Sarah just proved that she is more man than anyone the Dems can field.
Biden pouted and cried like a sissy girl. He played the gender card and got emotional.

Biden: Old and busted. Palin: New hotness
more...

Posted by: Open Blog at 07:18 PM | Comments (105)
Post contains 246 words, total size 1 kb.

Palin crashed the Corner.

Can anyone tell from my traffic when 'Cuda went on?

Thanks to Dave at Garfield Ridge for the Corner tip.

Posted by: Ace at 07:14 PM | Comments (15)
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

Safe link to Dan Riehl.

Posted by: Ace at 07:07 PM | Comments (29)
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

I flubbed this during the liveblog, but it's an important gaffe from so-called constitutional expert Joe Biden. He said:

"Vice President Cheney has probably been the most dangerous Vice President we've had in American history. He has 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. He works in the executive branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.

And the primary role of the Vice President of the United States of America is to support the President of the United States of America. Give that President his or her best judgment when sought and as the Vice President to preside over the senate only in a time when in fact there is a tie vote. The constitution is explicit, the only authority the Vice President has from a legislative standpoint is to vote only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea that he's a part of the legislative branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of the unitary executive..and look where it's gotten us.

Biden is just plain wrong about this. First of all, Article I defines the legislative branch, including its composition and the scope of its powers and the powers and privileges of its members. Article I, sec. 3, clause 4 is the first time the Vice President is mentioned in the Constitution. It gives the Vice President an important role to play:

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Constitution goes on to direct the Senate to chose a President pro tempore to preside over the Senate in the VP's absence. Though it is not explicitly stated, the VP is also the President of the Senate during all trials of impeachments other than trials of the President. In other words, when Biden says that the VP has "no authority relative to the Congress" the truth is actually that the VP has a special authority, reserved to no other unless the VP chooses to let another wield it.

Article II does not extend to the VP any executive powers. Sections 2 and 3 specifically grant duties and powers to the President; the VP goes unmentioned. In fact, Article II provides for compensation for the President, but doesn't direct the VP to receive anything!

So Joe Biden is talking out his ass when he says "Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the Vice President of the United States. That's the executive. He works in the executive branch." Article I doesn't define the VP's executive roles. In fact, neither does Article II, because the VP has no role to play within the executive branch except to take over in case of death or incapacitation of the President.

Now, this wouldn't ordinarily be all that big of a deal, but Joe Biden is supposed to be Mr. Big Constitutional Lawyer who is going to cure all the excesses of Darth Cheney. But it doesn't seem like he's got much of a grasp of the Constitution at all. Nowhere in the Constitution does it give the Vice President the "primary role ... to support the President of the United States of America." Under the Constitution, the VP only has two things to do: break ties in the Senate and wait for the President to die.

The relationship between the Vice President and the President has varied from administration to administration and it has no basis in the Constitution. It's good modern policy, but remember that in the original scheme of things the President and the VP were usually competitors. The President is well within his rights to kick the VP out in the cold.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 07:04 PM | Comments (219)
Post contains 657 words, total size 4 kb.

Fresh from the McCain people.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 06:45 PM | Comments (542)
Post contains 529 words, total size 3 kb.

Oh, and Tushar wanted open blog for some reason. So, okay: Open Blog until 10am tomorrow.

LUNTZ FOCUS GROUP: Overwhelmingly believe Palin won. One holdout says that's it's too close to call.

More reax, sent from the McCain camp, below. more...

Posted by: Ace at 06:40 PM | Comments (189)
Post contains 1203 words, total size 7 kb.

Post-Debate Live Blog Status Report [Gabe]:

Total Unique Readers who pressed 'Watch Now': 2067

Writer comments Published: 436

Reader Comments Published: 862

Reader Comments Sent: 6649

This is actually a reduction from the GOP convention liveblogs which averaged 8000+ viewers each. It's possible we lost many people because the CoveritLive severs seized up twice during the debate and then capped the number of readers. CoveritLive is trying to keep up with the expanded use of its liveblogs, but many large sites are using them now.

Of course, we (the cobloggers) are doing our best to keep content rolling. That 6649 reader comments sent represents 1.2 comments per second. And speaking for my cobloggers now, we love your comments. Thanks for watching (and drinking and shooting tequila out our noses) with us.

Original Post:
Live blog below, but not launched yet. I'll launch it ten minutes before the debate.

Until then, use this as an early Overnight Thread in which you can only discuss the debate.

And how Gwen Ifill is a lying whore. more...

Posted by: Ace at 03:16 PM | Comments (631)
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm saying this for a reason.

Because the last time it was said -- about Bush -- it proved to be a very wrong prognostication.

I'm hoping the "Bush is toast" idea actually jinxed the election. I think maybe that's why liberals won't say it yet.

So I'll say what they're thinking on their behalf. And get that jinx going again.

Posted by: Ace at 03:07 PM | Comments (75)
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

It is my opinion that Palin either does well or very well, thus reversing the general erosion of support for the ticket, or she fairs poorly, and pretty much dooms the ticket.

Palin was really the only reason we were ever ahead in the first place. We need her to be a positive factor to win. Not a nonfactor, and certainly not a net negative.

I hate to put so much on a single performance, but I think it's that important.

On the good side; A tie by Palin counts as a win for the ticket. Hell, a close loss counts as something of a win.

But a bad loss? Would not only take away the enormous plus she once provided, but will make her into a clear net negative, something McCain simply cannot afford. George H. W. Bush could afford a net negative in Dan Quayle. He was running as the third-term of still-popular Reagan, against Michael Dukaksis, for God's sake. McCain does not have that latitude.

Rasmussen Agrees: Thirty-four percent -- one third! -- say the debate is "key" to their vote.

Seems to me those are mostly wanna-vote-for-Palin-voters who are seeking reassurance she's up to the job. No one cares about what Biden says. He's a jackass and a bit of an idiot and everyone knows that already.

Good news: At best, we can gain five points in one night.

Bad news: At worst, we can lose five.

(Adjusted the numbers, which were always dodgy, but were, previously, flat-out ridiculous. Thanks to Karl for telling me not to be an idiot. I knew I was being an idiot, but I was sort of... I don't know. Being an idiot.)

Posted by: Ace at 02:34 PM | Comments (110)
Post contains 299 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to say this, but I already mentioned it, so cat's out of the bag.

I wrote to someone at FoxNews about this issue and told them they were getting the story wrong all day (and last night too), and that it was "kinda embarrassing."

Jim Angel is explaining now why these "tax break pork items" were so uncontroversial, and that they all would have passed on their own anyway (as they already had passed on their own, easily). Most of these items have been passed every year. For example, $63 billion of the $100 billion in "tax pork" is just a continuing adjustment to make sure some taxpayers don't get caught up in the Alternative Minimum Tax which they really shouldn't be paying at all, but Congress hasn't yet gotten around to permanently fixing that. So they just pass a bill adjusting it every year.

So it appears they're not actually explaining the thing I told them about. Alas.

Some progress, though, at least.

Posted by: Ace at 02:19 PM | Comments (27)
Post contains 204 words, total size 1 kb.