Gwen Ifell: "Well, that's all you've got"

This was the absolute high-point of the debate for me. Cheney trying to weasel his way around rules that his party helped create, wanting more time to respond to Edwards' claims regarding Halliburton (I think it was at that point in the debate) and saying he'd need more than 30 seconds to respond. Gwen Ifell smacked him down without missing a beat. I really like her. She's very good when given time and space to work. That Washington Week show that she hosts doesn't make the best use of her, too many issues squeezed into a mere half hour.

watched with a living room full of people-- the hoot was heard round the neighborhood.

...but I bet my hooting could be heard throughout the building. Great moment.

ask if I was somehow channeling thoughts to her.

It's a good think you didn't say, "Screw you, Dick".

uttered in the closet and out of earshot!

over Edwards for responses twice? Just asking.

...because there were some parts of the debate that I missed. But anyway, relax. Edwards did just fine even if Cheney did get an extra four minutes. Edwards is ahead in almost all of the online opinion polls. How do you think Edwards did?

There were two times near the beginning of the debate where Ifill asked Cheney two questions in a row without allowing Edwards a chance for rebuttal. Besides that, I think we have some great material for some new campaign commercials. Unfortunately, the media is overcompensating on their praise for Cheney compared to Kerry last week.

IFILL: New question to you, Senator Edwards, but I don't want to let go of the global test question first, because...

EDWARDS: Sure.

IFILL: ... I want people to understand exactly what it is, as you said, that Senator Kerry did say.

He said, "You've got to do" -- you know, he was asked about preemptive action at the last debate -- he said, "You've got to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons." What is a global test if it's not a global veto?

......

IFILL: Senator Edwards, new question to you, and you have two minutes to respond.

Part of what you have said and Senator Kerry has said that you are going to do in order to get us out of the problems in Iraq is to internationalize the effort.

Yet French and German officials have both said they have no intention even if John Kerry is elected of sending any troops into Iraq for any peacekeeping effort. Does that make your effort or your plan to internationalize this effort seem kind of naive?

.....

IFILL: New question, but same subject.

As the vice president mentioned, John Kerry comes from the state of Massachusetts, which has taken as big a step as any state in the union to legalize gay marriage. Yet both you and Senator Kerry say you oppose it.

Are you trying to have it both ways?

...the "global test/global veto" question because it seemed to me that she was simply stating plainly what the folks who've been harping on the whole "global test" thing are thinking and giving Edwards a chance to clear up the issue once and for all. Edwards, I think, cleared it up quite nicely. The other two statements are more problematic. The "kind of naive" statement did jump out at me too but I didn't hear the "have it both ways comment" because I was doing a bit of multi-tasking during the debate but I'd say that she might have been confronting him with the reality of what some voters think.