Grrr. Need help.

[AspenRose]

My husband (who is on travel right now) called and said he watched the debate last night. He said he thought Biden was lying about what Obama had said about meeting Ahmadinejad. He said that Biden had said that Obama had no plans to meet with him, when in fact he had said in the past that he would be meeting with him.

He also said he thought he flubbed up his answer about the Constitution and what the vice president's responsibility is.

Could someone please give me the 411 straight-up? I don't take kindly to having someone accuse another of lying without knowing all the facts.

Here's part of the transcript about what he's talking about.

PALIN: 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.

IFILL: Senator?

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.

[Muttocracy]

1. for vice pres:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States."

In practice Senators take turns presiding over the Senate. I don't think we've seen Cheney there except for a tie-break vote or at State of the Union.

Amendment 25 covers modern rules of succession.

[Muttocracy]

2. as for meeting with leaders of other nations...

I'm having trouble finding the article that I've read that explains it, but the difference may be that Obama is advocating that his administration talk to another country's administration - not necessarily president to president, but sending lower-level diplomats on each side, as Bush finally did with Iran (after calling that appeasement).

Will try to find you something better, or I bet someone in GDP could answer fast.

[Muttocracy]

3. Also, FactCheck.org is nonpartisan and their analysis of the VP debate

doesn't condemn Biden on either of those topics.

[jillan]

4. check your pm.

[AspenRose]

5. Thank you everyone

If nothing else this keeps me on my toes :-)

[Jennicut]

6. Only thing he flubbed was citing article I instead of article II in the constitution

But that is a small point and just a verbal mix up. Does Palin even know any amendment or article in the Constitution at all?

[Debi]

7. You realize that there are more than two syllables in both those words don'tcha?

:banghead: