Palin gives a detailed, full response on Afghanistan — well the terrain is different, but the principle is the same. Good grief. Some people in the media are going to have to explain why they didn’t see this coming. Okay, I didn’t see this coming.

Biden’s answer on interventionism is splendid — who knew he was a neocon?

It would launch a thousand new obnoxious blogs.

He’s clearly worried about a gaffe in talking about Afghanistan.  He’s corrected himself twice in this short exchange. And now Palin has shot back effectively on a surge-like strategy in Afghanistan. Now Biden is recalling statements from McCain two years ago–but things were entirely different in Iraq and Afghanistan two years ago.

Palin wants to go back. She points out that use of the surge policy in Afghanistan is something they’d do differently. Then she bangs Obama for accusing us of air bombing that country. This is a mystery: was she hidden from view while the other Palin did all those dopey interviews? I don’t get it.

This is an excellent point for Palin. The ultimate determinant of our toleration for nuclear weapons is whether or not a state uses them as a deterrent. The US, Israel, Britain, etc. possess nuclear weapons as a deterrent; Iran desires a nuclear weapon to be used for offensive–not defensive–purposes.

Policymakers with far greater experience in this area have failed to make the case against Iran so clearly. When she’s on, she’s an excellent communicator.

Something about Dick Luger and handshakes???

Any case in which nuclear weapons should be used? Ifill asks in what may be the most ludicrous question of the year, framed entirely to trip her up.

Palin turns it into an answer about rogue nations. Smart.

Palin, in her inimitable way, really has the best moment of the debate when she calls out Biden and Obama for constantly talking about George Bush and the past eight years. How, she implies, can you believe in the future if you are obsessed by the past? Biden, as only he can do, responds by mentioning George Bush seven times.

So says Palin. “Enough already looking back.” Wow. That was a darn good answer. This is all terribly odd. Where the heck has this person been?

Biden is getting miffed and a little angry. How’s it going to be different, he asks. But Ifill doesn’t ask Palin for an answer. Was that a help or a hindrance? We don’t know.

Palin is throwing every loosely pro-Israel slogan ever uttered into her answer on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There won’t be a second Holocaust. We’re going to move the embassy to Jerusalem. Iran can’t get a nuclear weapon. Israel has made peace with Egypt and Jordan. We support the two-state solution. Of these, only the last one has anything to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

point about the “change” ticket’s inability to stop pointing fingers at the mistakes of recent history.

When did Barack Obama say elections on the West Bank and Gaza were a “big mistake,” Joe?

Palin has it right. There is a difference between lower level talks and a presidential summit.  But Biden tries to obfuscate on the issue. Then he makes the ridiculous charge that McCain won’t meet with Zapatero of Spain because of a silly interview question that McCain flubbed a few weeks ago.

Biden just said Obama did not say he would sit down with Ahmadinejad. There’s an ad that can run for a week.

Palin reminds Biden that he has often differed with Barack Obama on the Iraq war, and offers her respect for Biden’s previous positions. “I don’t know how you can defend his positions now.” Brilliant.

The question is whether Biden and Obama can successfully claim John McCain was a cheerleader for the conduct of the Iraq war in 2003 when I heard him, with my own ears in a lunch in 2003, say there should be 100,000 more troops there.

And they’re a kind of ally of the U.S. So, Obama figured he’d threaten to bomb them and meet with Iran – which does not yet have nukes.

CNN is running a little scroll with Ohio voters’ instant response to the debate.  Palin seems to be doing better with men than women, at least on the foreign policy questions. More interesting, except for Biden’s claim that he wanted to end the war now-which got a big positive response-they’ve both been getting pretty neutral responses in this part of the debate.