The Vice Presidential Debate
10/6/04
Cheney won this debate. I don't know if he won it by the same margin that Kerry won the first Presidential debate, but he clearly won. He came off as honest, humble and wise. Edwards did as well he could do, considering what he was defending, and Democrats cannot be too upset with his performance. I thought it a bit strange that he brought up Cheney's family before Cheney did. Cheney let it slide and was gracious and brief about gay marriage as he should be. Edwards came off as well spoken, articulate, but also as somewhat of a surrogate. I will first post what I thought were the highlights of the debate. There is no reason why Bush couldn't have said these things during the first presidential debate.
----
(in response to Edwards saying the USA pays 90% of the cost and suffers 90% of the casualties)
CHENEY: Well, Gwen, the 90 percent figure is just dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they've taken almost 50 percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq, which leaves the U.S. with 50 percent, not 90 percent.
With respect to the cost, it wasn't $200 billion. You probably weren't there to vote for that. But $120 billion is, in fact, what has been allocated to Iraq. The rest of it's for Afghanistan and the global war on terror.
The allies have stepped forward and agreed to reduce and forgive Iraqi debt to the tune of nearly $80 billion by one estimate. That, plus $14 billion they promised in terms of direct aid, puts the overall allied contribution financially at about $95 billion, not to the $120 billion we've got, but, you know, better than 40 percent. So your facts are just wrong, Senator.
You also have a situation where you talk about credibility.
It's awfully hard to convey a sense of credibility to allies when you voted for the war and then you declared: Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time. You voted for the war, and then you voted against supporting the troops when they needed the equipment, the fuel, the spare parts and the ammunition and the body armor.
You're not credible on Iraq because of the enormous inconsistencies that John Kerry and you have cited time after time after time during the course of the campaign. Whatever the political pressures of the moment requires, that's where you're at. But you've not been consistent, and there's no indication at all that John Kerry has the conviction to successfully carry through on the war on terror.
----
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, a new question for you. You have two minutes to respond.
When the president says that Senator Kerry is emboldening enemies and you say that we could get hit again if voters make the wrong choice in November, are you saying that it would be a dangerous thing to have John Kerry as president?
CHENEY: I'm saying specifically that I don't believe he has the qualities we need in a commander in chief because I don't think, based on his record, that he would pursue the kind of aggressive policies that need to be pursued if we're going to defeat these terrorists. We need to battle them overseas so we don't have to battle them here at home.
I'm not challenging John Kerry's patriotism. I said in my acceptance speech in New York City at the Republican convention that we respected his service in Vietnam, and I got applause for that.
We've never criticized his patriotism. What we've questioned is his judgment.
And his judgment's flawed, and the record's there for anybody who wants to look at it.
In 1984, when he ran for the Senate he opposed, or called for the elimination of a great many major weapons systems that were crucial to winning the Cold War and are important today to our overall forces.
When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and occupied it in 1990 and '91, he stood up on the floor of the Senate and voted against going in to liberate Kuwait and push Saddam Hussein back to Iraq.
The problem we have is that, if you look at his record, he doesn't display the qualities of somebody who has conviction.
And with respect to this particular operation, we've seen a situation in which, first, they voted to commit the troops, to send them to war, John Edwards and John Kerry, then they came back and when the question was whether or not you provide them with the resources they needed -- body armor, spare parts, ammunition -- they voted against it.
I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.
Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to al Qaeda?
-----
CHENEY: Well, Gwen, it's hard to know where to start; there are so many inaccuracies there.
The fact of the matter is the troops wouldn't have what they have today if you guys had had your way.
You talk about internationalizing the effort. They don't have a plan. Basically, it's an echo.
You made the comment that the Gulf War coalition in '91 was far stronger than this. No. We had 34 countries then; we've got 30 today. We've got troops beside us.
It's hard, after John Kerry referred to our allies as a coalition of the coerced and the bribed, to go out and persuade people to send troops and to participate in this process.
You end up with a situation in which -- talk about demeaning. In effect, you demean the sacrifice of our allies when you say it's the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, and oh, by the way, send troops.
Makes no sense at all. It's totally inconsistent. There isn't a plan there.
Our most important ally in the war on terror, in Iraq specifically, is Prime Minister Allawi. He came recently and addressed a joint session of Congress that I presided over with the speaker of the House.
And John Kerry rushed out immediately after his speech was over with, where he came and he thanked America for our contributions and our sacrifice and pledged to hold those elections in January, went out and demeaned him, criticized him, challenged his credibility.
That is not the way to win friends and allies. You're never going to add to the coalition with that kind of attitude.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, 30 seconds.
EDWARDS: Thank you.
The vice president suggests that we have the same number of countries involved now that we had in the first Gulf War. The first Gulf War cost the American people $5 billion.
And regardless of what the vice president says, we're at $200 billion and counting. Not only that, 90 percent of the coalition casualties, Mr. Vice President, the coalition casualties, are American casualties. Ninety percent of the cost of this effort are being borne by American taxpayers. It is the direct result of the failures of this administration.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President?
CHENEY: Classic example. He won't count the sacrifice and the contribution of Iraqi allies. It's their country. They're in the fight. They're increasingly the ones out there putting their necks on the line to take back their country from the terrorists and the old regime elements that are still left. They're doing a superb job. And for you to demean their sacrifices strikes me as...
EDWARDS: Oh, I'm not...
CHENEY: ... as beyond...
EDWARDS: I'm not demeaning...
CHENEY: It is indeed. You suggested...
EDWARDS: No, sir, I did not...
CHENEY: ... somehow they shouldn't count, because you want to be able to say that the Americans are taking 90 percent of the sacrifice. You cannot succeed in this effort if you're not willing to recognize the enormous contribution the Iraqis are increasingly making to their own future.
We'll win when they take on responsibility for governance, which they're doing, and when the take on responsibility for their own security, which they increasingly are doing.
----
CHENEY: We know he was running a terrorist camp, training terrorists in Afghanistan prior to 9/11. We know that when we went into Afghanistan that he then migrated to Baghdad. He set up shop in Baghdad, where he oversaw the poisons facility up at Khurmal, where the terrorists were developing ricin and other deadly substances to use.
We know he's still in Baghdad today. He is responsible for most of the major car bombings that have killed or maimed thousands of people. He's the one you will see on the evening news beheading hostages.
He is, without question, a bad guy. He is, without question, a terrorist. He was, in fact, in Baghdad before the war, and he's in Baghdad now after the war.
The fact of the matter is that this is exactly the kind of track record we've seen over the years. We have to deal with Zarqawi by taking him out, and that's exactly what we'll do.
----
CHENEY: I've worked for four presidents and watched two others up close, and I know that there's no such thing as a routine day in the Oval Office.
----
The last line from Cheney is particularly important because Cheney is certainly the most qualified Vice President in the history of the United States. Here is Edwards, a 1st term Senator, who has spent the last 2 years on the campaign trail, attempting to argue over policy. I think Cheney could have been more forceful in highlighting this difference. Also, not mentioned, but notable, was Edward's story about how upset he was to be near a suicide bombing in Israel, and then Cheney said he suspects that a possible reason for the drop off in suicide bombings was the fact that Saddam was no longer paying $25,000 to each family and offering other support to the Palestinian terrorists.
Equally intriguing was the fact that Edwards could not answer these two questions the moderator posed:
----
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, new question to you, and you have two minutes to respond.
Part of what you have said and Senator Kerry has said that you are going to do in order to get us out of the problems in Iraq is to internationalize the effort.
Yet French and German officials have both said they have no intention even if John Kerry is elected of sending any troops into Iraq for any peacekeeping effort. Does that make your effort or your plan to internationalize this effort seem kind of naive?
MODERATOR: Time for a new question but the same topic. And this time to you, Senator Edwards.
You and Senator Kerry have said that the war in Iraq is the wrong war at the wrong time. Does that mean that if you had been president and vice president that Saddam Hussein would still be in power?
----
Edwards completely dodged these questions because there is no answer to them. I'm not even sure if he know the answer to them. An underlying characteristic of both members of the Democratic ticket is that they have more style then substance. They have NOT answered the hard questions about their significant foreign policy contradictions. I think this was especially apparent in the VP debate.
Cheney covered foreign policy pretty well, on some other issues he could have done better. This is what Cheney Should Have Said.
----
MODERATOR: This one is for you, Mr. Vice President. President Bush has derided in John Kerry for putting a trial lawyer on the ticket. You yourself have said that lawsuits are partly to blame for higher medical costs. Are you willing to say that John Edwards, sitting here, has been part of the problem?
CHENEY: Well, I don't know about his particular cases, but yes, if he and John Kerry are elected you can be assured that Malpractice insurance, and not just Malpractice, all types of litigation reform, will not be passed. Gwen, it has reached a crisis in this country, millions and millions of dollars are being shelled out to trial lawyers trying to 'hit the lottery' with frivolous lawsuits. Doctors are shutting down their practices and small businesses are going bankrupt. The Trial Lawyer community has raised over 2/3rds of Senator Edward's money for his Senate Races and Presidential run. They have given millions to the Kerry-Edwards campaign. No presidential ticket in history has ever been so heavily backed by trial lawyers and the people that are going to pay for all this litigation are our good doctors, small businesses and the middle class.
----
(qualification question asked to Edwards that Cheney has 90 seconds to respond to)
CHENEY: On the question of his qualification.. Well, Gwen, let me tell you why I think I am sitting next to John Edwards tonight. (pause) I think he was picked for a combination of three reasons. First, Senator McCain is strongly supports President Bush. (said smiling) Second, he brings with him millions of trial lawyer money to help fund the Kerry campaign. Thirdly, it polled well, and they probably figured it was going to get good press coverage; and it did. As I've already talked about with Iraq and with more issues then I can count, my fear is that the Kerry-Edwards campaign is a poll driven campaign. A poll driven campaign and a poll driven president cannot protect, lead and govern America. The most important thing to consider in selecting a Vice President is how that person will perform if, god help us, something should happen to the President.
----
Overall, I thought the questions were fair, and perhaps even slightly in favor in favor of the Vice President. On PBS however, the various, 'historians' and 'columnists' and 'experts' all slanted against Cheney! If you recall, last time they went against Kerry despite, what I thought was (and turned out to be) a clear Kerry win. What a worthless bunch! Two polls have come out so far with one showing Cheney winning and one showing Edwards winning. The two polls were compiled differently.
The main surprise has been, of course, the media. They have focused on the fact that Cheney gave a wrong website (told people to check out false Haliburton charges on factcheck.com instead of factcheck.org) and said this was the first time that he met Edwards. The first was a simple error, big whup, although it's funny that people are being sent to a George Soros website. The second was just stupidity on Cheney's part and something that he'll need to clear up at some point, but I'd say it's something to put in the third or fourth paragraph of a story, certainly not make it a headliner. But, despite what the media focuses on, people saw what they saw and I am confident that this event will be viewed as a positive for the Bush-Cheney campaign. Bush needs to take heed of some of these lessons for Friday. He needs to be partisan.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/debatereferee/debate_1005.html - Transcript
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35403-2004Jul7.html - Edwards brings Strong Lawyer support
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=272 - Fact checker on the VP debate