Peter here… with nothing particularly funny to say but an observation about last night’s debate, that as far I as I know, hasn’t been yet blogged about or commented upon elsewhere.

Early on, Edwards brought up a standard Dem talking point: that US forces have borne 90% of the casualities in Iraq. Here’s Cheney’s response — for versimilitude, scowl while you read it to yourself:

“Well, Gwen, the 90 percent figure is just dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they’ve taken almost 50 percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq, which leaves the U.S. with 50 percent, not 90 percent. ”

Now think about this. He’s saying that it’s not true that 90% of the dead bodies piled over there are American… because there are a lot more dead bodies. In fact — and here I have to rely on own, admittedly fuzzy, math skills — there are twice as many dead bodies. And only half of them — you can pick them out because the arms, sticking out of the pile, are wearing US military issue sleeves — are American. So, you know. Shut up about it.

In other words, he’s decreasing the percentage by increasing the sample size. Of dead people.

Here’s a question: are there any other campaign issues to which you could apply this admittedly effective rhetorical technique?

For example: it’s true that the US has lost about a million jobs under the Bush Adminstration. But if you include jobs in China, then we’ve actually gained about two million!

Post your examples in comments.

[Quick update: Chris Suellentrop at Slate, a smart writer I like, says this:

“Edwards got mauled when Cheney said Edwards, by saying that 90 percent of the casualties in Iraq were American, was saying that the deaths of Iraqi soldiers fighting with the U.S. “shouldn’t count.”"]

[Another update: This from the Washington Post lead editorial. Reading this, I feel like Kevin McCarthy screaming at the cars at the end of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers:”

“Mr. Cheney…also sharply accused Mr. Edwards of unfairly and mistakenly denigrating allied and Iraqi contributions to the war effort. Mr. Cheney was unpersuasive when he contended that the current coalition is as robust as the one he helped assemble for the 1991 Persian Gulf War. But he was right to chide the Kerry-Edwards team for appearing insufficiently appreciative of the allies and Iraqis who have fought alongside U.S. troops.”]