My sincerest apologies; it was most ignorant of me to assume that other readers would not dismiss my comment on so petty of grounds.

Thank you for the clarification — oh, wait, you provided none.

Weigel states nowhere that Cannon “mischaracterized” Biden's words.

No one disputes that Biden dressed down Cheney. The issue is that Weigel found Cannon's problem with Biden's focus on Cheney to be silly (Cannon “sniffed that” etc…). So do I.

Cheney was the focus of the moderator's question. This is grown-up politics. You know that and I know that. Palin ducked the whole question because the words confused her. THAT is the story. The fact that Biden knew the right answer, as well as the right way to deliver it, is unsurprising.

No majority of Americans thinks any journalist was too hard on the Pitbull With Lipstick.

She didn't do a single press conference. She thinks a constituent asking her whether she agrees with her running mate about attacking terrorists in Pakistan is “gotcha journalism.”

She cannot name a newspaper she reads or a Supreme Court opinion besides Roe v. Wade (She couldn't even think of the Exxon Valdez oil tanker case and that happened in freakin' Alaska!).

She mocked community organizers but quit her job. She said Hillary Clinton shouldn't whine about sexism or double-standards because it was just expected that you have to be a better candidate and the whining hurts other women. But look who hides behind sexism when she wants to start a feud with David Letterman. Look who whines about a double standard when she gets called out for quitting.

She tried to compare her situation with Janet Napolitano, Jon Huntsman, and others who “quit” their jobs. But those people were each PROMOTED to other, more difficult and prestigious jobs. None of them quit on their constituents so they could go collect political chits by giving speeches to flannel-clad gun-concealing hicks while wearing tight skirts and spouting gibberish about socialism.

She doubled the amount of cash paid per voter, I mean resident, under the Permanent Fund Trust to more than $3,200. Yet she ran around the country whining about how increasing the progressive tax rate's top tier by less than the amount Clinton raised it would be “socialism.”

She has no concept of anything but mocks others who do. And let's not get started on the “pro America parts of the country” nonsense. 9/11 happened in NYC, which I guess is the heart of liberal Fake America.

John, you are the one who should let it go.

I welcome all such articles by Mr. Weigel or otherwise. God knows the right keeps trying to reinvent Sarah Palin and save her from herself. They should not be allowed to get away with it.

Uh no they're not.

A new national survey from Public Policy Polling finds that the American public has a pretty solid verdict on Sarah Palin: A full majority, 55% of voters, say she is not fit to be president, compared to just 37% who say she is fit for it.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Rele...

The Hill July 9, 2009:
” Vulnerable GOPs want Palin to stay home
By Molly K. Hooper
Posted: 07/09/09 08:00 PM [ET]
Republicans facing tough elections in 2010 don’t want Sarah Palin campaigning with them.

Though the soon-to-be-former Alaska governor is seen as popular with the conservative grass roots, several Republicans said she’d help them by staying home in Wasilla.

Several of these Republicans hail from districts or states carried in 2008 by President Obama, a frequent target of Palin’s criticism. Republicans must keep these districts and win others where Obama is popular if they are to gain seats next year.”

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/vulnerable-...

According to Public Policy Polling against Palin Obama leads 56-35.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Rele...

Let it go.

You're preaching to the choir and even if you could channel de Tocqueville you wouldn't sour a single person on Palin who is in her corner.

This just in: a majority of Americans now believe the media–guys like you–crossed the line
with its lust for Palin's blood–even democrats who were pulling for Obama.

Biden answered Ifill's question, and while doing so, he explicitly attacks Cheney:

“The idea (that) he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States – that's the executive branch – he works in the executive branch,” Biden said. “He should understand that. Everyone should understand that. And the primary role of the vice president of the United States is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and, as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit….He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he's part of the legislative branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive, and look where it has gotten us.”

The question as posed asked whether or not it was the respondent's belief that the vice presidency belongs to both the Executive Branch and Legislative Branch, and provided Cheney as an example of a public figure who holds that belief.

Rather than simply stating his disagreement and explaining its grounds, Biden berated Cheney for his “bizarre notion”.

How, then, did Cannon mischaracterize Biden's words in stating that the senator was “dressing down Dick Cheney”?

I would love to hear clarification on this matter.