I know I said I would lay off the politics... sod that.
The VP debate was pretty nonsensical. They rarely, if ever stuck to the issues and wasted a lot of time throwing around figures and describing legislation that (I hope) everyone knows cannot be explained or understood in 90 seconds or less. I lost interest but was really put off by Edwards' response to the Israel/Palestine Issue. He didn't even make an attempt to appear balanced. It was all about Israel's defense and then a story about how a restaurant was bombed near to the hotel he had stayed in, but was not staying in at the time. I don't think Cheney said anything at all aside from the fact that Bush acknowledged a two-state plan. I'm not sure who was worse on this. Predictably, I have strong feelings on the issue and was looking forward to hearing something of substance but I see now that that was just dreaming.
I think Cheney did better in his demeanor and delivery than Edwards, and would even be impressed if he wasn't such a dirty old crook. Edwards, I think, would do well to stay quiet and just nod and smile. I missed the very beginning, but was there something in the rules about the norms of integrity and logic being suspended for each candidate's speaking time?
These two, in their constant manipulation of numbers and interpretations and in their invariable challenges on credibility, left me with the conclusion that I can't expect to hear anything solid from either.
The only thing about this debate that I found of value was the fact that it kept me distracted long enough to run 6 miles in just about 50 minutes.