Acidus wrote:
] ] I think that both Cheney and Edwards were occasionally
] guilty of
] ] being party mouthpieces who were repeating stuff that they
] ] didn't really believe,

] As for Cheney's "I never meet you" bit, I'm amazed you fell
] into arguing its literal merits. Cheney certainly didn't mean
] he physcially had never met Edwards, and Edwards knows he met
] Cheney. The comment was not a "lie" that Edwards should have
] call him on, as you so profess. It was a slight, a dig at
] Edward and his lack of experience in Washington. It was a way
] of saying "you've not important enough to have run in my
] circles. You didn't even make the radar screen." Oh course
] Edwards wouldn't bring that up while in the debate. The last
] thing he wanted was to waste valueable time trying to combat
] this his experience. So he (I agree, poorly) stayed off the
] defensive and addressed other issues. After the debate was the
] time to address Cheney on the slight.

No, I can't bend my brain into that kind of a pretzel to buy that argument. It wasn't a case of Edwards choosing not to respond.

C'mon, if Cheney said, "I never met you," and Edwards could have retorted, "We've never met? But we have, Mr. Vice President. I sat next to you for three hours at a prayer breakfast, and you called me by name. This is just another example of you being so out of touch with reality that you can't even tell who you're talking to." It would have been the *perfect* retort, and would have been the knockout punch that would have been on every newspaper's headline the next day.

Nope, Edwards just plain didn't remember either.

RE: The VP Debate