Joe Biden And The Palin Paradox

Sarah Palin has been hammered by her critics for her apparently inept performances during her interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric. I'll concede, perhaps solely for the sake of argument, that Gov. Palin has been, at times, less than stellar, at least in the finer points of national statesmanship. I'll admit, too, that some people are comfortable with her having a steep learning curve; some folks are especially comfortable with that curve knowing that it appears, in many ways, to be less steep than Barack Obama's.

But a giant white donkey and white elephant are in the room, and nary a Democrat can see them. One beast is Joe Biden. The other is the Palin Paradox.

Without question, the veteran of the fabulous foursome vying for the White House -- Joe Biden -- should be the most competent of the bunch. He should be, at the very least, the person least prone to gaffes and missteps: Having served in the Senate for 35 years, he should of all people know the power, specifically the negative or adverse power, of a gaffe.

But on Monday of this past week, Mr. Biden blundered his way to denouncing his own running mate in something of a confessional to Katie Couric. Just watch for yourself (I've posted this before, but I can't get enough of it):




That Sen. Biden admits his own campaign's attack ad on John McCain is "terrible" is amazing in what it reveals: a sharply divided house. But what's the outcome of Sen. Biden's confession? Sen. Biden was reportedly scolded by the Obama campaign and thus later backpedaled on the severity of the unarguably grotesque ad to which Ms. Couric referred. Ouch!

Again, this same week, the inimitable senior senator from Delaware criticized President Bush's handling of the current (and alleged) financial crisis:

"When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"

Attentive history buffs immediately corrected Sen. Biden, pointing out that Herbert Hoover was president when the stock market crashed and that TV was not even yet commercially available as a medium for mass communication. Ouch!

At a recent campaign stop Mr. Biden was asked a question by a woman who stood behind a cordon; she was curious about whether the Obama-Biden ticket supported "clean coal" technology. Here's a report about his reply and its relation to the facts on the ground, so to speak:

[Biden's] response was, “We are not supporting clean coal… no coal plants here in America. Build them, if they're going to build them, over there (China).” But here's what Obama said at the Democratic National Convention: “As president, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology and find ways to safely harness nuclear power.”

Ouch!

And then there's this report about Sen. Biden's thoughts on bailing out financial insurance institutions:

Biden also told the Today Show that he was against the AIG bail out when it was first announced, even though he is now for it. That didn't fit well with the Obama campaign’s attack on John McCain for the same flip-flop. Obama told Matt Lauer, "I think Joe should have waited, (to voice his opposition to the bailout) as well."

Of course, the list goes on ... and on.

Apparently there isn't a Democrat of note, or even a major news outlet, that has shown any interest whether Sen. Biden has the slightest understanding of the "Obama Doctrine," or even the Obama objective. Sarah Palin, by comparison, has been reviled by her critics for failing to handle Charlie Gibson's inane question about the elusive "Bush Doctrine," or her seemingly naïve defense of her foreign policy creds given during her interview with Katie Couric. But both queries by both interviewers were quite lame, even sophomoric: they were lame and sophomoric because they were intended to blind-side a governor of a state, to make her falter and look foolish, despite such questions' dubious relevance to her currently emerging role. Amazingly, a SENIOR Democratic senator, one of the most senior of ALL senators, is given a pass when he blows easy and plain questions, or even when he blatantly rebukes his own running mate's anti-McCain ads, or contradicts the policy positions of that same running mate. Joe Biden clearly fails NOT in his understanding about foreign policy. He simply fails to get his own campaign correct. He's somehow fit for office while Sarah Palin is not because she can't answer questions that are indeed arcane and difficult. Joe Biden can actually talk like a fool and win support; while Sarah Palin, who has not made a single comparable blunder to any of the aforementioned Joe Biden gaffes, can actually talk rather plainly and yet is deemed a fool for doing so.

Curiously, Sarah Palin is rejected by Democrats offhand as unsuitable for the vice presidency; being "one heartbeat away," she is not ready to step in as president should the need arise. However, Joe Biden's bid to be president was overwhelmingly rejected by his own party -- HIS OWN PARTY, not his antagonists' party -- and he was even rejected TWICE; but overnight he is apparently more than ready to be president should the need arise in an Obama presidency. Joe Biden's party did not want him to have ANY heartbeats IN the Oval Office; but they think a man who blunders the simplest questions and talking points is now more than capable to sit just "one heartbeat away." Amazing. And ouch.

All this amounts to the paradox -- the true Palin Paradox -- given us by the media and partisans utterly devoted to all things Obama. It is a paradox, and it is disingenuous to pretend that it is not, or that it is in any way enlightened.

©2008. All Rights Reserved.