But which debate? Well, the first blog post from your Ottawa-based correspondent would have to be on… Sarah Palin. (Now to be sure, I watched both. At the same time. That’s just the kind of multi-tasking woman I am. But my comments on the Canadian debate largely revolve around what a great moderator Steve Paikin is. Kidding! Sort of.)
Back to Sarah Palin. I thought she did well; it was not a knock out to be sure, but she certainly was not a failure, either. Which leads me to think there simply is no parallel to the hostile media test (the one she previously failed). Any given day, fighting the Taliban may in fact be easier. Furthermore, the hostile media test generally has little bearing on how competent you are. (What’s too bad, is that after you fail the hostile media test, they pull more pundits out of the bag to kick you while you’re already down. By discussing, on repeat.)
Update: Interesting to read commentary from around the globe. This from South Africa:
If she doesn’t get into the White House now, Palin could be a better contender in 2012. After a few more years of experience and with more time to polish her political skills, Palin might get where she wants to be. For now, I think her entry into this level of politics might be premature.
Plus, she wouldn’t be with McCain, who I believe is very weak indeed. Far weaker than I thought.
Brigitte cheers Steve: I didn’t watch much of the Canadian debate, choosing instead to watch the U.S. one (I’ve seen the Canadian debate last election, and the one before that; these guys keep repeating the same inane platitudes year in, year out). I would absolutely vote for Steve Paikin. He rocks.
Andrea: That makes two votes for Steve. Paikin, not Harper.
Tanya adds: Is it me, or are they trying to make Harper smile more…and at wierd times? BTW, I vote for Paikin, too.by