn’t around then: there were no TV broadcasts and nobody had a TV in their home.
(3) If he had known Bite-Me, Roosevelt would probably have said: “We have nothing to fear, but Biden himself.”

I have to dispute your statement that “I don’t expect many “gaffes” from Biden. He was fairly controlled in the 2008 debate.”

As I wrote following the 2008 debate, Biden made numerous gaffes and spun much of his side of the debate out of whole cloth. Here is what I wrote (long): Checking the Facts at the Door

By David B. Jenkins is an organization which purports to be objective and truth-seeking. They describe themselves as “. . . a nonpartisan, nonprofit ‘consumer advocate’ for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics.” But don’t believe everything you read on

Having gone carefully through the summary and analysis of the vice-presidential debate posted by FactCheck and having compared their list with lists of Biden’s misstatements compiled by others, I have to say that they are not accomplishing their stated purpose, because I have found more deception, not less, and my confusion has not been reduced, but increased.

In fact, since FactCheck outright ignored so many obvious and serious examples of Biden’s ability to stretch the truth, one could not be blamed for wondering if they aren’t doing damage control for him by making it appear that his misstatements are neither more numerous nor more serious than Palin’s — in much the same way the NYT article about Barack Obama and William Ayers did damage control by making that connection seem much less than it was.

Biden’s most accurate statement of the evening was “Facts matter.”

Indeed they do. So let’s look at some of Biden’s “facts” that didn’t appear to “matter” enough for FactCheck to mention them. Here’s a link to the NYT’s transcript of the debate if you would like to read it for yourself.

1. One seriously misleading blooper involved the relative cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Three times, with great earnestness and passion, he cited a mysterious statistic claiming that we spend more every three weeks in Iraq than we have invested in the Afghan War during its whole duration.
Actually, statistics from The Congressional Research Service (posted on the website of the Center for Arms Control and Nuclear Non-Proliferation) show that our biggest Iraq expenditure came in Fiscal Year 2008 and reached $158 billion – or $3 billion per week. This means that Biden’s “three weeks in Iraq” would cost $9 billion at most.
However, contrary to Biden’s claim, we’ve spent $177.5 total in Afghanistan, compared to $661.1 billion in Iraq. This means that Biden either over-stated the cost of the war in Iraq or understated the cost of the war in Afghanistan by a factor of twenty.

Listening to Biden speak reminds me of the saying that 69.3 percent of statistics are made up on the spot.
2. Biden outright lied when he said Obama had not said he would meet with Iran without preconditions. In the VP debate he said “This is simply not true about Barack Obama. He did not say sit down with Ahmadinejad.”
But at a July, 2007 debate Obama said he would meet leaders of hostile regimes, including Iran, without preconditions. He confirmed this in February, 2008, saying “There has been no confusion. I have been absolutely clear on this. I will meet not just with our friends but with our enemies. I will meet without preconditions.” (CNN’s “The Situation Room,” 2/4/08) In fact, at the very time of the debate, Barack Obama’s website said this: “Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.” (Obama For America Website,
According to The Washington Post, 6/22/08, “European officials are increasingly concerned that Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign pledge to begin direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program without preconditions could potentially rupture U.S. relations with key European allies early in a potential Obama administration.” (Glenn Kessler, “Europe Fears Obama Might Undercut Progress With Iran).”
3. FactCheck labeled Palin’s supposed misstatements as “hooey” and “balderdash,” while not ridiculing Biden. However, for pure, unadulterated hooey and balderdash, nothing came close to Biden’s claim that “. . .we kicked – along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t know— if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.’ Now what’s happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel.”
What in the world was Biden talking about? Neither we nor the French kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon. Nor is there any record of Biden and Barack saying “move NATO forces in there” to avoid Hezbollah control. If he meant to refer to Syria’s departure from Lebanon, he not only said “Hezbollah” when he meant “Syria,” but he also twisted the history because “we” did not kick them out. The Lebanese themselves forced the Syrians out during their “Cedar Revolution,”.
4. After 36 years as a senator, does Biden know the U.S. Constitution? He said “Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that. The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he’s part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive and look where it has gotten us.”
Biden is correct that some duties of the Vice President are defined in Article One. But Article One is about the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch.
5. Biden lied about his position on the invasion on Iraq, because he was enthusiastically “for it before he was against it.” In the debate, Biden said: “With regard to Iraq, I indicated it would be a mistake to — I gave the president the power. I voted for the power because he said he needed it not to go to war but to keep the United States, the UN in line, to keep sanctions on Iraq and not let them be lifted.”
But in 2002, in an NBC Meet The Press interview with Tim Russert, Biden said “This is a guy (Hussein) who’s used weapons of mass destruction. This is a guy who’s destabilized the whole neighborhood. This is a guy who in a war with the Iranians, over 800,000 people on both sides were killed. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world. And this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction. That case, in and of itself, ought to be sufficient. . .We have no choice but to eliminate the threat.”
He also said “I do not believe this is a rush to war. I believe it is a march to peace and security. … (Saddam Hussein) possesses chemical and biological weapons and is seeking nuclear weapons. . .We must be clear with the American people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the day after, but the decade after.”
In 2003, Biden said “I still believe that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction and that the war in Iraq was justified.” (Press Release,, 7/8/03)
6. Biden minimized the nuclear threat from Iran and exaggerated the threat from Pakistan, saying “Pakistan already has deployed nuclear weapons. Pakistan’s weapons can already hit Israel and the Mediterranean.”
However, according to, Pakistani missiles have a maximum range of 1000 miles, with poor accuracy. The distance from Pakistan to Israel is a little over 2000 miles.
7. Biden said “Number two, with regard to arms control and weapons, nuclear weapons require a nuclear arms control regime. John McCain voted against a Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty that every Republican has supported.”
The truth is that 49 other Republicans voted with McCain and against the treaty.
How is it that an organization that presumes to check the facts and tell us what is true and what is false should fail to check so many obvious points of genuine substance? FactCheck not only failed to check these and other facts; they didn’t even consider them worth any mention at all.
FactCheck is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, which was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg in 1994. Another of Annenberg’s philanthropic enterprises was a multi-million dollar gift to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an organization through which Barack Obama and William Ayres funneled money for the purpose of indoctrinating Chicago schoolchildren in radical leftist ideals under the guise of “reforming” the schools.
The Annenberg name might lead some to wonder if there is a connection here. Possibly, but the presence of a broom does not automatically prove a witch is lurking nearby. A more likely answer is simply that the FactCheckers are educators and journalists, both professions which are dominated by leftists.
A minor point, but one which reinforces Biden’s propensity to make up facts out of whole cloth is the episode in which he tells us how he likes to rub elbows with the common folk: “Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie’s Restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time . . .”
A true man of the people.
Actually, Katie’s Restaurant was never on Union Street and has been closed for about 20 years. (

As National Review said, “Sarah Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true. “

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Dave Jenkins. | October 8, 2012 at 12:34 am

    I was so annoyed at Factcheck not even mentioning Bidens massive Hizbollaah lie that I wrote to them .

    To understand Hiz is to understand the Western ME 1982-2010.

    No reply.

I think it was the New Yorker (among others) that rationalized Obama as having lost the debate because he’s too cerebral/professorial/contemplative/nuanced/other similar B.S. excuses imparting noble characteristics, etc.

So, if he does well in the coming debates, that means he isn’t really cerebral/professorial/nuanced thinking, etc.??

Why is it so hard for people to come to terms with what I see as the obvious fact that he’s not nearly as bright as his acolytes say? He’s just good at acting profound.

And, how does one lower expectations for Joe Biden?

I love Sarah Palin, but she doesn’t have nearly the command of these issues as Ryan does. And she at least fought Biden to a tie, if she didn’t win their debate.

So, I think Ryan will decimate Biden.

P.S. That was no knock against Palin. Ryan has dealt with national issues for a long time. Palin was dealing with the issues of Alaska … but she proved to be a quick study to hold her own against Biden given his decades of experience on national issues.

[…] Preview of VP Debate ( Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. […]

I think the Biden lies will be tough to deal with. He says them in a setting where you cannot stop to check the facts. Paul Ryan should ask for sources or references when Biden pulls “facts” out of his posterior. It will also show how much Biden learned in his preparations. Don’t let him off with “some economists say…” Make him cite specific economists. If he cannot he should withdraw the point. He must substantiate his claims.

Also, ask for specific dates when he claims actions were taken or things were done. When did you have that meeting. Who else was there…
Biden plays fast and loose with the facts because he knows 90% of the viewers will never hear the correction.

Mitt Romney should do the same if given the chance. I wager President Obama will find and excuse to cancel the remaining debates if Biden loses big.

As a scientist, we would never be allowed to make a claim we could not back up citing source or data. Politicians should not be allowed to do so as well.

Biden doesn’t really have 40 or more years of experience — he just has one year repeated 40 or so times.

Biden is smarter than Obama. Why wouldn’t he do better?

Biden’s a liar, but there hasn’t been a Democratic candidate for President who wasn’t in 20 years: Jerry Brown is nuttier than a big can of Planter’s Party Mix, but he used to speak directly, if misguidedly. Other than that, they have to lie and distort facts and misrepresent conservative ideas or they could never compete.

So I fully expect Biden to lie, and most to go as unnoticed as they did last time. And the expectations have been set so that if Ryan doesn’t set Joe stuttering and sputtering, it will be called “a successful night for the Vice President.”

I doubt the debate will change many votes, but Ryan has the opportunity, like Romney, to show the swing voters our team is not a bunch of monsters as Obama’s negative campaigning claims, and if they don’t accept our policy prescriptions they might at least note that Obama has no serious plans at all other than taxing those over $250,000 in income and killing fossil fuel production in the US.

Henry Hawkins | October 8, 2012 at 11:17 am

They run the risk of sabotaging their own debater if they are taking six days to upload facts and talking points apparently not already onboard and to install some sort of anti-gaffe mechanism.

As a psych diagnostician I interview people every day, and one of the ‘tells’ for prevarication is the speaker who hems and haws in the middle of a sentence, typically breaking eye contact to look shyward while they mentally scramble to confabulate whatever it is they feel they are supposed to be saying. Obama did this constantly during the debate. Look for it in Biden’s replies. Doesn’t mean he’s necessarily lying, of course, but that he’s struggling to remember the answer he’s supposed to give.

They may overprepare Biden, thereby negating his natural, populist speaking style. Biden might come out overly cautious about gaffes and stifle himself into awkwardness.