On the verdict of vice presidential debate 2008.....

The interest for the vice presidential debate 2008 between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin has been extremely high, versus the fairly low expectation, going in.

Given the stumble of Palin interview with Katie Couric, everybody's expecting her to fall flat on her face. Everyone's also expecting to see some funny gaffe that Biden is so famous for. None of those happens, at least not in a dramatic way.

Both parties, Dem and GOP alike, should be happy and sigh a belief. There's no stumble. It helps to reinforce Biden, but more importantly, it helps to refute the criticism of Palin since the Couric interview. Both of them exhibit the discipline to stick to their own scripts. It's to be expected of Biden since it's an experienced, old hand from Washington. But we see that Palin can do that too, and that counts to her credit.

While Biden is expected, and he did it too, to use the debate to expound on his experience on details, in much the same way McCain had done in the first presidential debate against Obama. Palin sets out to "speak directly to the American public", and she succeeded immensely in that. She lit up in front of the camera, even though she had been evasive in giving straight answers to straightforward questions.

I don't actually see much of a debate between Palin and Biden. While Biden tried hard to draw her out for a fight, she shows the discipline of sticking to her scripts. It's almost like talking a clueless who would answer question 1 with an answer 2. Surprisingly, she did it every time when she looked straight to the camera, and she's like she's having a chat with you (audience), ignoring Biden and the debate altogether. It should have been an outrage, but she did it with shrewd and astuteness. It's funny how she did it more than a few times, when she would say it out loud that, she said she knows she might not be answering the question, BUT she wants to discuss something else that she wants to discuss/tell you (audience). I've never seen anyone who has done it before in public politics and can get away with it. Yet she did it, and people like it too. It's amazing.

In the end, the veep pick supports the nominee, and both Biden and Palin achieved that goal.

What I want to ask is, why isn't anyone doubting why Dem had not put Biden (or better still, Clinton) as the nominee, but instead having the inexperienced (Obama) on top?! Palin had said it well, that GOP has the combination right, in having the experienced on top, and having a feisty young sidekick. And Dem would have it upside-down. It's exactly the same way George W Bush (the inexperienced) was voted in office, propped up by the uber-experienced Dick Cheney. Obviously, we now know how disastrous that has been on setting the country down a wrong path.

Ultimately, if you ask any voters, even if they won't admit it, or if they're doing it subconsciously, voters would vote for someone they like, someone they can identify with, someone whom they would like a beer with. If you ask me, I'd say, Biden passes that test, McCain would pass too, and Palin definitely passes it with flying colors. And no, only those who seep chardonnay would invite Obama to their table. It's perhaps very ironic that this happens to a crossover black guy.