To atone for only catching one of Biden’s gaffes during the debate itself, I have decided to compile a comprehensive list. And since there is no way of knowing what Joe actually meant to say, misstatements and outright falsehoods are included as well.
I’ll be updating this as I find new ones, and if you know of any that you don’t see here, please post it in the comments or email me.
At the bottom of this post is the list of ‘Joe Biden’s 14 Lies’ from the McCain camp. I will mention some of those fourteen (11, to be exact), but some are just policy quibbles or are based on fundamental differences in policy (i.e., position on the Iraq war).
** UPDATE: The Campaign Spot at National Review Online is also tallying the gaffes and lies, but they include all of the McCain list plus Biden’s mention of McCain’s vote against the Violence Against Women Act — not sure why they count that; McCain did vote against it, regardless of the fact that much of it was later declared unconstitutional. Not a lie or gaffe, just politics. **
** UPDATE: For those that may be visiting from the ‘other side of the aisle,’ so to speak, I make no claim to being fair and balanced — just fair. If you see an item on my list (not McCain’s; see above) that you believe is wrong, let me know. If you can show me that it is incorrect I will remove it. **
In no particular order (quotes are from CNN’s transcript):
- Responding to an invitation to bash Vice President Cheney, Biden says, “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.” Article I actually deals with the legislative, not the executive. However, he is right that Article I discusses the VP’s powers — but they are defined with respect to the legislature, and there is no mention of the VP’s authority in Article II, counter to Biden’s argument (see number 2).
- Biden further stated, “He has no authority relative to the Congress” — other than to vote in the Senate when there is a tie. Article I, section 3, states that the VP is the President of the Senate. He (or she) has no vote unless there is a tie, but holds that position regardless. At various times in history, the President of the Senate has wielded signficant power by controlling procedure in the Senate. Nowhere in the Constituion is the VP’s authority limited, or ‘defined’ other than this one mention of the VP’s role (which in any case contradicts Biden’s assertion that the VP has no authority in the legislature). (See the video from Voice of Reason.)
- “When we kicked — along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there.’” Um, no. Complete fabrication (on both the Hezbollah-kicking and NATO counts).
- “[W]e spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.” Again, no [10/5, fixed the link]. The totals are $661.1 billion in Iraq versus $177.5 billion in Afghanistan. Biden inflates the difference by a factor of twenty.
- “Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington [and] go to Katie’s Restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me.” (CNN’s transcripts says ‘or,’ but Biden clearly says ‘and’ in the video.) While there was a Katie’s in Wilmington, it has been closed for over twenty years (read down through the comments at the link for details). It also was not on Union Street. (Also just mentioned on Hot Air; Michelle Malkin mentions it, and has a great ‘Joe Depot’ photoshop to boot.)
- “Ahmadinejad does not control the security apparatus in Iran. The theocracy controls the security apparatus.” The theocrats in Iran certainly have a great deal of power, but using that to say Ahmadinejad does not is pretty, well, stupid. Furthermore, how dumb is the argument that talking to Ahmadinejad does not matter because of this? Pretty dumb.
- “This is simply not true about Barack Obama. He did not say sit down with Ahmadinejad.” Blatant lie. Now with video! (Thanks and nice job to Voice of Reason).
- “Our friends and allies have been saying, Gwen, ‘Sit down. Talk. Talk. Talk.’ Our friends and allies have been saying that, five secretaries of state, three of them Republicans. And John McCain has said he would go along with an agreement, but he wouldn’t sit down.” Biden tries to pull an Obama by deliberately conflating low-level diplomatic contacts with presidential-level talks. It sounded contrived when Obama did it, too.
- “So you’re going to have to place — replace a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check you just give to the insurance company. I call that the ‘Ultimate Bridge to Nowhere.’” Biden’s first (and only) laugh line of the evening. It also grossly misrepresents McCain’s plan. Palin explained it well, and Ramesh Ponnuru makes the point that wages will rise to offset at least some of the difference. (See also number 7 on McCain’s list of Biden lies.) (A better explanation of how Biden is wrong; h/t The Corner)
- “[T]wo years ago Barack Obama warned about the sub prime mortgage crisis.” Obama claimed this in his debate too. Prove it. I have tried to research this, but all I have been able to come up with is an Obama advisor warning against ‘over-regulating subprime mortgages,’ and criticism of Obama’s plan with regard to the subprime mess. It is easy for Obama to claim, but I won’t believe it until I see some proof beyond the word of Obama or Biden.
- UPDATE (10/5/08): [deleted for being incorrect]
- UPDATE (10/6/08): Obama sent a letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Paulson in March of 2007, in which he addressed the rising defaults by low-income individuals on subprime mortgages. Obama’s primary concerns in the letter are preventing foreclosures and attacking ‘predatory lending practices.’ I thought at first that this letter must be the ‘warning’ Biden referenced (in the now-deleted update to this item on 10/5), but Rick pointed out in the comments to this post that, in the presidential debate, Obama had mentioned both this specific letter and the still-unknown warning in 2006. So still no source for this mysterious warning other than the self-serving claims of the Obama campaign.
- “The cause is manmade. That’s the cause. That’s why the polar icecap is melting.” I originally thought that Biden had explicitly said that global warming was 100% manmade, however it is still clear that was his meaning, especially because his answer was a rejection of Palin saying that man was not the exclusive cause. Even global warming stalwarts only claim that man is most of the cause, not 100%.
- UPDATE (10/7) (h/t Rick): In addition to Biden’s claims about global warming being strictly manmade, he is also wrong about global warming being the sole cause of the changes in polar ice. The actual scientific evidence indicates that not all of the recent change in the polar ice are attributable to global warming.
- “She imposed a windfall profits tax up there in Alaska. That’s what Barack Obama and I want to do.” Blatant mischaracterization lie. Palin adjusted the severance tax; there was no new/increased windfall-profits tax. (See number 8 on McCain’s list; comprehensive explanation here.) Also, it appears that much of the preexisting Alaskan oil and gas windfall tax was repealed while Palin was governor (PDF link).
- “[O]ur commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan.” Although Palin misstated his name (it is McKiernan, not McClellan), Biden misstates his position. Gen. McKiernan has said that he does not want to use the word surge because it is too tied to Iraq, and that the exact programs in Iraq would not be directly transferable to Afghanistan because of differences in the countries (naturally), but he still advocates a surge. Just by a different name.
- Biden then quoted Gen. McKiernan as saying, “we need more troops. We need government-building. We need to spend more money on the infrastructure in Afghanistan.” So, like Gen. McKiernan, Biden appears to be for the surge as long as it isn’t called the surge.
- Other items from McCain’s list that I have not otherwise mentioned: Number 1, mischaracterization of McCain’s votes on taxes.
- Number 3, Biden’s brand-new support for offshore drilling.
- Number 5, Biden’s ever-shifting position on clean coal, which even Ifill dinged him on at the debate. (Also at Hot Air.)
- Number 10, Biden misrepresented McCain’s position on regulation of the financial sector.
- Number 12, Biden erroneously set the cutoff at $250,000, rather than $200,000, for Obama’s tax increases.
- Number 13, the bailout plan only meets two of Obama’s four principles, not all four as Biden stated.
- Number 14, American’s did not, contrary to what Biden says, pay more taxes under Reagan than they would under Obama
- “Pakistan already has nuclear weapons. Pakistan already has deployed nuclear weapons. Pakistan’s weapons can already hit Israel and the Mediterranean.” It would take an ICBM, so probably not. The longest-ranged weapon Pakistan has would only reach about halfway to Israel. (h/t Ace)
- “John McCain voted against a Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty that every Republican has supported.” Every Republican except John McCain and 49 of his Republican colleagues in the Senate, that is.
- “We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do.” Except that they are quite adamant that they don’t support same-sex marriage. Oops. In fact, in his next response Biden said, “No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage.”
- Some further items, from FactCheck.org, which should have been included earlier (all items can be found at this link): Biden’s claim that McCain refused to meet with leaders of Spain was incorrect; McCain only said that he would not make that decision in advance.
- Biden also misstated the Iraqi budget surplus in his arguments about ending the war. He said that the surplus was $80 billion, but that figure comes from an old estimate. The actual number is currently $29 billion.
- Biden’s claim that McCain would deregulated the health-care industry is a dishonest exaggeration of McCain’s statements regarding allowing the sale of health-care insurance across state lines.
- I am reinserting number 6 from McCain’s list, because it is correct in stating that according to FactCheck.org Biden is exaggerating — according to their count, McCain voted against alternative energy 11 times, not 20.
- I am also reinserting number 1 from McCain’s list: Biden claimed that McCain voted the same way as Obama on the bill Palin claimed raised taxes on families making $42,000/year, but McCain did not vote at all on that bill.
I find it amusing (in a sad way) how many commentators are praising Biden’s performance because of his knowledge and grasp of detail. It’s not too hard to grasp details when you pull them out of your own orifices. The challenge comes later, when you have to remember those sort of ‘facts.’
The list from McCain’s camp:
Joe Biden’s 14 Lies
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.”
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
- 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.
- 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.
- REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation — he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.”
- 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 the unlikely event that anyone from the McCain camp sees this - you’ve got some typos in there you ought to fix. Like ‘alernative’ energy in number 6.
Where is the breakdown of Palin’s gaffes you ask? Feel free to make your own — I know there were a few, but I seriously doubt she made up nearly as many of her answers as Biden did.
UPDATE (October 4, 2008 at 12:08):
Bird Dog is tracking the gaffes and lies as well, and he checks both candidates’ statements.
Posts
Loading ...
on Oct 3rd, 2008 at 13:37
[...] http://zerosheep.com/2008/10/03/bidens-debate-gaffes-lies [...]
on Oct 3rd, 2008 at 17:20
[...] 2: B D Shepherd at Counting Sheep already has a list with links. He’s up to number 22. Good work, B [...]
on Oct 3rd, 2008 at 17:50
[...] especially won if you include this list of gaffes, misstatements and [...]
on Oct 3rd, 2008 at 20:03
Look carefully at point #13. The one about surge being wrong for Afghanistan. During the debate Biden actually said that more troops are needed in Afghanistan, yet the surge is the wrong strategy…he contradicted himself within seconds.
[Reply]
bdshepherd Reply:
October 3rd, 2008 at 20:37
Good point - not sure it is distinct enough to rate a separate entry, but added it onto 13.
[Reply]
D Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 11:50
How is that a contradiction? So the “surge” was purely adding troops? No and you know that - you’re disingenuous to claim otherwise. Gen. McKiernan does not believe the “Iraq surge” will work for Afghanistan - if you want to then twist that into meaning he doesn’t want more troops…
[Reply]
on Oct 3rd, 2008 at 20:06
Don’t forget mistaking the West Bank for Gaza:
“Here’s what the president said when we said no. He insisted on elections on the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, “Big mistake. Hamas will win. You’ll legitimize them.” What happened? Hamas won.”
[Reply]
bdshepherd Reply:
October 3rd, 2008 at 20:19
I don’t know. That seems a bit too nitpicky — the Palestinian National Authority (of which the elections gave Hamas control) governs part of both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
I don’t claim to be an authority on the Middle East, though — please let me know if (& how) I’m wrong.
[Reply]
on Oct 4th, 2008 at 12:03
Well done! I’ve got my own list going here, and it covers both candidates. I’m trying to not link to the “factchecks” that came directly from the campaign websites, so in that vein, I’m trying to find independent confirmation re the windfall profits tax in Alaska.
[Reply]
bdshepherd Reply:
October 4th, 2008 at 12:32
Updated the post with a link to your discussion.
I went ahead and found some information on the ‘windfall’ tax issue and updated the list with it as well. A google for ‘Alaska oil severance tax’ returns many relevant results, but the best explanation I found was at this blog comment here, which in turn is referenced at the NRO Corner.
I noticed that your reference for at least one item is to FactCheck.org — I would be leery of taking them at face value. FactCheck.org is run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center; the board Obama was on in Chicago with Bill Ayers was the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. So there is some tie, however tenuous, to the Obama camp — there have also been ‘fact checks’ of FactCheck.org that show it is not always right when it comes to Obama (see here).
[Reply]
Bird Dog Reply:
October 4th, 2008 at 13:06
Thanks for the link! The post was getting a little long, so I added a conclusion.
Factcheck.org isn’t infallible, but they’re credible and they try to be fair-minded. They made several mistakes when they took an NRA ad to task re Obama and the 2nd Amendment, for example. But that said, I used them a lot (and effectively) in 2004 during the Bush-Kerry contest as well as the GOP primary race earlier this year and they do a fairly decent job. Their work product is leaps and bounds better than the hacks at CNN and ABC News. As for their funding by the Annenberg Foundation, I use that as a lever when I debate with my liberal friends. The WA Post Fact Checker is also pretty good.
Concerning windfall profits, I found the the Beldar link via Patterico, and I don’t think Beldar closed the deal, which probably explains why Captain Ed didn’t update his post. Whether you call it a severance tax or a windfall profits tax, the fact of the matter is that the Alaskan government under Palin’s watch passed a law that increased taxes on the extraction of oil, after deducting costs for production and transportation, and with the prices of crude oil where they are, the tax rates look confiscatory. If there is evidence that Palin opposed that bill, or if she had a better deal on the table that the legislature rejected, she would have been on stronger footing.
[Reply]
bdshepherd Reply:
October 4th, 2008 at 14:41
It may sound nit-picky, but there is a fundamental difference between a severance tax and a windfall-profits tax.
The former is essentially a tax on pulling resources out of the ground — ’severing’ them from the land. I imagine that every state with natural resources has some form of severance tax. For example, I live in Arkansas, where there is quite a bit of natural gas, and there is a severance tax here that applies to extracting natural gas.
A windfall-profits tax, on the other hand, is a tax aimed squarely at reducing the profits of oil companies.
Maybe the way to explain it is that a severance tax is applied neutrally, based on extraction of a concrete natural resources, while a windfall-profits tax is confiscatory and is essentially a punishment for making too much money. The exemptions and adjustments to the Alaskan severance tax that are related to costs do not transform it into a tax on profits.
Does the public at large know or care about the difference? No, but Biden clearly should — both as a 36-year Senator and an attorney. His effort to conflate the two is thus a lie.
on Oct 4th, 2008 at 15:05
[...] Thanks to Voice of Reason for the link and the video itself (#7 refers this list.) [...]
on Oct 4th, 2008 at 17:29
Sheep,
I, like you, am a Sarah Palin fan. Joe Biden is a waste.
I came across your site through Michelle Malkin’s site.
My blog is the Tygrrrr Express.
http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com
If you feel it is of a high quality, please consider a link or blogroll exchange.
Also, I get a decent amount (not Malkin-sized!) of traffic, in case you have anything
you would like to promote.
Respectfully,
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
[Reply]
on Oct 4th, 2008 at 17:43
Here’s the address of the Wilmington Home Depot from thier Store finder
is miller Road the same as “union St”???
Map Quest cant find a Home Depot on Union St
Wilmington,DE #8440
3600 Miller Road
Wilmington, DE 19802
(302)762-3501
[Reply]
on Oct 5th, 2008 at 06:53
I am waiting for Biden to come back and tell us that Katie’s Restaraunt was closed due to a Bush 43 tax cut that sent the cook and waitress jobs to India.
[Reply]
on Oct 5th, 2008 at 10:26
[...] Biden’s Debate Gaffes (& Lies) [...]
on Oct 5th, 2008 at 12:52
[...] again to Voice of Reason. This is the second video in a series covering Biden’s lies during the VP debate. (The first is linked [...]
on Oct 6th, 2008 at 14:04
I was glad to see you address the warning Obama allegedly issued two years ago. I’ve been trying to track that one down ever since Obama floated it in the presidential debate. I didn’t have any luck.
I did find a letter he wrote to Paulson and Bernanke in March, 2007, but, in that letter, he blames regulation, not deregulation for part of the problem. No mention of Fannie or Freddie, or anything to indicatie anticipation of the current meltdown. That letter is here:
http://obama.senate.gov/press/070322-obama_urges_ber/
Also, Obama makes a distinction between that letter, written “last year” and his warning two years ago. His quote from the debate:
“Two years ago, I warned that, because of the subprime lending mess, because of the lax regulation, that we were potentially going to have a problem and tried to stop some of the abuses in mortgages that were taking place at the time.
Last year, I wrote to the secretary of the Treasury to make sure that he understood the magnitude of this problem and to call on him to bring all the stakeholders together to try to deal with it.”
I’ve done a Lexis-Nexis search and have found no warning issued two years ago. He did introduce legislation to combat fraudulent lending. If that’s what he’s referring to, I’d say it’s a stretch. Here it is:
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060215-obama_durbin_pr/
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 6th, 2008 at 14:36
Good point - Biden did not distinguish between the Bernanke letter and the warning ‘two years ago,’ so I assumed that he meant the Bernanke letter and was just stretching a year and a half out to two years. Based on Obama’s statement, though, that is clearly not the case. I will update #10 to reflect that.
[Reply]
on Oct 6th, 2008 at 14:30
It’s political season.
Why not take a look at the misrepresentations on both sides? Here’s a third party link: Political Fact Checker:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 6th, 2008 at 14:39
Thank you. I’ll look it over.
To be honest, I tend to avoid FactCheck.org (see my 10/4, 12:32 response to Bird Dog above), but there is some good information there.
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 12:06
Updated with list with the information you referenced. (As to Biden; if I had to do it over I would include Palin as well — and I might cover both sides for the presidential debate — but I’m not going back now to add Palin.)
[Reply]
on Oct 6th, 2008 at 15:20
Very nice. All I can add is to say that no one doubts Sarah Palin tried to speak only of what she knew to be true, whether or not she erred. What’s scary is that Joe Biden also only spoke of what he knew to be true.
[Reply]
on Oct 6th, 2008 at 16:14
On the global warming front, three important things are happening:
1) global temperatures have been static for a decade
2) the pacific ocean (pacific decadal oscillation) is changing from its warm to its cool phase
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 09:33
Alaska’s oil windfallby the numbers
$6 billion
Estimated revenue collected by state of Alaska from new tax on oil profits this fiscal year.
$10 billion
Estimated total oil revenue collected by state this year (old plus new oil taxes).
$1,200
Special payment to each Alaskan resident this year from new oil tax.
$2,000
Estimated annual dividend each Alaskan will receive this year from oil-wealth savings account, not counting the new oil tax.
How the windfall tax works
The tax is imposed on the net profit earned on each barrel of oil pumped from state lands, after deducting costs for production and transportation.
The tax is set at its highest rate in Prudhoe Bay, where the state takes 25 percent of the net profit of a barrel when its price is at or below $52.
The percentage then escalates as oil prices rise over that benchmark.
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 09:55
Be careful not to lump the windfall and severance taxes together (at least for purposes of this list). Alaska has both, and both predate Palin. Both are taxes on oil companies, but whereas there would be no windfall-profit tax if an oil company lost money, the company would still be required to pay a severance tax based on the oil it pumped out of the ground (at least in theory).
I don’t know if the windfall-profits tax rate changed while Palin was governor, but I do know that significant portions of Alaska’s tax code dealing with it were repealed in 2007.
The severance tax, on the other hand, was significantly revised by Palin (allegedly to eliminate sweetheart deals made by her predecessors to the oil companies). It is the severance tax that has been publicized, and it is what Biden was erroneously referring to.
The practical effect of Alaska’s windfall-profit and severances taxes may be similar, but they are fundamentally different in what they actually tax (profits versus oil extraction).
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 09:51
Most observers estimate that Pakistan has enough nuclear material (highly enriched uranium and a small amount of plutonium) for 30 to 50 nuclear weapons.9 Like India,
Pakistan is thought to have “a small stockpile of nuclear weapons components and can probably assemble some weapons fairly quickly.”10
Pakistan could deliver its nuclear weapons using F-16s it purchased from the United States (28 F-16 and 12 trainer aircraft; 8 are no longer in service), provided the appropriate “wiring” has been added to make them nuclear-capable. In the 1980s, Pakistan moved assiduously to acquire ballistic missile capabilities and now deploys short-range ballistic missiles and a small number of medium-range missiles. AQ Khan, former head of Khan Research Laboratories, maintained that only the medium-range Ghauri missiles would be usable in a nuclear exchange (given fall-out effects for Pakistan of shorter-range missiles). Other observers view the 30 to 50 Hatf2 short-range (300km) missiles (modified Chinese M-11s) as potential delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons. Ghauri missiles (1350 and 2300km), which reportedly are based on the North Korean No-Dong and Taepo-Dong-1, are capable of reaching New Delhi with large payloads.11
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 10:06
Three comments:
First, there is no evidence that Pakistan has developed its nuclear technology to the point where it can build a weapon small enough to be deployed by an F-16 — there is quite a size difference in a payload for a ground-launched missile and an air-launched missile or bomb.
Second, even if Pakistan could put a nuke on its F-16s, delivering one to Israel would essentially be a kamikaze mission, because at approximately 2,000 miles, Israel is near the maximum range of an F-16 (with drop tanks) and Pakistan does not have mid-air refueling capability.
Third and finally, in the sense that nuclear weapons could be delivered by loading them on a ship, boat or train, Pakistan could deliver its nuclear weapons anywhere in the world. However, when people refer to range of nuclear weapons, the meaning is usually direct delivery via missile. So depending on how you define ‘deliver,’ Biden could be correct. But hyper-technical parsing of the language does not convince me that including his statement on this list is wrong.
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 11:13
Here’s a little more context on Biden’s claim regarding the polar ice cap: “If you don’t understand what the cause is, it’s virtually impossible to come up with a solution. We know what the cause is. The cause is manmade. That’s the cause. That’s why the polar icecap is melting.”
I agree with him when he says if you don’t understand the cause, it’s impossible to come up with a solution. Clearly, he doesn’t understand the cause.
From a NASA press release:
A team of NASA and university scientists has detected an ongoing reversal in Arctic Ocean circulation triggered by atmospheric circulation changes that vary on decade-long time scales. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2007-131
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 11:52
Thanks. I updated #11.
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 11:55
How’s your Palin list coming? Be sure to include each time she ignored the question altogether and the several times she called Gen. David McKiernan — FROM A SCRIPT — “McClellan.”
You betcha!
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 12:12
See my reply above as to a Palin list.
She did misstate McKiernan’s name, which is mentioned in #13 in the list. She also, shockingly for a politician, occasionally answered the question she wanted to rather than the one that was asked. It has nothing to do with this list, but it would be interesting to go back and tally how many times each candidate did that. Palin would probably be ahead, but I bet the difference would not be as large as you think.
The candidates were allowed nothing other than blank paper and writing instruments (provided for them). So, yes, she was occasionally reading, as was Biden — from notes they took during the debate. If you believe there was a script anyway, well . . . may I interest you in our fine assortment of tinfoil hats and beanies?
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 13:09
Brad,
I actually did attempt to tally the responses. It’s not that cut and dry; there is a lot of room for interpretation.
For example, Ifill asked Biden “…why is that not class warfare?” Biden’s response: ” Well Gwen, where I come from, it’s called fairness, just simple fairness.” Is that an answer?
I’d say neither of them answered the first four questions directly. After that, both of them came closer to being on topic, with some lapses. My guess is that they had to hit their talking points before anything else.
I’d give Biden the edge in slickness when it came to avoiding direct answers, but neither were guilty of being “slaves to the question”.
r
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 17:59
Reading a little more…..
“Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington [and] go to Katie’s Restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me.”
#5
Biden never said Katie’s was on Union Street, you could have walked very easily from Union Street to Lincoln where I believe Katie’s used to be. If you look at the sentence, there is three different scenario’s
Walk down Union Street and it is in Wilmington
Go to Katie’s close to Union therefore worth mentioning
Walk into Home Depot (most likely on DuPont Highway)
Three different thoughts!!!!
It’s very easy to read different things from the same paragraph. We all do and I may say the politicians do it the best.
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 18:03
Oh by the way, Katie’s was very well known and even today is mentioned with mouth watering words of their Italian cuisine. It was reasonable and a very local restaurant for the Italian community.
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 18:18
Simply getting the location of Katie’s wrong would hardly be worth mentioning. The larger point is that, in trying to make a point about being a man of the people, he suggesting going into a restaurant that has been closed for over 20 years. A lot of people may remember Katie’s, but I doubt many suggest to their acquaintances that they go there.
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 21:58
Brad what I think you are missing is that all three of these things were separate items. Even if Biden had some kind of memory clog, the thought was different from the others. Your attempt to connect all three was wrong. You actually misrepresented what he said. Something a lot of politicians do!
[Reply]
brad Reply:
October 7th, 2008 at 22:22
Doh, low blow! Just kidding.
I agree about the Home Depot, and that’s why I left it off. As for Katie’s being on Union St, I think that the way Biden said it made it sound like that: “go down Union Street with me . . . and go to Katie’s Restaurant.” I note in the text that the transcript says ‘or’ but that it sounds in the video like he says ‘and.’
The mention of Katie’s not being on Union St. is more of an aside, but I still think it is legitimate to mention — I don’t try to say that Biden said it was, I just present his words and then say that (1) Katie’s closed, and (2) it’s not on Union St.
Read #5 again; I didn’t try to connect all three, and I think what I did say was fair. If you still see a problem with it, though, let me know. And I would welcome a suggestion as to how to put it differently if you still think it misrepresents him.
[Reply]
on Oct 7th, 2008 at 22:50
Thanks and again what we see or hear can be interpretive and I won’t belabor the point. I lived and went to school in Wilmington and know Joe Biden (now you can determine if that is personally, professionally, or as an acquaintance). He is sometimes a wordy person, says things that are true as he knows it or remembers it. He has served the state of Delaware well. He will serve the United States of America well also even if Barack Obama can’t muzzle him. His heart is where the middle class people need his heart to be, his concerns are genuine for the middle class, he is not rich like McCain and he will have no trouble correcting his mistakes. He will always put his Country First along with the middle class. I’m getting off my soap box and then say a pray Barack Obama and Joe Biden win because I believe they have given me hope (the prayer is backup). Thank you.
[Reply]
on Oct 8th, 2008 at 01:36
Not to be flip, but my favorite Biden gaffe was when he said, in reply to a question about what would happen if Obama died and he became POTUS,- drumbeat, please - “That would be a national tragedy”. Am I the only one who caught that? I laughed so hard my wine came out of my nose.
[Reply]
on Oct 9th, 2008 at 21:49
[...] Another big thank you to Voice of Reason for his latest excellent video on Biden’s debate gaffes and lies. [...]
on Oct 9th, 2008 at 22:23
[...] with work this week than last, but it has also been a more difficult task than creating the list of Biden’s gaffes and lies from the VP debate. The VP debate was more confrontational, more fact based (as opposed to vague [...]
on Oct 17th, 2008 at 18:21
looking into Obama’s birth certificate … fact check.com says itis ok. Just found out factcheck,com is supported by the Annandale Foundation - who is in bed with Obama.
How is McCain behind by so much if we are all blogging about this?
[Reply]
on Oct 27th, 2008 at 09:03
You will not change their minds because they are like sheep. It is mass hysteria, being led to the slaughter. Nothing you nor I say will change their opinion of their “man”. What gets me is why he is even allowed to run? He is not a natural born citizen, and should not have been allowed to run for the Senate. I’m sure that is under investigation also. Someone slipped up there. Surely this will be proven in the courts, and fast. But there again , things are being delayed. Purposely? He keeps delaying going to court. Goes to Hawaii as an excuse to see his Grandmother.
McCain is a good, honest, lawabiding man, but the masses don’t care about character anymore. They love lies, and anyone who will promise them the moon, knowing they can’t deliver. Hey, who wants to work when the government will pay you not to work? Let the people in America who make over $250,000 pay your wages for you. You can then sit down to those nice lobster lunches that Michelle enjoys so!
They believe every word Barack and Joe say . That in itself is scary. People, wake up. Please question just one of the promises and you will find out for yourself he cannot deliver. You hate Bush so much, you are letting yourself being led into unknown territory without even questioning anything. That is why McCain is behind in the polls. He doesn’t promise what he cannot deliver. What you hear coming out of his mouth is the truth. He hasn’t swept anything under the rug or told any of his friends to keep their mouth shut until after the election.
I’m coming on too strong I guess, but let me add, I am not one of the sheep, or couldn’t you tell!!
Please edit or delete. At least I got this off my shoulders. I’m not one to get on a soapbox, but this is my future, my 5 children’s future and their spouses, 15 grandchildren’s future, and the two unborn greatchildren we have due next Spring.
[Reply]
on Oct 28th, 2008 at 11:14
[...] against masterful debater Joe Biden. The same Joe Biden that sounded so knowledgeable because he made up most of his own facts. The same Joe Biden that was given a pass on his gaffes, misstatements, and [...]