2008 미 대선 부통령 후보의 토론 입니다.
GWEN IFILL:
Good evening from Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. I'm
Gwen Ifill of "The NewsHour" and "Washington Week" on PBS. Welcome to
the first and the only 2008 vice presidential debate between the
Republican nominee, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, and the Democratic
nominee, Joe Biden of Delaware.
The
Commission on Presidential Debates is the sponsor of this event and the
two remaining presidential debates. Tonight's discussion will cover a
wide range of topics, including domestic and foreign policy matters.
It
will be divided roughly into five-minute segments. Each candidate will
have 90 seconds to respond to a direct question and then an additional
two minutes for rebuttal and follow-up. The order has been determined
by a coin toss.
The
specific subjects and questions were chosen by me and have not been
shared or cleared with anyone on the campaigns or on the commission.
The audience here in the hall has promised to remain very polite, no
cheers, applause, no untoward outbursts, except right at this minute
now, as we welcome Governor Palin and Senator Biden.
(APPLAUSE)
PALIN: Hey, can I call you Joe?
PALIN: Thank you.
Thank you, Gwen. Thank you. Thank you.
IFILL: Welcome to you both.
As
we have determined by a coin toss, the first question will go to
Senator Biden, with a 90-second follow-up from Governor Palin.
The
House of Representatives this week passed a bill, a big bailout bill --
or didn't pass it, I should say. The Senate decided to pass it, and the
House is wrestling with it still tonight.
As
America watches these things happen on Capitol Hill, Senator Biden, was
this the worst of Washington or the best of Washington that we saw play
out?
BIDEN: Let me begin by thanking you, Gwen, for hosting this.
And, Governor, it's a pleasure to meet you, and it's a pleasure to be with you.
I
think it's neither the best or worst of Washington, but it's evidence
of the fact that the economic policies of the last eight years have
been the worst economic policies we've ever had. As a consequence,
you've seen what's happened on Wall Street.
If
you need any more proof positive of how bad the economic theories have
been, this excessive deregulation, the failure to oversee what was
going on, letting Wall Street run wild, I don't think you needed any
more evidence than what you see now.
So
the Congress has been put -- Democrats and Republicans have been put in
a very difficult spot. But Barack Obama laid out four basic criteria
for any kind of rescue plan here.
He,
first of all, said there has to be oversight. We're not going to write
any check to anybody unless there's oversight for the -- of the
secretary of Treasury.
He secondly said you have to focus on homeowners and folks on Main Street.
Thirdly, he said that you have to treat the taxpayers like investors in this case.
And,
lastly, what you have to do is make sure that CEOs don't benefit from
this, because this could end up, in the long run, people making money
off of this rescue plan.
And
so, as a consequence of that, it brings us back to maybe the
fundamental disagreement between Governor Palin and me and Senator
McCain and Barack Obama, and that is that the -- we're going to
fundamentally change the focus of the economic policy.
We're
going to focus on the middle class, because it's -- when the middle
class is growing, the economy grows and everybody does well, not just
focus on the wealthy and corporate America.
IFILL: Thank you, Senator.
Governor Palin?
PALIN:
Thank you, Gwen. And I thank the commission, also. I appreciate this
privilege of being able to be here and speak with Americans.
You
know, I think a good barometer here, as we try to figure out has this
been a good time or a bad time in America's economy, is go to a kid's
soccer game on Saturday, and turn to any parent there on the sideline
and ask them, "How are you feeling about the economy?"
And
I'll bet you, you're going to hear some fear in that parent's voice,
fear regarding the few investments that some of us have in the stock
market. Did we just take a major hit with those investments?
Fear
about, how are we going to afford to send our kids to college? A fear,
as small-business owners, perhaps, how we're going to borrow any money
to increase inventory or hire more people.
The
barometer there, I think, is going to be resounding that our economy is
hurting and the federal government has not provided the sound oversight
that we need and that we deserve, and we need reform to that end.
Now,
John McCain thankfully has been one representing reform. Two years ago,
remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae
(NYSE:FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE) reform measures. He sounded that
warning bell.
People
in the Senate with him, his colleagues, didn't want to listen to him
and wouldn't go towards that reform that was needed then. I think that
the alarm has been heard, though, and there will be that greater
oversight, again thanks to John McCain's bipartisan efforts that he was
so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even
suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive
politics aside and putting the country first.
IFILL: You both would like to be vice president.
Senator
Biden, how, as vice president, would you work to shrink this gap of
polarization which has sprung up in Washington, which you both have
spoken about here tonight?
BIDEN:
Well, that's what I've done my whole career, Gwen, on very, very
controversial issues, from dealing with violence against women, to
putting 100,000 police officers on the street, to trying to get
something done about the genocide in -- that was going on in Bosnia.
And
I -- I have been able to reach across the aisle. I think it's fair to
say that I have almost as many friends on the Republican side of the
aisle as I do the Democratic side of the aisle.
But am I able to respond to -- are we able to stay on the -- on the topic?
IFILL: You may, if you like.
BIDEN:
Yes, well, you know, until two weeks ago -- it was two Mondays ago John
McCain said at 9 o'clock in the morning that the fundamentals of the
economy were strong. Two weeks before that, he said George -- we've
made great economic progress under George Bush's policies.
Nine
o'clock, the economy was strong. Eleven o'clock that same day, two
Mondays ago, John McCain said that we have an economic crisis.
That
doesn't make John McCain a bad guy, but it does point out he's out of
touch. Those folks on the sidelines knew that two months ago.
IFILL: Governor Palin, you may respond.
PALIN:
John McCain, in referring to the fundamental of our economy being
strong, he was talking to and he was talking about the American
workforce. And the American workforce is the greatest in this world,
with the ingenuity and the work ethic that is just entrenched in our
workforce. That's a positive. That's encouragement. And that's what
John McCain meant.
Now,
what I've done as a governor and as a mayor is (inaudible) I've had
that track record of reform. And I've joined this team that is a team
of mavericks with John McCain, also, with his track record of reform,
where we're known for putting partisan politics aside to just get the
job done.
Now,
Barack Obama, of course, he's pretty much only voted along his party
lines. In fact, 96 percent of his votes have been solely along party
line, not having that proof for the American people to know that his
commitment, too, is, you know, put the partisanship, put the special
interests aside, and get down to getting business done for the people
of America.
We're
tired of the old politics as usual. And that's why, with all due
respect, I do respect your years in the U.S. Senate, but I think
Americans are craving something new and different and that new energy
and that new commitment that's going to come with reform.
I think that's why we need to send the maverick from the Senate and put him in the White House, and I'm happy to join him there.
IFILL:
Governor, Senator, neither of you really answered that last question
about what you would do as vice president. I'm going to come back to
that...
(LAUGHTER)
... throughout the evening to try to see if we can look forward, as well.
Now, let's talk about -- the next question is to talk about the subprime lending meltdown.
Who
do you think was at fault? I start with you, Governor Palin. Was it the
greedy lenders? Was it the risky home-buyers who shouldn't have been
buying a home in the first place? And what should you be doing about it?
PALIN:
Darn right it was the predator lenders, who tried to talk Americans
into thinking that it was smart to buy a $300,000 house if we could
only afford a $100,000 house. There was deception there, and there was
greed and there is corruption on Wall Street. And we need to stop that.
Again,
John McCain and I, that commitment that we have made, and we're going
to follow through on that, getting rid of that corruption.
PALIN:
One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit
ourselves just every day American people, Joe Six Pack, hockey moms
across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never
again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those
who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars. We need to
make sure that we demand from the federal government strict oversight
of those entities in charge of our investments and our savings and we
need also to not get ourselves in debt. Let's do what our parents told
us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live
outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're
taking personal responsibility through all of this. It's not the
American peoples fault that the economy is hurting like it is, but we
have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through
this and say never again will we be taken advantage of.
BIDEN:
Well Gwen, two years ago Barack Obama warned about the sub prime
mortgage crisis. John McCain said shortly after that in December he was
surprised there was a sub prime mortgage problem. John McCain while
Barack Obama was warning about what we had to do was literally giving
an interview to "The Wall Street Journal" saying that I'm always for
cutting regulations. We let Wall Street run wild. John McCain and he's
a good man, but John McCain thought the answer is that tried and true
Republican response, deregulate, deregulate.
So
what you had is you had overwhelming "deregulation." You had actually
the belief that Wall Street could self-regulate itself. And while
Barack Obama was talking about reinstating those regulations, John on
20 different occasions in the previous year and a half called for more
deregulation. As a matter of fact, John recently wrote an article in a
major magazine saying that he wants to do for the health care industry
deregulate it and let the free market move like he did for the banking
industry.
So
deregulation was the promise. And guess what? Those people who say
don't go into debt, they can barely pay to fill up their gas tank. I
was recently at my local gas station and asked a guy named Joey Danco
(ph). I said Joey, how much did it cost to fill your tank? You know
what his answer was? He said I don't know, Joe. I never have enough
money to do it. The middle class needs relief, tax relief. They need it
now. They need help now. The focus will change with Barack Obama.
IFILL: Governor, please if you want to respond to what he said about Senator McCain's comments about health care?
PALIN:
I would like to respond about the tax increases. We can speak in
agreement here that darn right we need tax relief for Americans so that
jobs can be created here. Now, Barack Obama and Senator Biden also
voted for the largest tax increases in U.S. history. Barack had 94
opportunities to side on the people's side and reduce taxes and 94
times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction, 94
times.
Now,
that's not what we need to create jobs and really bolster and heat up
our economy. We do need the private sector to be able to keep more of
what we earn and produce. Government is going to have to learn to be
more efficient and live with less if that's what it takes to reign in
the government growth that we've seen today. But we do need tax relief
and Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year
for those families making only $42,000 a year. That's a lot of middle
income average American families to increase taxes on them. I think
that is the way to kill jobs and to continue to harm our economy.
BIDEN:
The charge is absolutely not true. Barack Obama did not vote to raise
taxes. The vote she's referring to, John McCain voted the exact same
way. It was a budget procedural vote. John McCain voted the same way.
It did not raise taxes. Number two, using the standard that the
governor uses, John McCain voted 477 times to raise taxes. It's a bogus
standard it but if you notice, Gwen, the governor did not answer the
question about deregulation, did not answer the question of defending
John McCain about not going along with the deregulation, letting Wall
Street run wild. He did support deregulation almost across the board.
That's why we got into so much trouble.
IFILL: Would you like to have an opportunity to answer that before we move on?
PALIN:
I'm still on the tax thing because I want to correct you on that again.
And I want to let you know what I did as a mayor and as a governor. And
I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to
hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let
them know my track record also. As mayor, every year I was in office I
did reduce taxes. I eliminated personal property taxes and eliminated
small business inventory taxes and as governor we suspended our state
fuel tax. We did all of those things knowing that that is how our
economy would be heated up. Now, as for John McCain's adherence to
rules and regulations and pushing for even harder and tougher
regulations, that is another thing that he is known for though. Look at
the tobacco industry. Look at campaign finance reform.
IFILL:
OK, our time is up here. We've got to move to the next question.
Senator Biden, we want to talk about taxes, let's talk about taxes. You
proposed raising taxes on people who earn over $250,000 a year. The
question for you is, why is that not class warfare and the same
question for you, Governor Palin, is you have proposed a tax employer
health benefits which some studies say would actually throw five
million more people onto the roles of the uninsured. I want to know why
that isn't taking things out on the poor, starting with you, Senator
Biden.
BIDEN:
Well Gwen, where I come from, it's called fairness, just simple
fairness. The middle class is struggling. The middle class under John
McCain's tax proposal, 100 million families, middle class families,
households to be precise, they got not a single change, they got not a
single break in taxes. No one making less than $250,000 under Barack
Obama's plan will see one single penny of their tax raised whether it's
their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax. And
95 percent of the people in the United States of America making less
than $150,000 will get a tax break.
Now,
that seems to me to be simple fairness. The economic engine of America
is middle class. It's the people listening to this broadcast. When you
do well, America does well. Even the wealthy do well. This is not
punitive. John wants to add $300 million, billion in new tax cuts per
year for corporate America and the very wealthy while giving virtually
nothing to the middle class. We have a different value set. The middle
class is the economic engine. It's fair. They deserve the tax breaks,
not the super wealthy who are doing pretty well. They don't need any
more tax breaks. And by the way, they'll pay no more than they did
under Ronald Reagan.
PALIN:
I do take issue with some of the principle there with that
redistribution of wealth principle that seems to be espoused by you.
But when you talk about Barack's plan to tax increase affecting only
those making $250,000 a year or more, you're forgetting millions of
small businesses that are going to fit into that category. So they're
going to be the ones paying higher taxes thus resulting in fewer jobs
being created and less productivity.
Now
you said recently that higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or
paying higher taxes is patriotic. In the middle class of America which
is where Todd and I have been all of our lives, that's not patriotic.
Patriotic is saying, government, you know, you're not always the
solution. In fact, too often you're the problem so, government, lessen
the tax burden and on our families and get out of the way and let the
private sector and our families grow and thrive and prosper. An
increased tax formula that Barack Obama is proposing in addition to
nearly a trillion dollars in new spending that he's proposing is the
backwards way of trying to grow our economy.
IFILL: Governor, are you interested in defending Senator McCain's health care plan?
PALIN:
I am because he's got a good health care plan that is detailed. And I
want to give you a couple details on that. He's proposing a $5,000 tax
credit for families so that they can get out there and they can
purchase their own health care coverage. That's a smart thing to do.
That's budget neutral. That doesn't cost the government anything as
opposed to Barack Obama's plan to mandate health care coverage and have
universal government run program and unless you're pleased with the way
the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think
that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health
care being taken over by the feds. But a $5,000 health care credit
through our income tax that's budget neutral. That's going to help. And
he also wants to erase those artificial lines between states so that
through competition, we can cross state lines and if there's a better
plan offered somewhere else, we would be able to purchase that. So
affordability and accessibility will be the keys there with that $5,000
tax credit also being offered.
IFILL: Thank you, governor. Senator?
BIDEN:
Gwen, I don't know where to start. We don't call a redistribution in my
neighborhood Scranton, Claymont, Wilmington, the places I grew up, to
give the fair to say that not giving Exxon Mobil (NYSE:XOM) another $4
billion tax cut this year as John calls for and giving it to middle
class people to be able to pay to get their kids to college, we don't
call that redistribution. We call that fairness number one. Number two
fact, 95 percent of the small businesses in America, their owners make
less than $250,000 a year. They would not get one single solitary penny
increase in taxes, those small businesses.
BIDEN:
Now, with regard to the -- to the health care plan, you know, it's with
one hand you giveth, the other you take it. You know how Barack Obama
-- excuse me, do you know how John McCain pays for his $5,000 tax
credit you're going to get, a family will get?
He
taxes as income every one of you out there, every one of you listening
who has a health care plan through your employer. That's how he raises
$3.6 trillion, on your -- taxing your health care benefit to give you a
$5,000 plan, which his Web site points out will go straight to the
insurance company.
And
then you're going to have to replace a $12,000 -- that's the average
cost of the plan you get through your employer -- it costs $12,000.
You're going to have to pay -- replace a $12,000 plan, because 20
million of you are going to be dropped. Twenty million of you will be
dropped.
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."
IFILL: Thank you, Senator.
Now...
(LAUGHTER)
...
I want to get -- try to get you both to answer a question that neither
of your principals quite answered when my colleague, Jim Lehrer, asked
it last week, starting with you, Senator Biden.
What
promises -- given the events of the week, the bailout plan, all of
this, what promises have you and your campaigns made to the American
people that you're not going to be able to keep?
BIDEN:
Well, the one thing we might have to slow down is a commitment we made
to double foreign assistance. We'll probably have to slow that down.
We
also are going to make sure that we do not go forward with the tax cut
proposals of the administration -- of John McCain, the existing one for
people making over $250,000, which is $130 billion this year alone.
We're
not going to support the $300 billion tax cut that they have for
corporate America and the very wealthy. We're not going to support
another $4 billion tax cut for ExxonMobil.
And
what we're not going to also hold up on, Gwen, is we cannot afford to
hold up on providing for incentives for new jobs by an energy policy,
creating new jobs.
We
cannot slow up on education, because that's the engine that is going to
give us the economic growth and competitiveness that we need.
And
we are not going to slow up on the whole idea of providing for
affordable health care for Americans, none of which, when we get to
talk about health care, is as my -- as the governor characterized --
characterized.
The
bottom line here is that we are going to, in fact, eliminate those
wasteful spending that exist in the budget right now, a number of
things I don't have time, because the light is blinking, that I won't
be able to mention, but one of which is the $100 billion tax dodge
that, in fact, allows people to take their post office box off- shore,
avoid taxes.
I call that unpatriotic. I call that unpatriotic.
BIDEN: That's what I'm talking about.
PALIN:
Well, the nice thing about running with John McCain is I can assure you
he doesn't tell one thing to one group and then turns around and tells
something else to another group, including his plans that will make
this bailout plan, this rescue plan, even better.
I
want to go back to the energy plan, though, because this is -- this is
an important one that Barack Obama, he voted for in '05.
Senator
Biden, you would remember that, in that energy plan that Obama voted
for, that's what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks. Your
running mate voted for that.
You
know what I had to do in the state of Alaska? I had to take on those
oil companies and tell them, "No," you know, any of the greed there
that has been kind of instrumental, I guess, in their mode of
operation, that wasn't going to happen in my state.
And
that's why Tillerson at Exxon and Mulva at ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP) ,
bless their hearts, they're doing what they need to do, as corporate
CEOs, but they're not my biggest fans, because what I had to do up
there in Alaska was to break up a monopoly up there and say, you know,
the people are going to come first and we're going to make sure that we
have value given to the people of Alaska with those resources.
And
those huge tax breaks aren't coming to the big multinational
corporations anymore, not when it adversely affects the people who live
in a state and, in this case, in a country who should be benefiting at
the same time. So it was Barack Obama who voted for that energy plan
that gave those tax breaks to the oil companies that I then had to turn
around, as a governor of an energy-producing state, and kind of undo in
my own area of expertise, and that's energy.
IFILL:
So, Governor, as vice president, there's nothing that you have promised
as a candidate that you would -- that you wouldn't take off the table
because of this financial crisis we're in?
PALIN:
There is not. And how long have I been at this, like five weeks? So
there hasn't been a whole lot that I've promised, except to do what is
right for the American people, put government back on the side of the
American people, stop the greed and corruption on Wall Street.
And
the rescue plan has got to include that massive oversight that
Americans are expecting and deserving. And I don't believe that John
McCain has made any promise that he would not be able to keep, either.
BIDEN:
Again, let me -- let's talk about those tax breaks. Barack Obama --
Obama voted for an energy bill because, for the first time, it had real
support for alternative energy. (OOTC:AEGC)
When
there were separate votes on eliminating the tax breaks for the oil
companies, Barack Obama voted to eliminate them. John did not.
And
let me just ask a rhetorical question: If John really wanted to
eliminate them, why is he adding to his budget an additional $4 billion
in tax cuts for ExxonMobils of the world that, in fact, already have
made $600 billion since 2001?
And,
look, I agree with the governor. She imposed a windfall profits tax up
there in Alaska. That's what Barack Obama and I want to do.
We
want to be able to do for all of you Americans, give you back $1,000
bucks, like she's been able to give back money to her folks back there.
But
John McCain will not support a windfall profits tax. They've made $600
billion since 2001, and John McCain wants to give them, all by itself
-- separate, no additional bill, all by itself -- another $4 billion
tax cut.
If that
is not proof of what I say, I'm not sure what can be. So I hope the
governor is able to convince John McCain to support our windfall
profits tax, which she supported in Alaska, and I give her credit for
it.
IFILL:
Next question, Governor Palin, still on the economy. Last year,
Congress passed a bill that would make it more difficult for
debt-strapped mortgage-holders to declare bankruptcy, to get out from
under that debt. This is something that John McCain supported. Would
you have?
PALIN:
Yes, I would have. But here, again, there have -- there have been so
many changes in the conditions of our economy in just even these past
weeks that there has been more and more revelation made aware now to
Americans about the corruption and the greed on Wall Street.
We
need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative
of John McCain's call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac,
with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of
rear that head of abuse.
And
the colleagues in the Senate weren't going to go there with him. So we
have John McCain to thank for at least warning people. And we also have
John McCain to thank for bringing in a bipartisan effort people to the
table so that we can start putting politics aside, even putting a
campaign aside, and just do what's right to fix this economic problem
that we are in.
It
is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting
Wall Street. And now we have to be ever vigilant and also making sure
that credit markets don't seize up. That's where the Main Streeters
like me, that's where we would really feel the effects.
IFILL:
Senator Biden, you voted for this bankruptcy bill. Senator Obama voted
against it. Some people have said that mortgage- holders really paid
the price.
BIDEN:
Well, mortgage-holders didn't pay the price. Only 10 percent of the
people who are -- have been affected by this whole switch from Chapter
7 to Chapter 13 -- it gets complicated.
But
the point of this -- Barack Obama saw the glass as half- empty. I saw
it as half-full. We disagreed on that, and 85 senators voted one way,
and 15 voted the other way.
But
here's the deal. Barack Obama pointed out two years ago that there was
a subprime mortgage crisis and wrote to the secretary of Treasury. And
he said, "You'd better get on the stick here. You'd better look at it."
John
McCain said as early as last December, quote -- I'm paraphrasing --
"I'm surprised about this subprime mortgage crisis," number one.
Number
two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now
-- and Barack Obama and I support it -- we should be allowing
bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate
you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be
able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.
That
would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it
from going under. But John McCain, as I understand it -- I'm not sure
of this, but I believe John McCain and the governor don't support that.
There are ways to help people now. And there -- ways that we're
offering are not being supported by -- by the Bush administration nor
do I believe by John McCain and Governor Palin.
IFILL: Governor Palin, is that so?
PALIN:
That is not so, but because that's just a quick answer, I want to talk
about, again, my record on energy versus your ticket's energy ticket,
also.
I think that this is important to come back to, with that energy policy plan again that was voted for in '05.
When we talk about energy, we have to consider the need to do all that we can to allow this nation to become energy independent.
It's
a nonsensical position that we are in when we have domestic supplies of
energy all over this great land. And East Coast politicians who don't
allow energy-producing states like Alaska to produce these, to tap into
them, and instead we're relying on foreign countries to produce for us.
PALIN:
We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries,
some who do not like America -- they certainly don't have our best
interests at heart -- instead of those dollars circulating here,
creating tens of thousands of jobs and allowing domestic supplies of
energy to be tapped into and start flowing into these very, very hungry
markets.
Energy
independence is the key to this nation's future, to our economic
future, and to our national security. So when we talk about energy
plans, it's not just about who got a tax break and who didn't. And
we're not giving oil companies tax breaks, but it's about a heck of a
lot more than that.
Energy independence is the key to America's future.
IFILL:
Governor, I'm happy to talk to you in this next section about energy
issues. Let's talk about climate change. What is true and what is false
about what we have heard, read, discussed, debated about the causes of
climate change?
PALIN:
Yes. Well, as the nation's only Arctic state and being the governor of
that state, Alaska feels and sees impacts of climate change more so
than any other state. And we know that it's real.
I'm
not one to attribute every man -- activity of man to the changes in the
climate. There is something to be said also for man's activities, but
also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet.
But
there are real changes going on in our climate. And I don't want to
argue about the causes. What I want to argue about is, how are we going
to get there to positively affect the impacts?
We
have got to clean up this planet. We have got to encourage other
nations also to come along with us with the impacts of climate change,
what we can do about that.
As
governor, I was the first governor to form a climate change sub-cabinet
to start dealing with the impacts. We've got to reduce emissions. John
McCain is right there with an "all of the above" approach to deal with
climate change impacts.
We've
got to become energy independent for that reason. Also as we rely more
and more on other countries that don't care as much about the climate
as we do, we're allowing them to produce and to emit and even pollute
more than America would ever stand for. So even in dealing with climate
change, it's all the more reason that we have an "all of the above"
approach, tapping into alternative sources of energy and conserving
fuel, conserving our petroleum products and our hydrocarbons so that we
can clean up this planet and deal with climate change.
IFILL: Senator, what is true and what is false about the causes?
BIDEN:
Well, I think it is manmade. I think it's clearly manmade. And, look,
this probably explains the biggest fundamental difference between John
McCain and Barack Obama and Sarah Palin and Joe Biden -- Governor Palin
and Joe Biden.
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.
Now,
let's look at the facts. We have 3 percent of the world's oil reserves.
We consume 25 percent of the oil in the world. John McCain has voted 20
times in the last decade-and-a-half against funding alternative energy
sources, clean energy sources, wind, solar, biofuels.
The
way in which we can stop the greenhouse gases from emitting. We believe
-- Barack Obama believes by investing in clean coal and safe nuclear,
we can not only create jobs in wind and solar here in the United
States, we can export it.
China
is building one to three new coal-fired plants burning dirty coal per
week. It's polluting not only the atmosphere but the West Coast of the
United States. We should export the technology by investing in clean
coal technology.
We
should be creating jobs. John McCain has voted 20 times against funding
alternative energy sources and thinks, I guess, the only answer is
drill, drill, drill. Drill we must, but it will take 10 years for one
drop of oil to come out of any of the wells that are going to begun to
be drilled.
In the meantime, we're all going to be in real trouble.
IFILL:
Let me clear something up, Senator McCain has said he supports caps on
carbon emissions. Senator Obama has said he supports clean coal
technology, which I don't believe you've always supported.
BIDEN: I have always supported it. That's a fact.
IFILL: Well, clear it up for us, both of you, and start with Governor Palin.
PALIN:
Yes, Senator McCain does support this. The chant is "drill, baby,
drill." And that's what we hear all across this country in our rallies
because people are so hungry for those domestic sources of energy to be
tapped into. They know that even in my own energy-producing state we
have billions of barrels of oil and hundreds of trillions of cubic feet
of clean, green natural gas. And we're building a nearly $40 billion
natural gas pipeline which is North America's largest and most you
expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy
into hungry markets.
Barack
Obama and Senator Biden, you've said no to everything in trying to find
a domestic solution to the energy crisis that we're in. You even called
drilling -- safe, environmentally-friendly drilling offshore as raping
the outer continental shelf.
There
-- with new technology, with tiny footprints even on land, it is safe
to drill and we need to do more of that. But also in that "all of the
above" approach that Senator McCain supports, the alternative fuels
will be tapped into: the nuclear, the clean coal.
I
was surprised to hear you mention that because you had said that there
isn't anything -- such a thing as clean coal. And I think you said it
in a rope line, too, at one of your rallies.
IFILL: We do need to keep within our two minutes. But I just wanted to ask you, do you support capping carbon emissions?
IFILL: OK. And on the clean coal issue?
BIDEN: Absolutely. Absolutely we do. We call for setting hard targets, number one...
BIDEN:
Oh, on clean coal. My record, just take a look at the record. My record
for 25 years has supported clean coal technology. A comment made in a
rope line was taken out of context. I was talking about exporting that
technology to China so when they burn their dirty coal, it won't be as
dirty, it will be clean.
But
here's the bottom line, Gwen: How do we deal with global warming with
continued addition to carbon emissions? And if the only answer you have
is oil, and John -- and the governor says John is for everything.
Well,
why did John vote 20 times? Maybe he's for everything as long as it's
not helped forward by the government. Maybe he's for everything if the
free market takes care of it. I don't know. But he voted 20 times
against funding alternative energy sources.
IFILL:
The next round of -- pardon me, the next round of questions starts with
you, Senator Biden. Do you support, as they do in Alaska, granting
same-sex benefits to couples? BIDEN: Absolutely. Do I support granting
same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden
administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a
constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and
a heterosexual couple.
The
fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted
-- same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the
hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et
cetera. That's only fair.
It's
what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. 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.
IFILL: Governor, would you support expanding that beyond Alaska to the rest of the nation?
PALIN:
Well, not if it goes closer and closer towards redefining the
traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. And
unfortunately that's sometimes where those steps lead.
But
I also want to clarify, if there's any kind of suggestion at all from
my answer that I would be anything but tolerant of adults in America
choosing their partners, choosing relationships that they deem best for
themselves, you know, I am tolerant and I have a very diverse family
and group of friends and even within that group you would see some who
may not agree with me on this issue, some very dear friends who don't
agree with me on this issue.
But
in that tolerance also, no one would ever propose, not in a
McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say,
visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed, negotiated between
parties.
But I
will tell Americans straight up that I don't support defining marriage
as anything but between one man and one woman, and I think through
nuances we can go round and round about what that actually means.
But I'm being as straight up with Americans as I can in my non- support for anything but a traditional definition of marriage.
IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage?
BIDEN:
No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what
constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the
decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who
practice their faiths the determination what you call it.
The
bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at
her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights
distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a
committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have
a difference.
IFILL: Is that what your said?
PALIN: Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not.
IFILL: Wonderful. You agree. On that note, let's move to foreign policy.
(LAUGHTER)
IFILL:
You both have sons who are in Iraq or on their way to Iraq. You,
Governor Palin, have said that you would like to see a real clear plan
for an exit strategy. What should that be, Governor?
PALIN:
I am very thankful that we do have a good plan and the surge and the
counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq that has proven to work, I am
thankful that that is part of the plan implemented under a great
American hero, General Petraeus, and pushed hard by another great
American, Senator John McCain.
I
know that the other ticket opposed this surge, in fact, even opposed
funding for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Barack Obama voted
against funding troops there after promising that he would not do so.
PALIN:
And Senator Biden, I respected you when you called him out on that. You
said that his vote was political and you said it would cost lives. And
Barack Obama at first said he would not do that. He turned around under
political pressure and he voted against funding the troops. We do have
a plan for withdrawal. We don't need early withdrawal out of Iraq. We
cannot afford to lose there or we're going to be no better off in the
war in Afghanistan either. We have got to win in Iraq.
And
with the surge that has worked we're now down to presurge numbers in
Iraq. That's where we can be. We can start putting more troops in
Afghanistan as we also work with our NATO allies who are there
strengthening us and we need to grow our military. We cannot afford to
lose against al Qaeda and the Shia extremists who are still there,
still fighting us, but we're getting closer and closer to victory. And
it would be a travesty if we quit now in Iraq.
BIDEN:
Gwen, with all due respect, I didn't hear a plan. Barack Obama offered
a clear plan. Shift responsibility to Iraqis over the next 16 months.
Draw down our combat troops. Ironically the same plan that Maliki, the
prime minister of Iraq and George Bush are now negotiating. The only
odd man out here, only one left out is John McCain, number one. Number
two, with regard to Barack Obama not quote funding the troops, John
McCain voted the exact same way. John McCain voted against funding the
troops because of an amendment he voted against had a timeline in it to
draw down American troops. And John said I'm not going to fund the
troops if in fact there's a time line. Barack Obama and I agree fully
and completely on one thing. You've got to have a time line to draw
down the troops and shift responsibility to the Iraqis.
We're
spending $10 billion a month while Iraqis have an $80 billion surplus.
Barack says it's time for them to spend their own money and have the
400,000 military we trained for them begin to take their own
responsibility and gradually over 16 months, withdrawal. John McCain --
this is a fundamental difference between us, we'll end this war. For
John McCain, there's no end in sight to end this war, fundamental
difference. We will end this war.
PALIN:
Your plan is a white flag of surrender in Iraq and that is not what our
troops need to hear today, that's for sure. And it's not what our
nation needs to be able to count on. You guys opposed the surge. The
surge worked. Barack Obama still can't admit the surge works.
We'll
know when we're finished in Iraq when the Iraqi government can govern
its people and when the Iraqi security forces can secure its people.
And our commanders on the ground will tell us when those conditions
have been met. And Maliki and Talabani also in working with us are
knowing again that we are getting closer and closer to that point, that
victory that's within sight.
Now,
you said regarding Senator McCain's military policies there, Senator
Biden, that you supported a lot of these things. In fact, you said in
fact that you wanted to run, you'd be honored to run with him on the
ticket. That's an indication I think of some of the support that you
had at least until you became the VP pick here.
You
also said that Barack Obama was not ready to be commander in chief. And
I know again that you opposed the move he made to try to cut off
funding for the troops and I respect you for that. I don't know how you
can defend that position now but I know that you know especially with
your son in the National Guard and I have great respect for your family
also and the honor that you show our military. Barack Obama though,
another story there. Anyone I think who can cut off funding for the
troops after promising not to is another story.
BIDEN:
John McCain voted to cut off funding for the troops. Let me say that
again. John McCain voted against an amendment containing $1 billion,
$600 million that I had gotten to get MRAPS, those things that are
protecting the governor's son and pray god my son and a lot of other
sons and daughters.
He
voted against it. He voted against funding because he said the
amendment had a time line in it to end this war. He didn't like that.
But let's get straight who has been right and wrong. John McCain and
Dick Cheney said while I was saying we would not be greeted as
liberators, we would not - this war would take a decade and not a day,
not a week and not six months, we would not be out of there quickly.
John McCain was saying the Sunnis and Shias got along with each other
without reading the history of the last 700 years. John McCain said
there would be enough oil to pay for this. John McCain has been dead
wrong. I love him. As my mother would say, god love him, but he's been
dead wrong on the fundamental issues relating to the conduct of the
war. Barack Obama has been right. There are the facts.
IFILL:
Let's move to Iran and Pakistan. I'm curious about what you think
starting with you Senator Biden. What's the greater threat, a nuclear
Iran or an unstable Afghanistan? Explain why.
BIDEN:
Well, they're both extremely dangerous. I always am focused, as you
know Gwen, I have been focusing on for a long time, along with Barack
on Pakistan. Pakistan already has nuclear weapons. Pakistan already has
deployed nuclear weapons. Pakistan's weapons can already hit Israel and
the Mediterranean. Iran getting a nuclear weapon would be very, very
destabilizing. They are more than - they are not close to getting a
nuclear weapon that's able to be deployed. So they're both very
dangerous. They both would be game changers.
But
look, here's what the fundamental problem I have with John's policy
about terror instability. John continues to tell us that the central
war in the front on terror is in Iraq. I promise you, if an attack
comes in the homeland, it's going to come as our security services have
said, it is going to come from al Qaeda planning in the hills of
Afghanistan and Pakistan. That's where they live. That's where they
are. That's where it will come from. And right now that resides in
Pakistan, a stable government needs to be established. We need to
support that democracy by helping them not only with their military but
with their governance and their economic well-being.
There
have been 7,000 madrasses built along that border. We should be helping
them build schools to compete for those hearts and minds of the people
in the region so that we're actually able to take on terrorism and by
the way, that's where bin Laden lives and we will go at him if we have
actionable intelligence.
IFILL: Governor, nuclear Pakistan, unstable Pakistan, nuclear Iran? Which is the greater threat?
PALIN:
Both are extremely dangerous, of course. And as for who coined that
central war on terror being in Iraq, it was the General Petraeus and al
Qaeda, both leaders there and it's probably the only thing that they're
ever going to agree on, but that it was a central war on terror is in
Iraq. You don't have to believe me or John McCain on that. I would
believe Petraeus and the leader of al Qaeda.
An
armed, nuclear armed especially Iran is so extremely dangerous to
consider. They cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons period.
Israel is in jeopardy of course when we're dealing with Ahmadinejad as
a leader of Iran. Iran claiming that Israel as he termed it, a stinking
corpse, a country that should be wiped off the face of the earth. Now a
leader like Ahmadinejad who is not sane or stable when he says things
like that is not one whom we can allow to acquire nuclear energy,
nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, the Castro brothers, others
who are dangerous dictators are one that Barack Obama has said he would
be willing to meet with without preconditions being met first.
And
an issue like that taken up by a presidential candidate goes beyond
naivete and goes beyond poor judgment. A statement that he made like
that is downright dangerous because leaders like Ahmadinejad who would
seek to acquire nuclear weapons and wipe off the face of the earth an
ally like we have in Israel should not be met with without
preconditions and diplomatic efforts being undertaken first.
IFILL:
Governor and senator, I want you both to respond to this. Secretaries
of state Baker, Kissinger, Powell, they have all advocated some level
of engagement with enemies. Do you think these former secretaries of
state are wrong on that?
PALIN:
No and Dr. Henry Kissinger especially. I had a good conversation with
him recently. And he shared with me his passion for diplomacy. And
that's what John McCain and I would engage in also. But again, with
some of these dictators who hate America and hate what we stand for,
with our freedoms, our democracy, our tolerance, our respect for
women's rights, those who would try to destroy what we stand for cannot
be met with just sitting down on a presidential level as Barack Obama
had said he would be willing to do. That is beyond bad judgment. That
is dangerous.
No,
diplomacy is very important. First and foremost, that is what we would
engage in. But diplomacy is hard work by serious people. It's lining
out clear objectives and having your friends and your allies ready to
back you up there and have sanctions lined up before any kind of
presidential summit would take place.
BIDEN: Can I clarify this? This is simply not true about Barack Obama. He did not say sit down with Ahmadinejad.
BIDEN:
The fact of the matter is, it surprises me that Senator McCain doesn't
realize that Ahmadinejad does not control the security apparatus in
Iran. The theocracy controls the security apparatus, number one.
Number two, five secretaries of state did say we should talk with and sit down.
Now,
John and Governor Palin now say they're all for -- they have a passion,
I think the phrase was, a passion for diplomacy and that we have to
bring our friends and allies along.
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. Now, how do you do that when you don't have your
administration sit down and talk with the adversary?
And
look what President Bush did. After five years, he finally sent a
high-ranking diplomat to meet with the highest-ranking diplomats in
Iran, in Europe, to try to work out an arrangement.
Our
allies are on that same page. And if we don't go the extra mile on
diplomacy, what makes you think the allies are going to sit with us?
The
last point I'll make, John McCain said as recently as a couple of weeks
ago he wouldn't even sit down with the government of Spain, a NATO ally
that has troops in Afghanistan with us now. I find that incredible.
IFILL: Governor, you mentioned Israel and your support for Israel.
IFILL:
What has this administration done right or wrong -- this is the great,
lingering, unresolved issue, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- what
have they done? And is a two-state solution the solution?
PALIN:
A two-state solution is the solution. And Secretary Rice, having
recently met with leaders on one side or the other there, also, still
in these waning days of the Bush administration, trying to forge that
peace, and that needs to be done, and that will be top of an agenda
item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration.
Israel
is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to
assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite,
again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to
destroy Israel, that that is what they would like to see.
We
will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also,
in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to
accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track
record of being able to forge these peace agreements.
They succeeded with Jordan. They succeeded with Egypt. I'm sure that we're going to see more success there, also.
It's
got to be a commitment of the United States of America, though. And I
can promise you, in a McCain-Palin administration, that commitment is
there to work with our friends in Israel.
BIDEN:
Gwen, no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to
Israel than Joe Biden. I would have never, ever joined this ticket were
I not absolutely sure Barack Obama shared my passion.
But
you asked a question about whether or not this administration's policy
had made sense or something to that effect. It has been an abject
failure, this administration's policy.
In fairness to Secretary Rice, she's trying to turn it around now in the seventh or eighth year.
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.
When
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.
The fact of the matter is, the policy of this administration has been an abject failure.
And
speaking of freedom being on the march, the only thing on the march is
Iran. It's closer to a bomb. Its proxies now have a major stake in
Lebanon, as well as in the Gaza Strip with Hamas.
We
will change this policy with thoughtful, real, live diplomacy that
understands that you must back Israel in letting them negotiate,
support their negotiation, and stand with them, not insist on policies
like this administration has. IFILL: Has this administration's policy
been an abject failure, as the senator says, Governor?
PALIN:
No, I do not believe that it has been. But I'm so encouraged to know
that we both love Israel, and I think that is a good thing to get to
agree on, Senator Biden. I respect your position on that.
No,
in fact, when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time,
too, when Americans are going to say, "Enough is enough with your
ticket," on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and
doing the blame game.
There
have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders
throughout this administration, as there are with every administration.
But
for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the
future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us
believe that that's where you're going.
Positive
change is coming, though. Reform of government is coming. We'll learn
from the past mistakes in this administration and other administrations.
And
we're going to forge ahead with putting government back on the side of
the people and making sure that our country comes first, putting
obsessive partisanship aside.
That's what John McCain has been known for in all these years. He has been the maverick. He has ruffled feathers.
But I know, Senator Biden, you have respected for them that, and I respect you for acknowledging that. But change is coming.
IFILL: Just looking backwards, Senator?
BIDEN:
Look, past is prologue, Gwen. The issue is, how different is John
McCain's policy going to be than George Bush's? I haven't heard
anything yet.
I
haven't heard how his policy is going to be different on Iran than
George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different
with Israel than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in
Afghanistan is going to be different than George Bush's. I haven't
heard how his policy in Pakistan is going to be different than George
Bush's.
It may be. But so far, it is the same as George Bush's. And you know where that policy has taken us.
We will make significant change so, once again, we're the most respected nation in the world. That's what we're going to do.
IFILL:
Governor, on another issue, interventionism, nuclear weapons. What
should be the trigger, or should there be a trigger, when nuclear
weapons use is ever put into play?
PALIN:
Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be all, end all of just too
many people in too many parts of our planet, so those dangerous
regimes, again, cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, period.
Our nuclear weaponry here in the U.S. is used as a deterrent. And that's a safe, stable way to use nuclear weaponry.
But
for those countries -- North Korea, also, under Kim Jong-il -- we have
got to make sure that we're putting the economic sanctions on these
countries and that we have friends and allies supporting us in this to
make sure that leaders like Kim Jong-il and Ahmadinejad are not allowed
to acquire, to proliferate, or to use those nuclear weapons. It is that
important.
Can we talk about Afghanistan real quick, also, though?
PALIN:
OK, I'd like to just really quickly mention there, too, that when you
look back and you say that the Bush administration's policy on
Afghanistan perhaps would be the same as McCain, and that's not
accurate.
The
surge principles, not the exact strategy, but the surge principles that
have worked in Iraq need to be implemented in Afghanistan, also. And
that, perhaps, would be a difference with the Bush administration.
Now,
Barack Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is
air-raiding villages and killing civilians. And such a reckless,
reckless comment and untrue comment, again, hurts our cause.
That's
not what we're doing there. We're fighting terrorists, and we're
securing democracy, and we're building schools for children there so
that there is opportunity in that country, also. There will be a big
difference there, and we will win in -- in Afghanistan, also.
IFILL: Senator, you may talk about nuclear use, if you'd like, and also about Afghanistan.
BIDEN: I'll talk about both. With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen.
The
fact is that our commanding general in Afghanistan said today that a
surge -- the surge principles used in Iraq will not -- well, let me say
this again now -- our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge
principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan, not Joe Biden, our
commanding general in Afghanistan.
He said we need more troops. We need government-building. We need to spend more money on the infrastructure in Afghanistan.
Look,
we have spent more money -- we 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.
Let
me say that again. Three weeks in Iraq; seven years, seven years or
six-and-a-half years in Afghanistan. Now, that's number one.
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.
John McCain has opposed amending the Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty with an amendment to allow for inspections.
John
McCain has not been -- has not been the kind of supporter for dealing
with -- and let me put it another way. My time is almost up.
Barack
Obama, first thing he did when he came to the United States Senate, new
senator, reached across the aisle to my colleague, Dick Lugar, a
Republican, and said, "We've got to do something about keeping nuclear
weapons out of the hands of terrorists."
They
put together a piece of legislation that, in fact, was serious and
real. Every major -- I shouldn't say every -- on the two at least that
I named, I know that John McCain has been opposed to extending the arms
control regime in the world.
PALIN:
Well, first, McClellan did not say definitively the surge principles
would not work in Afghanistan. Certainly, accounting for different
conditions in that different country and conditions are certainly
different. We have NATO allies helping us for one and even the
geographic differences are huge but the counterinsurgency principles
could work in Afghanistan. McClellan didn't say anything opposite of
that. The counterinsurgency strategy going into Afghanistan, clearing,
holding, rebuilding, the civil society and the infrastructure can work
in Afghanistan. And those leaders who are over there, who have also
been advising George Bush on this have not said anything different but
that.
BIDEN:
Well, our commanding general did say that. The fact of the matter is
that again, I'll just put in perspective, while Barack and I and Chuck
Hagel and Dick Lugar have been calling for more money to help in
Afghanistan, more troops in Afghanistan, John McCain was saying two
years ago quote, "The reason we don't read about Afghanistan anymore in
the paper, it's succeeded.
Barack
Obama was saying we need more troops there. Again, we spend in three
weeks on combat missions in Iraq, more than we spent in the entire time
we have been in Afghanistan. That will change in a Barack Obama
administration.
IFILL:
Senator, you have quite a record, this is the next question here, of
being an interventionist. You argued for intervention in Bosnia and
Kosovo, initially in Iraq and Pakistan and now in Darfur, putting U.S.
troops on the ground. Boots on the ground. Is this something the
American public has the stomach for?
BIDEN:
I think the American public has the stomach for success. My
recommendations on Bosnia. I admit I was the first one to recommend it.
They saved tens of thousands of lives. And initially John McCain
opposed it along with a lot of other people. But the end result was it
worked. Look what we did in Bosnia. We took Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks,
being told by everyone, I was told by everyone that this would mean
that they had been killing each other for a thousand years, it would
never work.
There's
a relatively stable government there now as in Kosovo. 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.
I,
along with Dick Lugar, before we went to war, said if we were to go to
war without our allies, without the kind of support we need, we'd be
there for a decade and it'd cost us tens of billions of dollars. John
McCain said, no, it was going to be OK.
I
don't have the stomach for genocide when it comes to Darfur. We can now
impose a no-fly zone. It's within our capacity. We can lead NATO if
we're willing to take a hard stand. We can, I've been in those camps in
Chad. I've seen the suffering, thousands and tens of thousands have
died and are dying. We should rally the world to act and demonstrate it
by our own movement to provide the helicopters to get the 21,000 forces
of the African Union in there now to stop this genocide.
IFILL: Thank you, senator. Governor.
PALIN:
Oh, yeah, it's so obvious I'm a Washington outsider. And someone just
not used to the way you guys operate. Because here you voted for the
war and now you oppose the war. You're one who says, as so many
politicians do, I was for it before I was against it or vice- versa.
Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if
you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it and it was a war
resolution.
And
you had supported John McCain's military strategies pretty adamantly
until this race and you had opposed very adamantly Barack Obama's
military strategy, including cutting off funding for the troops that
attempt all through the primary.
And I watched those debates, so I remember what those were all about.
But
as for as Darfur, we can agree on that also, the supported of the
no-fly zone, making sure that all options are on the table there also.
America
is in a position to help. What I've done in my position to help, as the
governor of a state that's pretty rich in natural resources, we have a
$40 billion investment fund, a savings fund called the Alaska Permanent
Fund.
When I and
others in the legislature found out we had some millions of dollars in
Sudan, we called for divestment through legislation of those dollars to
make sure we weren't doing anything that would be seen as condoning the
activities there in Darfur. That legislation hasn't passed yet but it
needs to because all of us, as individuals, and as humanitarians and as
elected officials should do all we can to end those atrocities in that
region of the world.
IFILL: Is there a line that should be drawn about when we decide to go in?
BIDEN: Absolutely. There is a line that should be drawn.
IFILL:
What is it? BIDEN: The line that should be drawn is whether we A, first
of all have the capacity to do anything about it number one. And number
two, certain new lines that have to be drawn internationally. When a
country engages in genocide, when a country engaging in harboring
terrorists and will do nothing about it, at that point that country in
my view and Barack's view forfeits their right to say you have no right
to intervene at all.
The
truth of the matter is, though, let's go back to John McCain's
strategy. I never supported John McCain's strategy on the war. John
McCain said exactly what Dick Cheney said, go back and look at Barack
Obama's statements and mine. Go look at joebiden.com,
contemporaneously, held hearings in the summer before we went to war,
saying if we went to war, we would not be greeted as liberator, we
would have a fight between Sunnis and Shias, we would be tied down for
a decade and cost us hundreds of billions of dollars.
John
McCain was saying the exact opposite. John McCain was lock- step with
Dick Cheney at that point how this was going to be easy. So John
McCain's strategy in this war, not just whether or not to go, the
actual conduct of the war has been absolutely wrong from the outset.
PALIN:
I beg to disagree with you, again, here on whether you supported Barack
Obama or John McCain's strategies. Here again, you can say what you
want to say a month out before people are asked to vote on this, but we
listened to the debates.
I
think tomorrow morning, the pundits are going to start do the who said
what at what time and we'll have proof of some of this, but, again,
John McCain who knows how to win a war. Who's been there and he's faced
challenges and he knows what evil is and knows what it takes to
overcome the challenges here with our military.
He
knows to learn from the mistakes and blunders we have seen in the war
in Iraq, especially. He will know how to implement the strategies,
working with our commanders and listening to what they have to say,
taking the politics out of these war issues. He'll know how to win a
war.
IFILL: Thank you, governor.
Probably
the biggest cliche about the vice-presidency is that it's a heartbeat
away, everybody's waiting to see what would happen if the worst
happened. How would -- you disagree on some things from your
principles, you disagree on drilling in Alaska, the National Wildlife
Refuge, you disagree on the surveillance law, at least you have in the
past. How would a Biden administration be different from an Obama
administration if that were to happen.
BIDEN: God forbid that would ever happen, it would be a national tragedy of historic proportions if it were to happen.
But
if it did, I would carry out Barack Obama's policy, his policies of
reinstating the middle class, making sure they get a fair break, making
sure they have access to affordable health insurance, making sure they
get serious tax breaks, making sure we can help their children get to
college, making sure there is an energy policy that leads us in the
direction of not only toward independence and clean environment but an
energy policy that creates 5 million new jobs, a foreign policy that
ends this war in Iraq, a foreign policy that goes after the one mission
the American public gave the president after 9/11, to get and capture
or kill bin Laden and to eliminate al Qaeda. A policy that would in
fact engage our allies in making sure that we knew we were acting on
the same page and not dictating.
And
a policy that would reject the Bush Doctrine of preemption and regime
change and replace it with a doctrine of prevention and cooperation
and, ladies and gentlemen, this is the biggest ticket item that we have
in this election.
This
is the most important election you will ever, ever have voted in, any
of you, since 1932. And there's such stark differences, I would follow
through on Barack's policies because in essence, I agree with every
major initiative he is suggesting.
PALIN: And heaven forbid, yes, that would ever happen, no matter how this ends up, that that would ever happen with either party.
As
for disagreeing with John McCain and how our administration would work,
what do you expect? A team of mavericks, of course we're not going to
agree on 100 percent of everything. As we discuss ANWR there, at least
we can agree to disagree on that one. I will keep pushing him on ANWR.
I have so appreciated he has never asked me to check my opinions at the
door and he wants a deliberative debate and healthy debate so we can
make good policy.
What
I would do also, if that were to ever happen, though, is to continue
the good work he is so committed to of putting government back on the
side of the people and get rid of the greed and corruption on Wall
Street and in Washington.
I think we need a little bit of reality from Wasilla Main Street there, brought to Washington, DC.
PALIN:
So that people there can understand how the average working class
family is viewing bureaucracy in the federal government and Congress
and inaction of Congress.
Just
everyday working class Americans saying, you know, government, just get
out of my way. If you're going to do any harm and mandate more things
on me and take more of my money and income tax and business taxes,
you're going to have a choice in just a few weeks here on either
supporting a ticket that wants to create jobs and bolster our economy
and win the war or you're going to be supporting a ticket that wants to
increase taxes, which ultimately kills jobs, and is going to hurt our
economy.
BIDEN:
Can I respond? 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 and you ask anybody in there whether or
not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made
them better off in the last eight years. And then ask them whether
there's a single major initiative that John McCain differs with the
president on. On taxes, on Iraq, on Afghanistan, on the whole question
of how to help education, on the dealing with health care.
Look,
the people in my neighborhood, they get it. They get it. They know
they've been getting the short end of the stick. So walk with me in my
neighborhood, go back to my old neighborhood in Claymont, an old steel
town or go up to Scranton with me. These people know the middle class
has gotten the short end. The wealthy have done very well. Corporate
America has been rewarded. It's time we change it. Barack Obama will
change it.
PALIN:
Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You
preferenced your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now
doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to
do for them in the future. You mentioned education and I'm glad you
did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a
teacher for 30 years, and god bless her. Her reward is in heaven,
right? I say, too, with education, America needs to be putting a lot
more focus on that and our schools have got to be really ramped up in
terms of the funding that they are deserving. Teachers needed to be
paid more. I come from a house full of school teachers. My grandma was,
my dad who is in the audience today, he's a schoolteacher, had been for
many years. My brother, who I think is the best schoolteacher in the
year, and here's a shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood
Elementary School, you get extra credit for watching the debate.
Education
credit in American has been in some sense in some of our states just
accepted to be a little bit lax and we have got to increase the
standards. No Child Left Behind was implemented. It's not doing the job
though. We need flexibility in No Child Left Behind. We need to put
more of an emphasis on the profession of teaching. We need to make sure
that education in either one of our agendas, I think, absolute top of
the line. My kids as public school participants right now, it's near
and dear to my heart. I'm very, very concerned about where we're going
with education and we have got to ramp it up and put more attention in
that arena.
IFILL:
Everybody gets extra credit tonight. We're going to move on to the next
question. Governor, you said in July that someone would have to explain
to you exactly what it is the vice president does every day. You,
senator, said, you would not be vice president under any circumstances.
Now maybe this was just what was going on at the time. But tell us now,
looking forward, what it is you think the vice presidency is worth now.
PALIN:
In my comment there, it was a lame attempt at a joke and yours was a
lame attempt at a joke, too, I guess, because nobody got it. Of course
we know what a vice president does.
BIDEN: They didn't get yours or mine? Which one didn't they get?
PALIN:
No, no. Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not
only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very
seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more
authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose
to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are
supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our
president understands what our strengths are. John McCain and I have
had good conversations about where I would lead with his agenda. That
is energy independence in America and reform of government over all,
and then working with families of children with special needs. That's
near and dear to my heart also. In those arenas, John McCain has
already tapped me and said, that's where I want you, I want you to
lead. I said, I can't wait to get and there go to work with you.
BIDEN:
Gwen, I hope we'll get back to education because I don't know any
government program that John is supporting, not early education, more
money for it. The reason No Child Left Behind was left behind, the
money was left behind, we didn't fund it. We can get back to that I
assume.
With
regard to the role of vice president, I had a long talk, as I'm sure
the governor did with her principal, in my case with Barack. Let me
tell you what Barack asked me to do. I have a history of getting things
done in the United States Senate. John McCain would acknowledge that.
My record shows that on controversial issues. I would be the point
person for the legislative initiatives in the United States Congress
for our administration. I would also, when asked if I wanted a
portfolio, my response was, no. But Barack Obama indicated to me he
wanted me with him to help him govern. So every major decision he'll be
making, I'll be sitting in the room to give my best advice. He's
president, not me, I'll give my best advice.
And
one of the things he said early on when he was choosing, he said he
picked someone who had an independent judgment and wouldn't be afraid
to tell him if he disagreed. That is sort of my reputation, as you
know. I look forward to working with Barack and playing a very
constructive role in his presidency, bringing about the kind of change
this country needs.
IFILL:
Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the
vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as
Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold
complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is
also a member of the Legislative Branch?
PALIN:
Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the
Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice
president. And we will do what is best for the American people in
tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive
and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so
I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and
we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans
that are needed for this nation. And it is my executive experience that
is partly to be attributed to my pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as
a governor, but earlier on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as
a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level
that will be put to good use in the White House also.
IFILL: Vice President Cheney's interpretation of the vice presidency?
BIDEN:
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.
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 vice president,
to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie
vote. The Constitution is explicit.
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. It has been very
dangerous. IFILL: Let's talk conventional wisdom for a moment. The
conventional wisdom, Governor Palin with you, is that your Achilles
heel is that you lack experience. Your conventional wisdom against you
is that your Achilles heel is that you lack discipline, Senator Biden.
What id it really for you, Governor Palin? What is it really for you,
Senator Biden? Start with you, governor.
PALIN:
My experience as an executive will be put to good use as a mayor and
business owner and oil and gas regulator and then as governor of a huge
state, a huge energy producing state that is accounting for much
progress towards getting our nation energy independence and that's
extremely important.
But
it wasn't just that experience tapped into, it was my connection to the
heartland of America. Being a mom, one very concerned about a son in
the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to
college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills? About times and
Todd and our marriage in our past where we didn't have health insurance
and we know what other Americans are going through as they sit around
the kitchen table and try to figure out how are they going to pay
out-of-pocket for health care? We've been there also so that connection
was important.
But
even more important is that world view that I share with John McCain.
That world view that says that America is a nation of exceptionalism.
And we are to be that shining city on a hill, as President Reagan so
beautifully said, that we are a beacon of hope and that we are
unapologetic here. We are not perfect as a nation. But together, we
represent a perfect ideal. And that is democracy and tolerance and
freedom and equal rights. Those things that we stand for that can be
put to good use as a force for good in this world.
John
McCain and I share that. You combine all that with being a team with
the only track record of making a really, a difference in where we've
been and reforming, that's a good team, it's a good ticket.
BIDEN: You're very kind suggesting my only Achilles Heel is my lack of discipline.
BIDEN:
Others talk about my excessive passion. I'm not going to change. I have
35 years in public office. People can judge who I am. I haven't changed
in that time.
And,
by the way, a record of change -- I will place my record and Barack's
record against John McCain's or anyone else in terms of fundamental
accomplishments. Wrote the crime bill, put 100,000 cops on the street,
wrote the Violence Against Women Act, which John McCain voted against
both of them, was the catalyst to change the circumstance in Bosnia,
led by President Clinton, obviously.
Look,
I understand what it's like to be a single parent. When my wife and
daughter died and my two sons were gravely injured, I understand what
it's like as a parent to wonder what it's like if your kid's going to
make it.
I
understand what it's like to sit around the kitchen table with a father
who says, "I've got to leave, champ, because there's no jobs here. I
got to head down to Wilmington. And when we get enough money, honey,
we'll bring you down."
I
understand what it's like. I'm much better off than almost all
Americans now. I get a good salary with the United States Senate. I
live in a beautiful house that's my total investment that I have. So I
-- I am much better off now.
But
the notion that somehow, because I'm a man, I don't know what it's like
to raise two kids alone, I don't know what it's like to have a child
you're not sure is going to -- is going to make it -- I understand.
I
understand, as well as, with all due respect, the governor or anybody
else, what it's like for those people sitting around that kitchen
table. And guess what? They're looking for help. They're looking for
help. They're not looking for more of the same.
PALIN:
People aren't looking for more of the same. They are looking for
change. And John McCain has been the consummate maverick in the Senate
over all these years.
He's
taken shots left and right from the other party and from within his own
party, because he's had to take on his own party when the time was
right, when he recognized it was time to put partisanship aside and
just do what was right for the American people. That's what I've done
as governor, also, take on my own party, when I had to, and work with
both sides of the aisle, in my cabinet, appointing those who would
serve regardless of party, Democrats, independents, Republicans,
whatever it took to get the job done.
Also,
John McCain's maverick position that he's in, that's really prompt up
to and indicated by the supporters that he has. Look at Lieberman, and
Giuliani, and Romney, and Lingle, and all of us who come from such a
diverse background of -- of policy and of partisanship, all coming
together at this time, recognizing he is the man that we need to leave
-- lead in these next four years, because these are tumultuous times.
We
have got to win the wars. We have got to get our economy back on track.
We have got to not allow the greed and corruption on Wall Street
anymore.
And we
have not got to allow the partisanship that has really been entrenched
in Washington, D.C., no matter who's been in charge. When the
Republicans were in charge, I didn't see a lot of progress there,
either. When the Democrats, either, though, this last go- around for
the last two years.
Change is coming. And John McCain is the leader of that reform.
BIDEN: I'll be very brief. Can I respond to that?
Look,
the maverick -- let's talk about the maverick John McCain is. And,
again, I love him. He's been a maverick on some issues, but he has been
no maverick on the things that matter to people's lives.
He
voted four out of five times for George Bush's budget, which put us a
half a trillion dollars in debt this year and over $3 trillion in debt
since he's got there.
He
has not been a maverick in providing health care for people. He has
voted against -- he voted including another 3.6 million children in
coverage of the existing health care plan, when he voted in the United
States Senate.
He's
not been a maverick when it comes to education. He has not supported
tax cuts and significant changes for people being able to send their
kids to college.
He's
not been a maverick on the war. He's not been a maverick on virtually
anything that genuinely affects the things that people really talk
about around their kitchen table.
Can
we send -- can we get Mom's MRI? Can we send Mary back to school next
semester? We can't -- we can't make it. How are we going to heat the --
heat the house this winter?
He
voted against even providing for what they call LIHEAP, for assistance
to people, with oil prices going through the roof in the winter.
So maverick he is not on the important, critical issues that affect people at that kitchen table.
IFILL:
Final question tonight, before your closing statements, starting with
you, Senator Biden. Can you think of a single issue -- and this is to
cast light for people who are just trying to get to know you in your
final debate, your only debate of this year -- can you think of a
single issue, policy issue, in which you were forced to change a
long-held view in order to accommodate changed circumstances?
BIDEN:
Yes, I can. When I got to the United States Senate and went on the
Judiciary Committee as a young lawyer, I was of the view and had been
trained in the view that the only thing that mattered was whether or
not a nominee appointed, suggested by the president had a judicial
temperament, had not committed a crime of moral turpitude, and was --
had been a good student.
And
it didn't take me long -- it was hard to change, but it didn't take me
long, but it took about five years for me to realize that the ideology
of that judge makes a big difference.
That's
why I led the fight against Judge Bork. Had he been on the court, I
suspect there would be a lot of changes that I don't like and the
American people wouldn't like, including everything from Roe v. Wade to
issues relating to civil rights and civil liberties.
And
so that -- that -- that was one of the intellectual changes that took
place in my career as I got a close look at it. And that's why I was
the first chairman of the Judiciary Committee to forthrightly state
that it matters what your judicial philosophy is. The American people
have a right to understand it and to know it.
But I did change on that, and -- and I'm glad I did.
PALIN:
There have been times where, as mayor and governor, we have passed
budgets that I did not veto and that I think could be considered as
something that I quasi-caved in, if you will, but knowing that it was
the right thing to do in order to progress the agenda for that year and
to work with the legislative body, that body that actually holds the
purse strings.
So
there were times when I wanted to zero-base budget, and to cut taxes
even more, and I didn't have enough support in order to accomplish that.
But
on the major principle things, no, there hasn't been something that
I've had to compromise on, because we've always seemed to find a way to
work together. Up there in Alaska, what we have done is, with
bipartisan efforts, is work together and, again, not caring who gets
the credit for what, as we accomplish things up there.
And
that's been just a part of the operation that I wanted to participate
in. And that's what we're going to do in Washington, D.C., also, bring
in both sides together. John McCain is known for doing that, also, in
order to get the work done for the American people.
IFILL:
Let's come full circle. You both want to bring both sides together. You
both talk about bipartisanship. Once again, we saw what happened this
week in Washington. How do you change the tone, as vice president, as
number-two?
BIDEN:
Well, again, I believe John McCain, were he here -- and this is a
dangerous thing to say in the middle of an election -- but he would
acknowledge what I'm about to say.
I
have been able to work across the aisle on some of the most
controversial issues and change my party's mind, as well as
Republicans', because I learned a lesson from Mike Mansfield.
Mike
Mansfield, a former leader of the Senate, said to me one day -- he -- I
made a criticism of Jesse Helms. He said, "What would you do if I told
you Jesse Helms and Dot Helms had adopted a child who had braces and
was in real need?" I said, "I'd feel like a jerk."
He
said, "Joe, understand one thing. Everyone's sent here for a reason,
because there's something in them that their folks like. Don't question
their motive."
I
have never since that moment in my first year questioned the motive of
another member of the Congress or Senate with whom I've disagreed. I've
questioned their judgment.
I
think that's why I have the respect I have and have been able to work
as well as I've been able to have worked in the United States Senate.
That's the fundamental change Barack Obama and I will be bring to this
party, not questioning other people's motives.
PALIN:
You do what I did as governor, and you appoint people regardless of
party affiliation, Democrats, independents, Republicans. You -- you
walk the walk; you don't just talk the talk.
And
even in my own family, it's a very diverse family. And we have folks of
all political persuasion in there, also, so I've grown up just knowing
that, you know, at the end of the day, as long as we're all working
together for the greater good, it's going to be OK.
But
the policies and the proposals have got to speak for themselves, also.
And, again, voters on November 4th are going to have that choice to
either support a ticket that supports policies that create jobs.
You
do that by lowering taxes on American workers and on our businesses.
And you build up infrastructure, and you rein in government spending,
and you make our -- our nation energy independent.
Or
you support a ticket that supports policies that will kill jobs by
increasing taxes. And that's what the track record shows, is a desire
to increase taxes, increase spending, a trillion-dollar spending
proposal that's on the table. That's going to hurt our country, and
saying no to energy independence. Clear choices on November 4th.
IFILL: Governor Palin, you get the chance to make the first closing statement.
PALIN: Well, again, Gwen, I do want to thank you and the commission. This is such an honor for me.
And
I appreciate, too, Senator Biden, getting to meet you, finally, also,
and getting to debate with you. And I would like more opportunity for
this.
I like
being able to answer these tough questions without the filter, even, of
the mainstream media kind of telling viewers what they've just heard.
I'd rather be able to just speak to the American people like we just
did.
And it's so important that the American people know of the choices that they have on November 4th.
I
want to assure you that John McCain and I, we're going to fight for
America. We're going to fight for the middle-class, average, everyday
American family like mine.
I've
been there. I know what the hurts are. I know what the challenges are.
And, thank God, I know what the joys are, too, of living in America. We
are so blessed. And I've always been proud to be an American. And so
has John McCain.
We have to fight for our freedoms, also, economic and our national security freedoms.
It
was Ronald Reagan who said that freedom is always just one generation
away from extinction. We don't pass it to our children in the
bloodstream; we have to fight for it and protect it, and then hand it
to them so that they shall do the same, or we're going to find
ourselves spending our sunset years telling our children and our
children's children about a time in America, back in the day, when men
and women were free.
We will fight for it, and there is only one man in this race who has really ever fought for you, and that's Senator John McCain.
IFILL: Thank you, Governor. Senator Biden.
BIDEN: Gwen, thank you for doing this, and the commission, and Governor, it really was a pleasure getting to meet you.
Look,
folks, this is the most important election you've ever voted in your
entire life. No one can deny that the last eight years, we've been dug
into a very deep hole here at home with regard to our economy, and
abroad in terms of our credibility. And there's a need for fundamental
change in our economic philosophy, as well as our foreign policy.
And
Barack Obama and I don't measure progress toward that change based on
whether or not we cut more regulations and how well CEOs are doing, or
giving another $4 billion in tax breaks to the Exxon Mobils of the
world.
We measure
progress in America based on whether or not someone can pay their
mortgage, whether or not they can send their kid to college, whether or
not they're able to, when they send their child, like we have abroad --
or I'm about to, abroad -- and John has as well, I might add -- to
fight, that they are the best equipped and they have everything they
need. And when they come home, they're guaranteed that they have the
best health care and the best education possible.
You
know, in the neighborhood I grew up in, it was all about dignity and
respect. A neighborhood like most of you grew up in. And in that
neighborhood, it was filled with women and men, mothers and fathers who
taught their children if they believed in themselves, if they were
honest, if they worked hard, if they loved their country, they could
accomplish anything. We believed it, and we did.
That's why Barack Obama and I are running, to re-establish that certitude in our neighborhoods.
Ladies and gentlemen, my dad used to have an expression. He'd say, "champ, when you get knocked down, get up."
Well,
it's time for America to get up together. America's ready, you're
ready, I'm ready, and Barack Obama is ready to be the next president of
the United States of America.
May God bless all of you, and most of all, for both of us, selfishly, may God protect our troops.
IFILL:
That ends tonight's debate. We want to thank the folks here at
Washington University in St. Louis, and the Commission on Presidential
Debates.
There
are two more debates to come. Next Tuesday, October 7th, with Tom
Brokaw at Belmont University in Nashville, and on October 15th at
Hofstra University in New York, with Bob Schieffer.
Thank you, Governor Palin and Senator Biden. Good night, everybody.