I thought Ifill was terrible.

***

Indeed! A candidate for vice-president tells you she won't answer your questions as moderator, and you let THAT PASS...??!??!

It was 90 minutes of softballs, to both candidates.

Michael:

How'd a law professor feel about Palin's view of the "job description" of vice president?

Question for you Scott, you say you are a democrat  I would assume you like the democratic platform, what issues does Barack go against, that make you so upset that you would go to McCain/Palin ticket?

Jodi, I did a really long post a while ago in this thread answering exactly that.

I'm a moderate Democrat.  For fiscal, foreign and national security issues I'm conservative.  For social issues I'm liberal.  In normal times I vote toward the social issues.  In the current global climate the things I'm conservative about are more important to me.

If Obama's stance on fiscal, foreign and national security issues was the same as McCain's, I'd have voted for Obama in a heartbeat.

In Florida’s Economic Pain, Obama Gains Ground

I liked both the VPs better than Obama and McCain.

I do not think I would like either Obama or McCain in person.

I think both Biden and Palin are playing roles they would rather not be doing.

I get the impression that both Biden and Palin would rise beyond their respective critics' expectations if they were made President.

How'd a law professor feel about Palin's view of the "job description" of vice president?

****

Very uncomfortable, Geoff, because it's pretty clearly unconstitutional.

Characterizing the Vice President as a legislative officer opens a huge legal can of worms.

All executive power is constitutionally vested in the President -- completely. There is no residuum for the Vice President or any other person. The Vice President's only constitutional duties are to preside over the Senate and to become President if the current President dies or leaves office. The Vice President executes no laws and is not part of the President's administration the way that other officials are. The Vice President cannot be fired by the President; as an independently elected officeholder, he can be removed only by Congress via impeachment.

What staff, office, and perquisites the Vice President enjoyed had originally come via the Senate; it was not until Spiro Agnew mounted a legislative push that the Vice President got his own budget line. Traditionally, Vice Presidents had not done much, which is why the position was famously characterized by Vice President John Nance Garner as not worth "a pitcher of warm spit.” That changed when Jimmy Carter gave Walter Mondale an unusual degree of responsibility, a move replicated in subsequent administrations, particularly under Clinton/Gore and Bush/Cheney.

But whatever executive power a Vice President exercises is exercised because it is delegated by the President, not because the Vice President possesses any executive power already. Constitutionally speaking, the Vice President is not a junior or co-President, but merely a President-in-waiting, notwithstanding recent political trends otherwise. To the extent the President delegates actual power and does not simply accept recommendations for action, the Vice President is exercising executive authority delegated by the President while being immune to removal from office by the President, unlike everyone else who exercises delegated power. All the President can do is withdraw delegation of powers and order everybody else not to listen to the Vice President.

In any event, the President is not allowed to delegate executive power to a legislative official, as that would be a separation of powers violation. This is where the claim that Cheney is really a legislative official creates problems for the White House.

This question has produced no case law, and may never, as it may pose a very difficult “political question” or incur standing problems that render it not amenable to judicial review. But any potential challenge to the delegation of executive power to the Vice President poses some serious problems if the Vice President is characterized as a legislative official. In general, the delegation of executive power to legislative officials violates the constitutional separation of powers.

In Bowsher v. Synar, the leading case on the subject, the Supreme Court found that the separation of powers prohibits vesting of executive powers in an official subject to control by Congress and who is not removable by the President. If this is the case, then the case for vesting executive powers in the Vice President--who is a legislative official himself, and also not removable by the President--is decidedly weak. Indeed, this arrangement seems perilously close to permitting “Congress to execute the laws,” which is plainly out of bounds. Thus, if the Vice President is a legislative official, as Cheney's office argued, it would seem that his expansive role in the Bush Administration is unconstitutional.

Nonetheless, a Supreme Court decision addressing this question is unlikely any time soon. There are no cases in the pipeline, and it is not clear who would bring such an action. But litigation before the Supreme Court is not the only avenue for addressing the arrangement. Congress is vested, under Article I, Section 8, with the power “[t]o make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” Congress can protect the separation of powers, and the viability of Vice Presidents as backup presidents, by employing this constitutional power to prohibit the Vice President from exercising any executive functions.

If Obama's stance on fiscal, foreign and national security issues was the same as McCain's, I'd have voted for Obama in a heartbeat.

**********

Yeah Jodi, Obama's a socialist. Scott read it somewhere. And no you never said how you agree with McCain on those issues. Still waiting for that answer.

Nice try William, but when you say, "She's not at the debate to spout McCain's positions; she's there to tell us her own" then the Biden has to be held to the same standard.   If that's what Palin is supposed to do then the same should be expected of Biden.  Period

***********

And Biden did just that. But once again you miss the point. The McCain team tried to have the rules of the debate changed to benefit her lack of knowledge. I never made the ststement above, Tom French did. But I agree with it 100%. I want to know where the person who is next in line for president stands on every issue. I don't give a shit where McCain stands. That's what his debates are for. So I ask again where does she stand and do you even care?

And just because Obama can organize some community events doesn't make him competent to be President.  He has no more qualifications that Palin does.  It's sad when the VP on the ticket is more qualified for the job than the head of the ticket.

************

But after McCain spent months lambasting Obama's lack of experience, to pick someone with even less shows just how bad his judgement is. The fact you don't see that as problem is mind boggling.

But after McCain spent months lambasting Obama's lack of experience, to pick someone with even less shows just how bad his judgement is. The fact you don't see that as problem is mind boggling.

The fact that you say Palin has even less experience than Obama is what's mind boggling.  While Palin only has a little executive experience Obama has none.