Transcript of Palin, Biden debate

From: www.cnn.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The vice presidential candidates, Democratic Sen. Joe Biden and Republican Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, are debating in St. Louis, Missouri, Thursday night. Gwen Ifill of PBS is the debate moderator. Here is a transcript of that debate, which is still going on:

Sen. Joe Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin debate the issues Thursday night.

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, Gov. 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 Gov. Palin and Sen. Biden.
PALIN: Nice to meet you.
BIDEN: It's a pleasure.
PALIN: Hey, can I call you Joe?
BIDEN: (OFF-MIKE)
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 Sen. Biden, with a 90-second follow-up from Gov. 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, Sen. 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 Gov. Palin and me and Sen. 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.
Gov. 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 and Freddie Mac 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.
Sen. 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: Gov. 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...
... 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, Gov. 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.
IFILL: Senator?
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 Sen. 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 Sen. 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.
IFILL: Senator?
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. Sen. 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, Gov. 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, Sen. 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.
IFILL: Governor?
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 Sen. 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 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... 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, Sen. 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.
IFILL: Governor?
BIDEN: That's what I'm talking about.
IFILL: Governor?
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.
Sen. 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, 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.
IFILL: Senator?
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.
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, Gov. 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: Sen. Biden, you voted for this bankruptcy bill. Sen. 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 Gov. Palin.
IFILL: Gov. 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 -- Gov. 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, Sen. McCain has said he supports caps on carbon emissions. Sen. 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 Gov. Palin.
PALIN: Yes, Sen. 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 Sen. 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 Sen. 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?
PALIN: I do. I do.
IFILL: OK. And on the clean coal issue?
BIDEN: Absolutely. Absolutely we do. We call for setting hard targets, number one...
IFILL: Clean coal.
BIDEN: Oh, I'm sorry.
IFILL: On clean coal.
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, Sen. 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.
IFILL: You both have sons who are in Iraq or on their way to Iraq. You, Gov. 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, Sen. 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 pre-surge 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.
IFILL: Senator?
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.
IFILL: Governor?
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.
IFILL: Senator Biden?
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 actually 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.
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.
IFILL: Governor, you mentioned Israel and your support for Israel.
PALIN: Yes.
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.
IFILL: Senator?
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?
IFILL: Certainly.
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.
IFILL: Governor?
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.
IFILL: Senator.
PALIN: 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.
IFILL: Governor.
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.
IFILL: Governor.
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, D.C.

Commentary: 10 rules for winning a debate

From: http://www.cnn.com/

By: Paul Begala

To win, keep the message simple and don't get lost in details
Use humor to help make your key points
Candidates should create a moment that will be captured on video, he says
Confident candidates who trust their instincts will do well

Editor's note: Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 and was counselor to Clinton in the White House. Begala is not a paid political consultant for any politicians or candidates. His new book is "Third Term: Why George W. Bush Loves John McCain."

Paul Begala says he's played a behind-the-scenes role in most of the presidential debates of the past 20 years.

(CNN) -- I have been involved in most of the presidential and vice presidential debates over the past 20 years.
I've done debate prep, been a spin doctor, convened the greatest comedy writers in Hollywood in a one-liner factory, even played George W. Bush for Al Gore's practice debates.
So now that I'm merely observing the debates as a CNN political analyst, I thought I'd offer our readers and the candidates my Top 10 rules for debates:

1. Debates are easy. It's a dirty little secret, but for all the hype, debates are easier than news conferences, town-hall meetings or in-depth, one-on-one interviews on Sunday morning television. You hit your mark, you deliver your lines, you try not to pass out or throw up, then you declare victory. So relax, candidates, you might even have fun.

2. 20 questions, 20 answers, one message. This is not "Jeopardy," where you're at the mercy of the topics Alex Trebek (or in this case, Jim Lehrer, Gwen Ifill, Tom Brokaw and Charlie Gibson) select. There is really only one question in an election: Why should we vote for you and not the other candidate?
Your answer to that question -- your basic message -- should be marbled throughout your substantive answer on everything from Waziristan to Social Security. John McCain's basic message, it seems to me, is, "I'm experienced, Obama's too risky." Barack Obama's, on other hand, is, "I'm for change, McCain is more of the same."
Each answer to each question should be a variation on that theme. A good debater introduces or ends lots of answers with "That's another example of why we need change... (or experience, or whatever it is he or she is running on) ..."

3. Familiarity matters. The best debate preps are like SAT courses; they focus on test familiarity more than substantive details. Familiarity brings comfort. Comfort breeds confidence. Confidence delivers victory. In 1992, we Clintonites were so eager to make our man comfortable in the town-hall debate in Richmond, Virginia, that we brought the stools we'd used for debate prep to the debate site.
Then someone -- and I'm not ratting anyone out here -- replaced the "official" stools at the debate site with the ones we'd been practicing with. We wanted Gov. Bill Clinton to be completely at ease in his surroundings, right down to his butt.

4. Don't cram. If your debate prep is dominated by propeller-heads, you're in trouble. I love the nerds, Lord knows, but they can overwhelm you. In 1984, the brilliant Richard Darman overloaded Ronald Reagan with minutiae, perhaps in an effort to dispel rumors that the Gipper had lost a step.
The strategy blew up in the Reagan campaign's face. In his first debate with Walter Mondale, Reagan stumbled and stammered. There was too much new information clanging around in his brain. But by the second debate, he blew away concerns about his age. He did this not with a rapid-fire recitation of statistics, but with a classic Reagan quip: "I will not use my opponent's youth and inexperience as an issue in this campaign." Which leads me to my next rule:

5. Wit is sticky. John Kerry bested George W. Bush in all of their debates, according to the polls. And yet voters were left without any take-home point. That's because Kerry not only lacked a clear, coherent message (see No. 1 above), he didn't use humor. In fact, I was told that one of his aides later bragged that Kerry had refused to use any of the "cute lines" my Hollywood writers had sent his way -- as if being witty were beneath him.
The most memorable lines are often the funniest. Think of jug-eared Ross Perot crowing, "If you have a better plan ... I'm all ears." Or former POW McCain saying of a plan to build a museum at the site of the Woodstock concert, "I'm sure it was a cultural and pharmacological event. But I could not attend. I was tied up at the time." Chris Rock recently told Larry King that people only laugh at a line if they see some truth in it. Smart candidates ought to heed Rock's observation.

6. The camera is always on. So, by the way, is the microphone. Al Gore had been promised that there would be no reaction shots in his first debate with George W. Bush. That, of course, was wrong. So, while Gore trounced Bush on the issues, the post-debate cut-and-paste jobs caught Gore sighing repeatedly and rolling his eyes endlessly.
Gore was in fact frustrated, perhaps understandably so. But never let 'em see you sweat -- or sigh. No matter what they tell you, the camera (and the microphone) is always on.
One of the most important skills for a debater is knowing what to do when the other candidate is attacking you. Poor Dan Quayle had his famous deer-in-the-headlights moment when Lloyd Bentsen skewered him ("Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.") But Obama was better coached.Every time McCain launched a broadside, Obama would shake his head slowly, paint a half-smile on his face, look down and jot a note. It doesn't matter what he was writing. It could have been gift ideas for his daughter's birthday. But he did not glare angrily or stare blankly.

7. Create a moment. The voters who will decide the election are unlikely to be watching the debate in its entirety. Instead, they will see brief clips repeated frequently. The job of a debater is to force his or her way into one of those clips by creating a moment. The easiest way to do this is by a direct address: "John, you said we would be greeted as liberators. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong."
They say actors have a hard time knowing what to do with their hands. For debaters, the challenge is what to do with their eyes. The best debaters -- Reagan, Clinton -- spent much of their time creating moments by either fixing their eyes on their opponent when launching a barb or looking directly into the camera. In the first debate, McCain rarely if ever engaged either Obama or the audience with his eyes, preferring instead to direct all his remarks to moderator Jim Lehrer. You can bet his team will correct that mistake by the second debate.

8. Don't be a lawyer. I am burdened with a legal education, as are Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Civilians think lawyers are good debaters. Wrong. They're often effective advocates, but the structure of a legal argument is often this: facts, reasoning, supporting evidence, conclusion. A political debater must start with the conclusion, then follow up with reasoning and facts and analysis.
Compare McCain's strong performance at Pastor Rick Warren's Saddleback Civil Form with Obama's thoughtful, but meandering, answers. It was McCain's best moment of the campaign thus far.But by the time the first debate rolled around, Obama had in part stifled his inner law professor. Still, his habit of conceding a small point to make a larger one, ("Senator McCain is right when he says we need earmark reform, but ...") while effective in a classroom or a courtroom, was taken out of context and caricatured as weakness. Look for Obama to start more sentences with "Senator McCain is wrong, and here's why ... " or "Senator McCain just doesn't get it, because ... "

9. Small people make small points. Both Obama and McCain got lost in the weeds in the first debate over whether Henry Kissinger supports presidential negotiations with Iran. With all due respect to Dr. Kissinger, who the heck cares?McCain should have gone to his larger message: "This is just another example of how dangerous and risky Senator Obama's lack of experience is." And Obama should have gone to his: "The failed, old status quo of Bush and McCain has only strengthened Iran. I want a tougher, smarter, new approach."
When Bob Dole was hammering Bill Clinton on what Clinton thought were cheap attacks in their 1996 debate in San Diego, California, Clinton went big, winning the debate not by responding, but by going to his larger message. "I could respond in kind," he lectured Dole, "but a political attack never created a single job, a negative ad never educated a child, a cheap shot never comforted a senior citizen or cleaned up a toxic waste site ..." Clinton went big and he won big.

10. Debates are more often lost than won. When Gerald Ford told Jimmy Carter that Eastern Europe was not under Soviet domination in 1976, it might have cost him the election. Candidates can be certain that any mistake will be played -- and overplayed -- in the media. How do you avoid gaffes? Well, by observing points 1 through 9 above. But even more than that, I believe self-confidence is the best defense mechanism.
I coach Little League. The best way to ensure that a kid strikes out is to tell him as he walks up to the plate, "Don't strike out, Charlie. Whatever you do, don't strike out." Politicians are a lot like Little Leaguers (although I don't think I'd trust them with aluminum bats). They crave confidence. And the more confident they are, the better they're likely to do.
Before every debate, the last thing I'd whisper in Bill Clinton's ear before he walked on stage was, "Trust your instincts. They're the best I've ever seen. If something pops into your head, say it." Of course, it helps if your candidate truly is the best you've ever seen -- as Clinton was.

Blogger comment:

Simply brilliant, the simple you are the great you looked at. You give simple lines and you put complicated facts in few sentences. Demonstrate the way you think and approach problems by getting all the knowledge necessary, experts, various points of views and making consensus. Many times it can be better than a definitive answer to one problem. If you have definite answers that people need to know now and you are very unlikely need to change in the future you can stick to that particularly if you are able to debate it decisively from all angels. People will be choosing you not for a single factor as knowledge, wisdom, being smart, making decisions, knowing consequences....and so forth but all of them which is simply called judgement.

Once you ruled with sound judgement you make your decisions. They can change according to new added knowledge and circumstances. Rigidity and upholding fixed decisions can be dangerous. Principals are fixed but decisions can be changeable. You can be reluctant to make decision A at a point of time, however when new circumstances happen you may be able to make decision A in this new point of time. Once decisions promised, became laws or affidavits it is difficult to change so be sure before you finalize your decision.

Prophet Musa (Moses) (PBUH)

From: www.itsislam.net

The Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him) and his family settled in Egypt. They were called the Israelites. Gradually they increased in number and gained considerable power. These Israelites did not intermingle with other native people. They remained isolated and were considered as foreigners in Egypt.

Cruel Act of Pharaoh in respect of Israelites
At that time Egypt was ruled by the king Fir'aun (Pharaoh). He was arrogant, tyrant and powerful. He thought himself to be god. In their kingdom the people led miserable lives. They were forced to work as slaves. They were chained and whipped if they refused to work. The Israelites were looked down upon in that society. They suffered badly due to destitution and indigence. Some of them grew weak and died of starvation.
When Pharaoh noticed that the Israelites were increasing in number, he was much alarmed. He held discussions with his counselors on this topic. They decided that Israelites should be snubbed. They should not be allowed to become powerful and supreme in the land. They planned to oppress and persecute them in different ways. Pharaoh ordered that all male children born in the families of the Israelites should be put to death. This tyrannical act of Pharaoh against the Israelites has been described in the following Verses of the Holy Quran:
"Surely Fir'aun exalted himself in the land and divided its people into parties, oppressing one party from among them by killing their sons and sparing their women. Surely he was one of the mischief-makers." (Surah 28: Verse 3-5)
When the people heard those terrible orders they were much upset. The soldiers started complying with the orders of their king. Whenever they got wind of the male baby born to any family, they would yank him out of his mother's arms. They did not care for the feelings of the crying mothers. They used to throw the infants mercilessly into the river. It was an awful act of cruelty but no one dared to disobey the orders of Pharaoh because every one was much scared of him. Many innocent babies were drowned in this way and numerous unfortunate parents expressed lamentations over the death of their dear ones.

The Prophet Musa (Moses) Enclosed into Chest and Cast into the River
In that era one of the Israelite woman gave birth to a male baby who was extremely beautiful. The mother thought that the soldiers of Pharaoh would soon find him out. They would throw him to the fish in the river. God revealed to her to be patient and not to be frightened. She was communicated the glad-tidings that her son would become an Apostle. The newly born baby was named Musa (Moses). He was very attractive. His mother fed and concealed him for a few months. When she was unable to hide him any longer, God guided her saying:
"And We revealed to Musa's mother saying: Give him suck. When you fear for him, cast him into the river and do not fear nor grieve, surely We will restore him to you and make him one of the apostles." (Surah 28: Verse 7)
The same direction is expressed in other Verses:
"Call to mind the occasion when We revealed to your mother: Put him into the chest and cast it down into the river, then the river shall throw him on the shore; then shall take him up to one who is an enemy to Me and enemy to him and I cast down upon you love From Me and that you may be brought up before My eyes." (Surah 20: Verses 38-39)
When the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) had attained the age of a few months, his mother got made a very tight box. She put a blanket in the box. She lifted her affectionate son and kissed him again and again. She put him in the box with tears in her eyes. Her heart was beating violently. She pushed the box into the water when it was still dark. The box moved slowly on the surface of the water. His sister watched the box at a distance but the mother went back home wailing and sobbing. She was full of anxiety due to the separation of her beloved baby.
The Prophet Musa's sister was hiding from place to place along the shore of the river. She was constantly watching the box and praying for the safety of her brother. The box went on moving and gradually came near the shore. Some People were washing their clothes at the shore. By chance they saw the box floating slowly. They waded through the water and picked up the box. They were greatly surprised to see a beautiful infant enclosed in the box. He had a smiling countenance.

The Prophet Musa Grows up in Pharaoh's House
The people took the box to Pharaoh and his family. All of them were full of excitement. The Prophet Musa's sister followed them but no one recognized her. The wife of Pharaoh fell in love with the baby. She decided to make him her own son:
"And Fir'auns wife said: Joy of the eye to me and to you, do not slay him, may be he will be useful to us or we may take him for a son. But they knew not what they did.'' (Surah 28: Verse 10)
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) became awfully hungry. He began to cry out of hunger. The baby was handed over to a woman who was appointed to nurse him. He did not take her breast and kept on weeping. Every one was in a fix what to do. The sister of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) who was standing near remarked: May I bring a woman whom the baby requires?
She was directed to go immediately and call her. She rushed towards her house and informed her mother of the whole situation. She requested her mother to accompany her to Pharaoh's house. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was still crying due to hunger. The mother gave him her breast. He was much pleased and drank milk to his heart's content. Pharaoh's wife requested the mother of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to stay with them and nurse him. The Holy Quran states:
"So We restored him to his mother that her eyes might be refreshed and that she might not grieve and that she might know that the promise of Allah is true but most of them do not know." (Surah 28: Verse 13)
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was brought up in Pharaoh's house like a prince. His mother was taking care of him and he was the apple of her eye. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) learnt a great deal about Pharaoh and his indecent ways of life. He came to know about his cruel treatment towards Israelites. Although he led a luxurious life yet deep inside his heart he had pains.

An Egyptian is Killed by Prophet Musa
One day he saw an Israelite fighting hard with one of the men of the King. They were shouting and hitting each other. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) appeared on the scene. He tried to pacify them. When he saw that the Egyptian was not going to spare him in spite of several requests, he lifted up his stick and hit the man of the King. The man became dizzy and fell to the ground with a bang. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and his companions stepped forward to support the man but he was limp like a rag. Soon after he passed away.
Prophet Musa Repents
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) felt sorry for what had happened. It was an accidental and not intentional act. One blow of the stick is quite insufficient to cause the death of a person. His head was twirling. He called his action as a devil's doing who misled human beings. He realized his mistake and prayed for Divine protection. The Holy Quran states:
"He found therein two men fighting, one being of his party and the other of his foes and he who was of his party cried out to him for help against him who was of his enemies. Musa struck him with his fist and dispatched him. He said: This is of the devil's doing; surely he is an open enemy leading astray. He said: My Lord: Surely l have done harm to myself, so, You should protect me." (Surah 18: Verse 18)

Prophet Musa's Migration and Marriage
Soon the news of the murder of a man spread far and wide. The people flew into a rage. They hatched a plan to kill the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). He became scared and was directed to migrate to another place. The Holy Quran states:
"A man came running from the remotest part of the City. He said: 0' Musa Surely the Chiefs are consulting together to slay you. Therefore, be gone at once. Surely I counsel you as a friend." (Surah 28: Verse 19)
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) packed up his luggage and left Pharaoh's house in the pitch dark when every one was enjoying a sound sleep. He reached Madian after a long tiresome journey. He sat down to take rest near a watering place.
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) saw two young girls waiting at a distance. Their sheep were standing near the spring for drinking water. The Prophet Musa (peace he upon him) thought that the girls needed some help. Although he was tired and hungry yet he wished to help them. He went up to the girls and asked if they needed help. The girls were modest and bashful. They said that they were waiting so that the shepherds might go away.
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) drove the sheep to the spring to drink water. It was a kind act of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). The girls expressed a deep sense of gratitude for this favor. They took their sheep and proceeded towards their house. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) went back to rest. He became depressed and prayed to Almighty Allah to help him. In the meanwhile two women came to him and said:
"My father invites you so that he may give you the reward of your having watered for us." (Surah 28: Verse 24)
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) accompanied them. When be entered the house, he introduced himself politely; Soon after he dined with the members of the family. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was asked to stay with them. The time passed on happily. One day the master of the house said:
"I desire to marry one of these two daughters of mine to you on the condition that you should serve me for eight years but if you complete ten, it will be of your own free will, and I do not wish to be hard on you. If Allah pleases, you will find me one of good. He said: This will be an agreement between you and me. whichever of the two terms I fulfill, there shall be no wrong doing to me and Allah is a witness of what we say." (Surah 28: Verses 27-28)
According to the agreement Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) got married to one of the girls of that family. He took care of the farm and the sheep efficiently. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) had been away from his family for many years. He missed his kith and kin. One day he set out on a journey from Madian. His family accompanied him.

The Call of Prophet Musa to Prophethood
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) crossed the sandy desert and reached the mountain, Tur. He perceived a brilliant light from a distance. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) thought that to be fire land reached near it to warm himself. All of a sudden a voice was-heard from the right side of the Valley. It uttered:
"Surely. I am your Lord: so put off your shoes because you are in the sacred Valley which is blessed twice I have chosen you; so hearken to what shall be revealed: Verily, I am Allah, there is no god but I, therefore serve-Me-and keep up prayers for My remembrance." (Surah 10: Verse 22)
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was puzzled and scared. The thing which looked like fire was not fire in the real sense of the word but it was the reflection of the glory of God. It was a moment of great honor for the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him).

Some Miracles of Prophet Musa
God commanded Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to throw the stick that was in his hand on the ground. He threw the stick in compliance with the orders. To his surprise he saw the stick moving like a long wiggling snake and it greatly scared him. He thought that it was going to bite him. God directed the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) not to lose courage and pick up the snake. He obeyed and caught hold of the terrible looking snake. When he touched it, it was restored to its former shape. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was much amazed to see those happenings.
Soon afterwards God ordered the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to thrust his hand into his armpit. He did so. When he took out his hand, it was shining white when he put his hand back into his armpit and pulled it out it had been changed into its normal position.
Allah, the Almighty made the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to perform those miracles so that he might feel better and become sure of the existence of Allah and His power. He was going to derive benefits out of such miracles in future.

The Prophet Musa Settles in Egypt Again
Allah commanded the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to go to Egypt to deliver the Israelites from Pharaoh and reform his depraved people. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was not good at arguing. He had an impediment in his tongue to speak freely. He sought permission from Allah to take his brother Prophet Harun with him as an aider because he was an eloquent speaker. The permission was immediately granted.

The Prophet Musa Argues with Pharaoh
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) settled with his family in Egypt. They went to Pharaoh to argue with him. They conveyed him the message of Allah but he made fun of them. He did not lose heart and kept on preaching. The king and his people were not convinced. Finally in desperation, the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) said: O' King! Do you like me to show you that my message is true?
He replied in affirmative with an unbelieving smile on his face. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) threw his stick on the ground and it changed its shape as a terrible looking snake. The people were wonder-struck and got scared of it. When the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) picked it up, it became a stick again. Every one was much amazed.
Then the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) put his hand in his armpit. When he got it out, his hand was shining brilliantly. The Holy Quran states:
"Then he threw down his staff and lo! it was an obvious serpent. And he drew forth his hand and lo! it appeared white to the beholders." (Surah 26: Verse 32)

The Prophet Musa Contests with Magicians
The Chiefs said that the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was an enchanter. He intended to turn the minds of the people. Pharaoh was much worried. He feared lest people should begin to follow him. He fixed a special day for contest between the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and other magicians. He sent collectors in various parts of the country to bring enchanters to hold competition and prevail upon the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). He promised to reward the winners.
On the appointed day thousands of people gathered there. There was a great deal of excitement. Every one was eager to see the performances of the magicians of the king and the miracles of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). First of all the royal magicians threw their sticks. They moved and looked like snakes from a distance. They deceived the eyes of the people and frightened them. The people were much surprised. They appreciated the magicians for their astonishing performances.
Soon after the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) cast his stick. The stick became a hungry serpent by the order of Allah. It wiggled and moved like a dart. It devoured every moving stick that the magician had thrown. The spectators were much impressed. Some of the priests thought that such miracles could be done only by the order of Allah. Most of the magicians drew back humiliated and prostrated themselves adoring. They said: We believe in the Lord of the Worlds; the Lord of Prophet Musa and Prophet Harun (peace be upon them).
On seeing this state of affairs Pharaoh was much worried. He became mad with rage because his men were inclined to follow the Prophet Musa peace be upon him) and adopt his new religion. He threatened them of dire consequences. He said:
"I shall certainly cut off your hands and your feet on opposite side, then I will crucify you altogether. (Surah 7: Verse 124)

Persecution of Prophet Musa slid his followers
Pharaoh and his men began to persecute the followers of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). The Israelites remained patient. They began to worship and glorify God in their homes. They kept praying to God. They said:
"O' Our Lord! Make us not subject to persecution of the unjust people, and deliver us by Your mercy from the unbelieving people." (Surah 20: Verse 86)
When the Israelites were under the burden of hardships and sufferings, Allah ordered the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to leave the area with his followers. He promised to save them. In compliance with the Commandment of Allah the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) directed his people to migrate secretly to another place.

The Prophet Musa Leaves Egypt
When it was dark, a scanty band of the Israelites left Egypt. They took all precautionary measures to escape from the eye-sight of the guards. They moved as fast as they could with firm conviction that they would he saved by Allah. Next day the residence of the Israelites were found desolate and without hustle and bustle.
Pharaoh was informed. He lost his temper and sent heralds to chase the absconders. He wanted to take revenge of his disgrace. He ordered his soldiers to arrest the Israelites and bring them back. When the followers of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) were near the sea-shore, they heard the sound of the hoofs of their horses. They were much frightened. They thought that they would be overtaken and punished by the enemies.

The Sea Splits and Pharaoh is Drowned
When the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and his followers were being chased Allah revealed this order to him:
"Strike the sea with the rod; and it clove asunder and each part become like a large mountain." (Surah 26: Verse 60)
The water of the sea went up high with the great uproar. The bottom of the sea turned into dry land. It was an amazing miracle. The people could hardly believe their eyes. The Israelites ran desperately and went far ahead. Pharaoh and his huge army chased them in hostility. There was a great uproar again. The water from both the sides poured. It rushed over Pharaoh and his soldiers. They were completely drowned. The Holy Quran relates this incident in the following Verses:
"And We made the children of Israel to pass through the sea, then Fir'aun and his hosts followed them in hostility and for oppression until when drowning overtook him, he said: I believe that there is no god but He in Whom the children of Israel believe and I am of those who submit. What now! said God, and indeed you have been rebellious and was of the mischief makers. But this day We save you in your body so that you may be a sign to those after you and most surely most people are heedless of Our Signs". (Surah 20: Verses 90-92)
The body of Fir'aun is still present in the Egyptian Museum as an admonitory sign to those who are transgressors.
When Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and thousands of his followers got rid of Pharaoh, they expressed a deep sense of gratitude to Allah. They had witnessed an impressive miracle. Now they were free to live according to the teachings of Allah.

The Prophet Musa Receives Instructions
Allah commanded Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) to go to a certain mountain for austerity. He had to stay there for forty days. During this period Allah, the Almighty gave a lot of religious knowledge to Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). He gave him the tablets which contained ten Commandments. One day he (Musa) said:
"My Lord! Show me Thyself so that I may look upon Thee. He said': you cannot bear to see Me but look at the mountain, if it remains firm in its place, then you will see Me. When his Lord manifested His glory to the mountain He made it crumble and Musa fell down in swoon. When he recovered, he said: Glory be to You: I turn to You and! am the first of believers". Surah 7: Verse 142)
At the end of the appointed time Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) went to his people to tell them about the revelations which he had received.

Israelites Worship the Calf
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was much grieved to know that his followers had become addicted to praying to the cow instead of Allah. Whenever his brother Prophet Harun (peace be upon him) forbade them to do so, they made fun of him. Sometimes they tortured him.
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) tried hard to uproot this form of idolatry from the hearts of the Israelites. Some men who had gone astray, repented but most of them insisted on worshipping a cow. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) said to his people:
"Surely, Allah commands you that you should sacrifice a cow." (Surah 2: Verse 71)
Most of them did so hesitatingly but the others refused. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) kept on conveying the people the new message of God.

Another Miracle
One season came there was hardly any rain. It overtook the people with draughts and diminution of fruit. There was an acute shortage of water and food. The people began to die of starvation. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) prayed to Allah and He provided them with eatables. Water was not available in the area. They approached Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) for help. He prayed to Allah for a miracle. Allah directed the Prophet to hit a special high cliff with his stick.
The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) touched the cliff saying: By the name of our Lord, Almighty Allah. At once the water gushed forth. There were twelve places in that cliff from which sprang out cool clear water. The people were much amazed at the sight of this wonderful miracle. The Holy Quran states:
"And when Musa prayed for drink for his people, We said: Smite with your staff the rock, and there gushed out there from twelve springs so that each tribe knew their drinking place: Eat and drink of that which Allah has provided and do not act corruptly making mischief in the earth." (Surah 2: Verse 60)
The Israelites were of twelve branches each a descendant of a son of Prophet Ya'qub (peace be upon him). So each branch came to drink from one of the springs of water from that cliff. The people drank water to their hearts content. They do not have to shove and push for the water because Allah gave them twelve springs.

Israelites Win Victory and Prosper
After staying in the desert for some time Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) planned to proceed towards the blessed land, Palestine. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) sent twelve men in advance to go and had a bird's eye view of the blessed land. They came back after many days. They told him that there were fertile farms and green trees. There was plenty of water. It made every one eager to go there. It was also reported that the owners of the blessed land were strong and brave. They had invincible armies. It was impossible to capture that land without fighting.
The Israelites were much terrified because they were weak and armless. The Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and a small group of Israelites wished to fight tooth and nail whereas most of them did not agree to fighting. Some of them said to Prophet Musa (peace be upon him): You go with your God and fight against them. We will stay here and wait.
As the years passed, they increased in number. They gained strength gradually. They formed a small army of their own and marched with faith in their hearts towards the rich blessed land. They fought hard and became victorious in the battle. They became the rulers of Palestine. The inhabitants of that land lived with them in peace and harmony. Allah showered favors on Israelites and they began to prosper wonderful.

The Superiority of the One Who Descended with the Quran

From: www.rediscoverquran.blogspot.com

The Superiority of the One Who Descended with the Quran

Within various Verses of the Quran, Allah spoke highly of the one who descended with the Quran to our Messenger, Muhammad (pbuh). I am referring here to none other than Jibreel (Gabriel), the angel that was entrusted with the task of conveying divine revelation to the Prophet (pbuh).

Allah praised Jibreel (Gabriel) for this superior qualities in a number of Verses, such as the following Verse from Surah An Nahl :Allah Says:
“ Say ( O Muhammad ) Ruh ul Qudus (Gabriel) has brought it ( the Quran) down from you Lord with truth, that it may make firm and strengthen ( the faith of) those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings to those who have submitted ( to Allah as Muslims).” (Quran 16:102)
The word Ruh means soul or spirit, but in the context of the above mentioned Verse it refers to Jibreel (Gabriel); And Qudus connotes the meanings of purity and virtue. Allah used the word Ruh to describe Jibreel in another verse as well:Allah says:
“Then We sent to her Our Ruh (Angel Gabriel).” (Quran 19:17)
And in yet another Verse, Allah said:
“And truly, this (the Quran) is a revelation from the Lord of the Alamin (mankind, jinn and all that exists). Which the trustworthy Ruh (Gabriel) has brought down. Upon your heart (O Muhammad) that you may be (one) of the warners.” (Quran 26:192-194)

We know that Ruh means spirit or soul, so why was Jibreel given the name Ar Ruh? Scholars have answered this question with various explanations, such as these ones:
*Jibreel is in fact a pure and virtuous soul, and so Allah named him thus a way of honoring him and proclaiming his lofty status.
*The religion of Islam is alive through Jibreel, just as a body of a person is alive through his soul. *This makes sense since Jibreel was charged with the duty of bringing down the revelation not just to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) but to previous Prophets as well.
*Spirituality is one of the dominant qualities of all angels, but to a greater degree with Jibreel than with any other angel.

Allah said:
“Verily, this is the Word (this Quran brought by) a most honorable Messenger (Gabriel, from Allah to the Prophet Muhammad).Owner of power, and high rank with (Allah) the Lord of the Throne, Obeyed (by the angels), trustworthy there (in the heavens).” Quran 81:19-21)

In this verse Allah described Jibreel with five Qualities:He is ‘most honorable.’He is an’ owner of power’He enjoys a high ranking with AllahHe is obeyed in the heavensHe is trustworthy.Upon contemplating this Verse and all of the above mentioned Verses, one is made to appreciate and to stand in awe of the chain of the Noble Quran. “Chain” in this context refers to a chain of a narration; every Hadeeth, for instance, has a chain: so and so related from so and so, who related so and so , who related from such and such Companion that the Messenger of Allah. Upon studying the chains of the most authentic of Ahadeeth, one finds the names of many eminent scholars of Hadeeth from various generations, the likes of Abu Hurairah, Abdullah bin Masood, Sufyaan Ath Thuwree, Maalik Ibn Anas, Saeed, Al Hasan, and so on. Now consider the lofty and awe-inspiring chain of the Noble Quran:The Messenger of Allah related from the angel Jibreel who related directly from the Lord of all that Exists, Allah.

Original Sin

From: www.islamicity.com

By Laurence B. Brown, MD

The concept of original sin is completely foreign to Judaism and Eastern Christianity, having achieved acceptance in only the Western Church. Furthermore, Christian and Islamic concepts of sin are virtual opposites with respect to certain nuances. For example, there is no concept of “sinning in the mind” in Islam; to a Muslim, an evil thought becomes a good deed when a person refuses to act upon it. Overcoming and dismissing the evil thoughts which forever assail our minds is considered deserving of reward rather than punishment. Islamicly speaking, an evil thought only becomes sinful when acted upon.

Conceiving good deeds is more contrary to the base nature of man. Since our creation, if not bound by societal or religious restrictions, humankind has historically dined on the banquet of life with lust and abandon. The orgies of self-indulgence that have carpeted the corridors of history envelop not only individuals and small communities, but even major world powers which ate their fill of deviancy to the point of self-destruction. Sodom and Gomorrah may top most lists, but the greatest powers of the ancient world—to include the Greek, Roman and Persian empires, as well as those of Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great—certainly bear dishonorable mention. But while examples of communal decadence are innumerable, cases of individual corruption are exponentially more common.

So, good thoughts are not always the first instinct of humankind. As such, the Islamic understanding is that the very conception of good deeds is worthy of reward, even if not acted upon. When a person actually acts upon a good thought, Allah multiplies the reward even further.

The concept of original sin simply does not exist in Islam, and never has. For the Christian readers, the question is not whether the concept of original sin exists in present day, but whether it existed during the period of Christian origins. Specifically, did Jesus teach it?
Apparently not. Whoever dreamt up the concept, it certainly wasn’t Jesus, for he reportedly taught,
“Let the little children come to me, and do not forbid them, for of such is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:14)

We may well wonder how “for of such” could be “the kingdom of heaven” if the unbaptized are hell‑bound. Children are either born with original sin or are bound for the kingdom of heaven. The church can’t have it both ways. Ezekiel 18:20 records,
“The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
Deuteronomy 24:16 repeats the point. The objection may be raised that this is Old Testament, but it’s not older than Adam! If original sin dated from Adam and Eve, one wouldn’t find it disavowed in any scripture of any age!

Islam teaches that each person is born in a state of spiritual purity, but upbringing and the allure of worldly pleasures may corrupt us. Nonetheless, sins are not inherited and, for that matter, not even Adam and Eve will be punished for their sins, for God has forgiven them. And how can humankind inherit something that no longer exists? No, Islamicly speaking, all of us will be judged according to our deeds, for
“…man can have nothing but what he strives for” (Quran 53:38–39)
…and
“Who receives guidance, receives it for his own benefit: who goes astray does so to his own loss: no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another ...” (Quran 17:15)

Each person will bear responsibility for his or her actions, but no infant goes to hell for being unbaptized and burdened with sin as a birthright—or should we say a birthwrong?

Copyright © 2008 Laurence B. Brown—used by permission.
The author’s website is www.leveltruth.com. He is the author of two books of comparative religion entitled MisGod’ed and God’ed, as well as the Islamic primer, Bearing True Witness. All of his books are available through Amazon.com.

Muslims Should Show Dignity In The Face Of Provocation

From: http://www.islamicity.com/

The Muslim Council of Britain urges right-thinking people everywhere not to be provoked by those seeking to divide us. Many will wish the publication of the novel ‘The Jewel of Medina’ as a way to demean cherished figures in Islam, while others will look to Muslim responses as a way of further marginalising our community.

“For many British Muslims, the publication of this book will understandably cause hurt at a time of sustained and increasing vilification of our faith, our community and our cherished figures. We urge the Muslim community to refrain from playing into the hands of sections of the cynical media who are keen on vilifying Islam and Muslims and portraying them as opponents of freedom. The MCB urges Muslims in Britain and elsewhere to direct their strong feelings peacefully within the law and with dignity,” said Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain.

Many of us will feel strongly at the purported character assassination of Aishah (may Allah be pleased with he r), the Prophet’s beloved wife and mother of the faithful. As Muslims we are ever mindful of our Lord’s injunction to convey our faith with wisdom and beautiful words. Indeed in the noble Qur’an we are told: “The true servants of the Merciful are those who walk humbly on the earth and when the ignorant address them they say: Peace.”

The book ‘Jewel of Medina’ may well provide an inaccurate and salacious portrayal of Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her, but we urge our brothers and sisters to remain vigilant but dignified. We must reach out to the community around us and discuss and convey the true character of Aishah and indeed the Prophet. Aishah represents the true contribution women made in the early days of Islam. Women who were strong-willed, erudite and who led men and women into battle and scholarship.

The MCB is convening a special meeting of community representatives on Saturday 18th October to coordinate responses and to discuss means by which this unfortunate episode can be turned round to become an opportunity for enhancing religious understanding and knowledge of Islam.

Blogger comment:

Some in the west were not feeling pain for us when we were oppressed and poor in fact they did all they can to maintain this status. Now when they see Islam is waking up and Muslims want their freedom they attack one of the best women known in history. No violent reaction, our best response is to continue to call for Islam and have more converts to our religion.

They will never tell you that she was very happy to marry the prophet and loved him very much and did not marry after him. She was one of the best narrators of hadith and a holy woman. The incident with Imam Ali when she wanted to support his enemy was best dealt by Imam Ali himself when he reconciled with her and put her in high place.

You never see those attacking Islam feeling sad that we are oppressed by tyrants but actually support our tyrants. Muslims need a lot of wisdom to deal with the west. Always remember that God in the side of the just and faithful to him.