Yet More Palin

Particularly cynical when you consider McCain's age ... in a sense, actually irresponsible. And I'm the first to credit experience in raising five kids - but seriously, folks!

But doesn't this argument cut against Obama too?

Kevin is right. This is appalling!

As others have pointed out, the Obama campaign would be wise not to focus on her lack of experience. Rather, they should make the point that McCain was being very disingenuous by suggesting all that matters is experience.

Clearly he thinks his VP can be a heartbeat away. So too, is Obama ready to lead on day one.

Jeff, the short answer is NO.

Obama is actually much more experienced that Palin.

More importantly we all, all of us, have had over a year to vet Obama ourselves. We have seen how he thinks and how he reacts. There isn't enough time for the American people to properly figure out if Gov. Palin is presidential timber.

I really like Sarah Palin, but this whole this is just bizarre. It's like your mom suddenly being a heartbeat away from the presidency.

WOW! I think she just gave a kick ass performance and announced a totally new McCain campaign. He's shifting from running on foreign policy/Commander in Chief to focusing on domestic issues - energy and the economy. This is the McCain of 2000 combined with Bush's 2000 "compassionate conservativism" I think this makes for a tough campaign.

The real test - how quickly will Hillary Clinton denounce her far right politics?

This has a Harriet Miers kind of feel to it. If you pick a lame one and lose, you're off the hook for ever naming a woman again.

i fell out of bed laughing when i heard the announcement. any minute they're going to break out the klown kar.

but seriously, i think mccain "chose" palin because no one else was willing to trash what little remains of their reputation to "run" with mccain.

What's astounding, and ironic, is how much of an affirmative action hire this is.

Dude, you seem to think that this country and process are rational. Look who has been in the White House.

Will Obama campaign push the CYNICAL theme? That McCain seems to think that just nominating a woman will be enough of Hillary supporters. That she is no Hillary, no Condi, etc. And that Oprah is more qualified to run the country.

Also, when considering those so-called disaffected Hillary voters ... they saw her as someone who had fought all those old battles and one reason for disgust with Obama wasn't just his gender -- it was his age. It was that mix. And it's hard NOT to understand it -- professional, successful women seeing the hot new man get the promotions, adulation, etc.

Well, for many professional successful women, it's even worse when the old fart executive gets charmed by the beauty queen with scant accomplishment and promotes her.

This is a dangerous pick for the McCain campaign. Feels like a Hail Mary thrown in the second quarter.

Also ... why not push a quote like this: "We're glad to see john McCain is coming around to the view that you don't need to spend decades in washington to be qualified."

Sarah Palin is to the Vice Presidency what Harriet Miers was to the Supreme Court.

After reading Charlie Homas' post on your old stomping grounds, Kevin, (Washington Monthly), now I wonder if Sarah represents McCain's attempt to go after Obama on the 'change' theme. She apparently did go after some of the corruption in the Republican establishment in Alaska and thus propel herself into popularity and power. Most Republicans would vote for McCain if he had a chimp as his running mate (they understand it's all about the power of the presidency), but I wonder if Sarah can make a run at Independent voters. She apparently is extremely likable (high Q score??) Nahhh, they ain't that stupid.

This pick really fits with modern GOP political thinking - tactically brilliant but strategically idiotic.

Tactically, it does a good a job stomping Obama's convention bounce as anything and it gives a real shot of energy to McCain's campaign.

Strategically, Palin prevents McCain from making any sort of experience argument against Obama while not completely defusing Obama's "more of the same" argument against McCain, she can only be an effective campaigner on social or economic issues, but McCain is at his weakest when those are what everyone is talking about.

So, McCain has picked a momentary feel good moment and destroyed his main weapon against Obama and will actual suffer the more the campaign focuses on the areas Palin might be good at.

Mike

I just read the comment by the new editor over at Political Animal.

We were so close, but Obama is doomed. Governor Palin has arrived and everything has changed.

I think she was McCain's best chance. All the others had too many problems--so go with a nobody that you can control the framing for. The strategy for Obama should be to ignore her--make this about Bush/McSame. I'd put Hillary on her then sit back with some popcorn and enjoy the show.

A brilliant tactic, and it's worked. All of you have already forgotten about McCain's insane policies, and are focusing on his VP pick. As if anyone has ever cared who was running for VP (remember Dan Quale?). Up next: a dancing bear!

So...on the day McCain announces his VP pick people are focused on McCain's VP pick.

What a genius move!

But I'm just stunned by the cynicism of the whole thing.

I was surprised by the cynicism of the Obamabots in declaring racism everywhere.

McCain's choice of a woman? That was predicted a long time ago. It was the obvious move in response to the shabby way Obamabots have treated anyone who respectfully disagreed with them.

The best part about Obama is Obama. The worst part about Obama is his supporters, especially those with blogs.

McCain looked much like a sugar-daddy up on the stage with his little bimbo Sarah today, as she cooed "John McCain is a GREAT man". This craven ploy will not win over the Hillary die-hards because Palin is hard-line anti-abortion. She sings to the choir but not to the feminists.

Two things.

1. Did anyone else see the empty seats? Perhaps Palin will excite the base enough that she'll close the enthusiasm gap, but as others have noted, they had to give away the tickets today, and they still couldn't get the place filled. Obama's speech, on the other hand, sold out in less than a day. If Palin can't get the base excited, then I think McCain's going to lose simply because of that reason.

2. I think it was on this blog that someone said Palin's press secretary played the media for a bunch of fools when they announced that she'd be at the fair that was held last week in a different city watching fireworks at 5:00 AM. Granted, I fell for it, too, and if you don't know Alaska, it's pretty hard to know that it was a load, but it's still pretty damn clever.

What this should show us Democrats is the cynicism and bankruptcy of identity politics.

I think people are underestimating the extent to which Obama-Biden will have to treat Palin with kid gloves.

The media are going to absolutely dwell on a bunch of Palin positives.

She's a mom of five
Her husband is a fisherman/oilworker
she has a baby with Down's Syndrome
her son is in the military

I say ignore her (sending the correct message, she is irrelevant) and go straight at McCain.

Ignore her until she screws up that is. She, and her team, have never been vetted by the press, have never had every word scrutinized, and have never been under so much pressure. Treat her respectfully until they drop the ball and then never let anyone forget she just arrived on the stage. Then the message is she is a great lady but far from ready for prime-time.

Assuming McCain doesn't win the election (which I think will happen, unless Obama pulls a monumental gaffe or two), but puts up a decent, non-landslide showing, does this elevate Palin into the forefront of GOP candidates for 2012, as losing in '04 as Kerry's running mate did for John Edwards (who of course had run for president earlier that year)? She certainly adds some sort of new dimension to the GOP equation for the future, regardless of what happens Nov. 4.

The Harriet Miers comparison is dead-on.

Republicans may be making all kinds of nice noises for the media, but you can be sure that they're already hammering McCain behind the scenes. This was an idiotic choice and McCain will surely see the light. A hurricane-delayed convention would help with the logistics, but - one way or another - it's a pretty good bet that Palin will soon discover some pressing problems in Alaska that require her to bow out of the nomination.

Did anyone else see the empty seats? Perhaps Palin will excite the base enough that she'll close the enthusiasm gap, but as others have noted, they had to give away the tickets today, and they still couldn't get the place filled.

Good point. IIRC, Obama appeared at the Nutter Center in Dayton during the primary campaign. Anyone want to check what kind of crowd he drew that day?

From Kevin:

Someone with virtually no serious political experience, and no serious experience of any other kind to make up for it? She's going to shake up Washington?

I actually don't disagree too much with this, but Obama supporters have a hard time making this charge seem serious since it also describes their presidential candidate.

If the McCain campaign intended to make Obama's inexperience the central issue, this choice seriously undermines it, but I have the feeling that his campaign managers have decided to attack elsewhere, and let the media themselves talk about inexperience at the top of the Democratic ticket and the bottom of the Republican one.

I was betting on Hutchinson and hoping for Whitman, but Palin will be interesting to watch. She could be a brilliant choice or one of the lamest ever made.

As an example in Democratic sexism, just read through the comments in this thread.

Palin = Miers?

Governor of the biggest state = Bush's personal attorney?

Choose one or more of the following: It's okay for us Democrats to be sexist, because a) we're just being ironic, or b) we're Democrats and god sings in our ears!

"Sarah Palin is to the Vice Presidency what Harriet Miers was to the Supreme Court."

ZING. That has to be the line. It just has to be. It takes the wind out of her sails.

Doesn't seem to know much about the V-P job, or at least didnt' a couple weeks ago:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=loUHRv3ipLE

I agree, Kevin. It just screams cynicism.

A BA from University of Idaho. Mayor of a town of 9200. (I grew up in a tiny town with 13,000 people. I have a real feel for this. It's Very Little.) Less than 2 years of experience as Governor of a state of 670,000. (I live in a city with that population!) Zero foreign policy experience. And old man McCain offers us this as he runs ads saying Obama lacks experience? She's ready to be Commander in Chief, is she, John? What with the two wars and all...?

I recognize that she's manna for the socially conservative base...but, gee, she just had a Downs Syndrome baby last April and she's got the time and energy to run and serve as VP. Really??? This is a wise and balanced life choice?

She seems to have a lovely personality and enjoys public dialogue. But did you see how completely disconnected she and McCain seemed in that rally? Her voice sounded so young. Can anyone imagine them as genuine working partners, a la Obama and Biden? There is just so much BS in this choice, it takes my breath away. Reporters and Dems should go after McCain-As-Cynical-Hypocrite like a charging bulls.

The more the press play up the mom of five and the youngest has Down's syndrome angle, the more people -- both men and women -- are going to ask "What is this woman thinking? She has virtual newborn with special needs and she wants to spend that child's infancy being VP?"

It's not a question of can this woman do it -- she probably can, there are lots of heroic women out there who do similiar things on a smaller scale [go to work,etc. and take care of sick children] but most of them do it because they HAVE to. In the very demographic in which McCain thinks this choice will help -- ie., working class women -- it's going to backfire and maybe even lose some of their husbands too.

McCain's pick of Palin, a woman with very little executive experience, a woman who has approved a 26 billion dollar oil pipeline to Canada instead of the United States shows that McCain's decision was made from an adlolescent place of "I'll show you mentallity" instead of one of wisdom and judgment and will be a disaster because this is not a game but serious, deadly business! Maybe McCain really is senile and confused and incapable of making sound judgments. This woman will be a heartbeat away from being in charge of the highest office in the land. If she was Qualified, that would be different but she is not and that is the bottom line. Not to mention that his argument that Barack has no experience And Is not Ready is out the door, his strongest argument against Barack.

Is this decision Historic or Hysterical or a mockery to our political system? A game changer or a roll of the dice? And should a Presidential candidate play russian roulette with the people's business? It is sort of sad to me personally, that McCain with all the problems we face here, did not have the People's interest at heart but rather a desire to win for winning's sake and did not think of the consequences of his actions and what it would mean for this country if she had to be sworn in as President of the United States!

However, in this evil ploy to pull Hillary women from Barack with no consideration as to whether or not this woman has the ability and experience to lead the United States here and on a world scale shows a very adolescent way of thinking, and a lack of sound judgment and as McCain's first executive decision, a disaster! Through this pick, McCain has just shown that he is NOT READY TO LEAD, and it also proves that he is not really serious about solving America's problems!

I fear that this is not as bad (strategically) a pick as it first seems to many, possible wishful and insufficiently canny, commenters. They can say that Palin has "some real experience as an executive" versus the legislative-only (?) ticket of BO-Joe. It will be hard to criticize her for "lack of experience" due to that and Obama's own vulnerability. (However, many commenters got hip to the strategy of accusing McCain of hypocrisy/double-standard about that issue, instead.) Many women will be attracted to the idea, especially if they were on the fence before.

We can only hope that it looks like the pandering it is to enough voters, and that enough voters (take note Hillary supporters) McCain-Palin would suppress abortion rights strongly given what they say they believe.

Almost transparently, this has Rove-bullet's "fingerprints all over it" - the cynical pandering move, done as a political stunt. McCain clearly shows as a prick (metaphorically at least.)

Go BO-Joe!

I think I've figured it out!

Can't criticize McCain because he was a POW.

Can't criticize Palin because she's a woman.

Winner!

Yes, this is a cynical pick, but does that really surprise anyone? Cynicism is part of the game.

As for the pick, McCain is just trying to neutralize the historical aspect of Obama's candidacy. The thinking is that there's a sizable amount of right-of-center voters who can't resist the allure of voting for the first black president, and this gives them a chance to vote their conscience and still have their historic moment (first female VP).

Will it work? Probably not.

Hey, speaking of the Repub hands "hammering McCain behind the scenes" - how best to find out, and report back to the blog?

Victoria and Clarice's comments are so sexist that I can't help thinking that they are men.

So Palin has a young child with Down syndrome, and SHE is supposed to stay at home and take care of him.

What about her husband? Is he chopped liver? From the articles out so far, it looks like both she and her husband have managed to take good care of their son while she has been working as Governor.

She comes with her very own scandal. Film at TPM.

"Someone with virtually no serious political experience..."

Give me a break! She ran the PTA for pete's sake.

An interesting question for the speculative folks in the crowd: If Hillary had gotten the nomination, who's the bright young African-American man that McCain would have chosen for his running mate?

A Vote For McCain/Palin is a vote for more of the same.

Via God-o-Meter "Below is McCain's statement announcing Sarah Palin as running mate. There's a big omission: no mention of her being a social conservative, a darling of the Christian Right. Instead, she's framed as a bipartisan peacemaker. The McCain campaign must figure that everyone who needs to know about her pro-life advocacy and other social conservative activism already does. Their right. Very smart. Very Bushian." Continued here...

I was betting on Hutchinson and hoping for Whitman, but Palin will be interesting to watch. She could be a brilliant choice or one of the lamest ever made.

You have your finger on one of the biggest reasons I think this pick will be an enormous letdown to Republican women. KBH & CTW are two perfect examples of the kind of women McCain could have chosen to really put the screws to Obama. KBH is the perfect choice if you want to go with a red meat, movement conservative, whereas CTW provides a great counterweight to Obama's post-partisan talk. The real point, though, is that -- like them or not -- each of these women is a proven, established leader who would, by her very presence on the ticket, effectively double down on the issue of experience -- Biden or no Biden. Additionally, McCain wouldn't have to waste valuable campaigning time on introductions. A team including either Hutchinson or Whitman would've hit the ground running. This was a lost opportunity for McCain.

You know, Michael Palin would have actually been a brilliant choice. Hell, I'd consider switching my vote just for the entertainment value of the next 4 years.

If Hillary had gotten the nomination, who's the bright young African-American man that McCain would have chosen for his running mate?

It would have been Jindal. (Close enough for McCain's purposes.)

"Can't criticize Palin because she's a woman.

Winner!"

-- Cheryl Rofer

Actually, *men* can't criticize a woman without risk. Women criticize other women every day, sometimes to the point men recoil in horror.

There's no shortage of Democratic women (Hillary comes first to mind) to criticize Palin. And their criticism is likely to be much more effective in the eyes of female voters.

My wife, who supported Hillary and now supports Obama, reacted to McCain's pick by commenting that it looks to her like a gimmick, and why Palin over other GOP women.

"But a heartbeat away from the presidency? Someone with virtually no serious political experience, and no serious experience of any other kind to make up for it?"

Did you say that, or Rush Limbaugh?

well try sending her over to Georgia for a little bit of diplomacy and then picture her or Biden having a little tete-a-tete with Putin - not even close. like Kevin said this is a JOKE !!

Ya mean no experience. . . like a one term senator?

C'mon, let's keep our arguments straight.

If Joe Biden reminds people of Leo McGarry, I wonder who Sarah Palin reminds them of? Me - BSG's Laura Roslyn. You know, the accidental President who has to try to pick up the pieces of the shattered human race after the self-inflicted apocalypse?

Laura grew into the job, but I don't believe in giving Sarah the chance, myself.

But a heartbeat away from the presidency? Someone with virtually no serious political experience, and no serious experience of any other kind to make up for it?
But he has a black skin and is for change.

talk about unpatriotic, this is a man who puts personal ambition in the form of a
" hail mary pass " ahead of the welfare of our country.

Here's a parlor game. Make a list of Republican women with more relevant experience than Palin who are below retirement age (b. 1942 or later, say). I'll start:

Kathryn Ann Bailey Hutchison
Olympia Snowe
Christine Todd Whitman
Susan Molinari
Deborah Pryce
Sue Wilkins Myrick
Jo Ann Emerson
Kay Granger
Heather Wilson
Mary Bono Mack
Shelley Moore Capito
Marsha Blackburn
Ginny Brown-Waite
Katherine Harris
Candice Miller
Thelma Drake
Virginia Foxx
Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Jean Schmidt
arguably Carly Fiorina

*

Junebug,

I was talking about Meg Whitman, not Christine.

Palin will not be a letdown to Republican women- she will definitely solidify their support to McCain. Palin may not sell well to independent women, but I don't believe that myself- I think will sell very well.

Now he has some eye-candy for the cover of People and Redbook magazines. She'll get her share of, "Awww, she looks like a nice lady" votes.

To optical weenie:

I know it's tricky to talk about mothers with infants and work. But from my experience as a life-long feminist and coordinator of a college women's studies program, I can attest that most women I know talk a LOT about the particularly maternal demands of the first few years of children's lives. If feminists grapple with this basic life reality, if we recognize there can be serious tensions between healthy public ambition and sacred private responsibilities, then surely it is also where the rubber meets the road of all those social conservative theoretical family values that seem to allow so little wiggle room. My point was the possible tension in her social conservative manna.

I think it will be great for the national dialogue as she talks in the campaign season about the challenges of getting up to speed on issues and flying around the country while also looking after kids starting their school years, etc, in Alaska. It's a presidential campaign for crying out loud. The ultimate killer marathon.

Keep in mind Joe Biden almost turned down his Senate seat when his boys needed him.

It holds 12,000. I was there and it was near capacity. They estimated he had over 11,000.

3. The Dems will have much trouble attacking that inexperience given the lack of experience at the TOP of their ticket

Oy. Let me spell this out for you: Experience was NEVER going to be a part of the Democratic attacks on the 2008 Republican ticket. It just wasn't in the arsenal this year. But it WAS a major theme of the attacks that Republicans have been making against Obama.

By choosing Palin, McCain has taken nothing away from the Democrats while taking a major campaign theme away from the Republicans.

Experience is now off the table as a talking point, and only one side loses anything from that. Got it?

Anyone who argues that Palin's "experience" equates with Obama's is not to be taken seriously. He's been a U.S. Senator for about four years, dealing with foreign and domestic issues on the national level, not to mention his years of experience as a state senator. His state district had at least ten times as many people as the Alaskan village where she was mayor.

Oh, and now she's been Governor of a state with more bears than people, where she's already mired in a scandal and investigation. She used her power to fire her state trooper brother-in-law because he was divorcing her sister. A made-for-t.v. scandal/soap opera if ever there was one. Should be fun to watch.

Governor of the biggest state = Bush's personal attorney?

Alaska has a population of 670,000. It may be the biggest by land mass, but it's one of the smallest in terms of population. Are you arguing that she's more qualified than Obama (who represents 12,000,000 people) because she has more square acreage?

Laura on BSG had better writers.

*

To Optical Weenie:

Well, at least half your moniker is correct.

First, what I was arguing was not that Palin couldn't or even shouldn't do the work, but that what looks on the surface like a stroke of brilliance (she's a Mom! one of her kids is disabled! What a hero!) is double-edged. As a mom myself (sorry to disappoint you, but I am a woman), I know that the tug of those kids who need you and your own desire/ambition, etc. are real. Palin is going to have to be able to answer the question why at this point in her life, when the demands of the office are exponentially greater than being the governor of a state of fewer than one million (and which would be even greater if something were to happen to McCain), she thought it was a good idea to take on this challenge. There probably is something sexist about the perception that she needs to be able to ask that question but we do live in a sexist society. What I was suggesting is that it's going to come up (even if under the radar) and the answer is not necessarily a 'win' for Palin.

For the record, I'd ask the same question of a man in similar circumstances.

Maybe if Palin had obvious experience and could argue that it just would not have been right to say no to McCain, the question would not come up ---- but even Palin doesn't believe that. Her performance this morning at the rollout was tentative and gushing. One of the pundits said it was poised but is about the only complement I could give it.

And finally, for the record, I work with a number of men and women alike who have stepped back and altered their ambitions and scaled back their plans when life has thrown them a curveball. In most of these couples, it has taken both partners to figure out how to cope with severely autistic children, serious childhood illness, etc.

C'mon, I bet running the country and running Wasilla, Alaska are VERY similar...

No Mnemosyne, even an idiot like you should be able to see I never said she had more experience than Obama.

I know you need to purposefully misconstrue what other people said, so I'll spell it out for you.

PALIN == Governor of the biggest state
MIERS == Bush's personal attorney

See, Obama never even appears there, only in your twisted sense of how it is okay to smear people in the name of identity politics.

I am saying that it's stupid and wrong to dismss Palin as Miers, and sexist as well.

Back in 1984, it was a sign of shrewd political calculus if you picked a Catholic or a Southerner white male to “balance” your ticket. But when Fritz Mondale picked a woman, it was dismisses as just a case of political pandering. It will be interesting to see how much this is still true.

I think Palin is a brilliant choice because it shows just how out of touch the Republicans are; McSame was thinking, "Gosh, they wanted a woman, so I'll get me one and they'll pick her."

It's obvious pandering and will most definitely bring Obama that much closer to victory in November. Great choice!

I was talking about make Whitman, not Christine.

Yet another capable woman with far more executive experience than McCain's actual choice, but picking a captain of industry worth gajillions of dollars during an election cycle when the conversation is dominated by concerns over a tanking economy sends a horrible message that even Republicans don't want to get on board with. (Which is just one more reason -- as if he needed another -- McCain couldn't go with Mittens as his VP choice.) I'll reiterate my previous point by saying that there'll be plenty of 50+ Republican women scratching their heads & wondering why a more proven woman wasn't chosen.

McCain's choice of Palin as his running mate shows that he lacks the judgment it takes to be a successful commander-in-chief. If McCain felt having a female running mate was important, he should have chosen Hutchison or Rice. Both would have been excellent choices. Neither could have been seen as pandering either to the right or to women. Both are intelligent and have impressive credentials. God only knows what could have led McCain to chose Palin.

Katherine Harris

Yeah, we got lucky with the Palin pick, KH would have been *really* lucky. Democrats don't have that kind of luck.

Sarah Palin??? Until this morning I had never heard of her. Does McCain actually think that this will get him the White House?? "Hey, if I pick a woman young enough to be my daughter I'll have a balanced ticket!" What a moron.
He just conceded the election to Obama, folks.

Mayors of the biggest U.S. cities have more responsibility and experience than the (less than two year) Governor of Alaska. Just sayin'.
Alaska is the biggest state in terms of land mass, but to equate it with California, Florida or New York is a joke. The biggest threat that she's had to face is bears getting into the garbage.
The Republicans I've talked to today think this is a joke. McCain is basically conceding the election.

she is not a lady and she is not good for the ticket....my opinion

Hope somebody asks and keeps asking McCain why, given his concern for experience, did he choose inexperience to ride shotgun on his ticket? Why did he choose to pass over much more qualified and experienced people, men and women? How does this show any concern for the country should he be incapacitated? This is the best GOP had to offer?

These are so obvious. Obama was chosen by millions, having been vetted and tested in the primaires. Palin is chosen by one person.

The real issue here is NOT about Obama's experience v. Palin's experience. It's about McCain's judgment--his choice, given all the talent available to him in the GOP.

Wow! What a relief! Just when I expected McCain to select Joe Lieberman or Mike Huckabee, his desperation trumps his bad judgement and he selects a VP primarily on the basis of gender - a choice made with clearly zero consideration of her real qualifications to assume the presidency! McCain just as clearly demonstrates zero respect for women, based on his divorce of his former seriously injured wife, remarriage to an heiress whom he calls a trollop and a c__t, and his apparent view of women as either disposable assets or convenient window dressing. To think for an instant that Americans will not recognize this anachronistic, misogynist dodge is to insult the voters. But like Bush, McCain was never a person known for intelligent subtleties. If his tragically bad health, tendency to pander and advanced age don't get him, this most recent self-inflicted shot into his own foot will. Congratulations, Barack! John McCain has just abdicated to you and Joe. Good luck on your first terms. -Jerome Thomas.

I am saying that it's stupid and wrong to dismss Palin as Miers, and sexist as well.

Um, let's just skip right past the inane hyperventilating in the first half of your sentence. How, for the love of Pete, is it sexist to compare Palin to Miers?

Obviously trying to get unhappy Hillary voters with the selection of Palin. Women need to know that Palin is extremely anti-choice. Any women who is anti-choice keeps women in the traditional roles. This issue needs to be made loud and clear by the Obama group. Biden is the champion of women. He staunchly defends their rights to live free of fear and abuse. What are Palin's views on DV? Who knows! We do know she sould force the victim of domestic violence to bear the child of an abusive man, damning both mother and child to life of misery.

It is disturbing that this is starting to become a discussion of sexism. If I am going to have a complicated operation it is irrelevant and frankly none of my business, to ask a female surgeon how many children she has and whether they are too big a demand on her time. That is clearly sexist. It is not sexist to ask what experience she has had with the operation, or even assisting the operation should the surgeon (regardless of gender need to step out). I must say with a 72-year old surgeon who has had recurrences of melanoma and can't seem to remember how man homes he owns, the back-up surgeon would be even more important. This is not addressed to the McCain partisans, who are certain (and quite wrong in my view) that Obama is similarly uninformed and inexperienced. To those who support Obama, it is essential that we not let sexism be a distraction. It is certainly the case that either Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton are ready to assume the presidency. Most importantly, and I say this as someone who favored Obama from day one, a man with Hillary Clinton's resume and talents would have been a very viable candidate for the presidency- I don't think anyone could say the same of Sarah Palin.

1. I agree with karen marie's post at 1pm. What self respecting republican would run in these times.

2. I didn't really go through all the posts, but how come people aren't pointing out the bold letters spelling BIG OIL PUPPET written on her congenial forhead?

Everyone keeps forgetting that Alaska isn't that big of a state to run when it comes to what really matters...people! And running Alaska is nothing like running any other state. For crying out loud, the state pays people to live there! She doesn't have to deal with unpopular tax levies to pay for infrastructure or schools. And this whole inexperience thing is ridiculous anyway. All the Obama camp should be doing is pointing out the fact that Lincoln's opponents used the same argument against him.

So when are all the "value voters" going to ask how she can leave her infant baby with downs syndrome at home for eight years as vice president?

Isn't that their big issue?

Kevin I was at the Nutter center today and the Hillary cheer wasn't real big - just polite. The real roar came about the 18 millions cracks in the glass ceiling.

All Hillary supporters are welcomed to vote Republican just this once - don't feel guilty - everybody's doing it. We won't tell anyone what you did.

A while back NOW had an episode about the whole Alaskan scandal regarding VECO and Republican corruption. (See http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/347/index.html). In here, Palin comes off quite well, raising taxes on an oil company. It helps counter the fact that McCain thinks the economy is strong and can't remember how many houses he owns.

I think one of the previous posters is correct in saying the Dems should focus on her conservative views, especially on abortion, and not on how much experience she has or her Down's child.

It is way to soon to judge the impact or wisdom of the choice, but it sure has thrown liberals off balance.

I agree with some of Kevin's last comment (it is too soon to judge some other parts), but the comment also count be made about Obama (especially when he announced for president after about 150 days in the Senate).

"But a heartbeat away from the presidency? Someone with virtually no serious political experience, and no serious experience of any other kind to make up for it? She's going to shake up Washington?

I don't know how she'll do on the stump or in the debates. Maybe she'll be great. Who knows? But a potential leader of the free world? You gotta be kidding."

Orwell - don't be surprised if few Clinton supporters choose the anti-choice creationist because of her chromosomes.

As an Alaskan, I can truly say this is a shocker. A couple of thoughts.

I'm decidedly not Republican (Alaska Green Party), but I like Palin. She is, for a Republican, a breath of fresh air. Her heart's in the right place on social issues -- so much so, that she's started to shape up as a thorn in some Republicans' sides up here. Those certain parties have dredged up a (largely manufactured) so-called failure of judgement on her part. What that really means is that she has a problem (no secret) with one of her former inlaws, a so-called "peace officer," who's shown some, shall we say, errors of judgement of his own; including tazing an 11 year old to "show him what it's like," beating his wife, and various on-job violations, including drinking beers in his patrol car. Now she's being taken to task for supposedly firing the head of the Department of Public Safety (Troopers) "for" not firing this rouge cop for her.

That accusation is shaping up to be baseless, but as revelations unfolded, she promptly suspended one agency head who, it turned out, DID misrepresent himself as speaking for the governor, when calling the DPS about the bad cop.

The interference she was accused of is the kind of thing one expected from the Murkowski administration, but it's simply not Sarah's style. She sees governance as a demanding responsibility, not to be taken lightly, and that includes observance of both ethics and ethical appearances. She thinks like a mom setting a good example for her kids. Seriously, what better stance could you ask for, in a public servant?

This is why Sarah, to me, isn't even a Republican; just a dedicated public servant. (Doubtless some Republicans in this deep-red state feel likewise; but of course to them a real public servant is someone who's NOT looking after their own special interests!) I didn't vote for her, but I might the next time, depending on the competition.

BUT... is she ready to be president, when the old guy with the temper problem has an anurism in the Oval Office? Who knows, she might surprise there as well; as she surprised the AK Republicans, when she started tossing out Murkowski policies and put Murkowski's Royal Jet-to-nowhere back on the auction block, restored the seniors' supplimental allowance, and renegotiated King Murkowski's private pet deals with the oil companies.

But I would absolutely NOT support the McCain ticket on that account (sorry, Sarah), because we really need a NEW direction here, not a small chance at not screwing things up as badly as they might be. There's a much larger chance, that a McCain presidency will surprise us with how much worse our situation can become, domestically and geo-politically -- even from the current low point.

A President Palin would actually do her best to fix some things, such as making healthcare more accessible to seniors and soldiers; but some of her policies are unrelievedly Republican, such as her desire to drill out the Alaskan North Slope.

And for McCain, burdened with the stench of Bush's approval, this is a smart move. Republicans can now sell themselves as being open-minded -- while doing the same old things! The problem is when McCain kicks the bucket. Palin will have the same challenge at that point, that she's now having with the conservative die-hards in AK; but on a national scale, and against much better-funded opponents. Washington-centered Corporatists are pretty much guaranteed not to like her choices, which do tend to put people first, though not to the extent of backing unions or such.

Indeed, I can't see Sarah liking McCain's policies in general, and am a bit mystified as to why she would agree to this. McCain's hard-ass backers wouldn't touch her with a ten foot pole, if she were actually running for president.

And for me (not to be overly ghoulish about it), the possibility of a Presidential Anurism would then be the ONLY bright spot in a McCain Presidency. That's pretty sorry, though, when we have a chance right now to elect a President who could set the country on a course back to the things that matter.

All you folks who are talking about her lack of experience? Let's talk about your experience: Did you predict the winner in 2000 and 2004? You didn't? Let's have the Obama people go after Palin's lack of experience...that'll be good for laughs.

I just want to add that as a Governer of an acutal United State (no matter how long she been in office), Palin now has more pure executive management experience than the other three senators in the race combined.

State Governers tend to do well in Presdidential races because they are seen to be managers and directors of entire entities, rather than small comittees or individual legistlation, which are the provinces of seantors. And Governers have an edge since they come from outside of Washington. The Senate, remember, has an even lower public approval record than Goerge Freakin' Bush. McCain, Biden, Obama -- all come from the lowest rated senate body of all-time.

I am not saying McCain/Palin can win this thing (god forbid) but, this veep selection might actually work out ok for McCain.

Carol:
Maybe people aren't criticizing Palin as a BIG OIL PUPPET because it is almost assumed that anyone McCain picks for VP would be a BIG OIL PUPPET. His own puppet credentials are a bit shaky until recently, so who can big oil look to to protect their interests?

Does playing bingo with Eskimos count as foreign policy experience?

Look, John McCain vouches that Palin has enough experience to be Commander in Chief. That's the end of that line against Obama. Isn't that good?

Oops. Sorry for the typos, y'all.

I've been biting my nails over this since the announcement.

Peace,
DW

Obviously, Sarah Palin is the Commander In Chief in her home. Cindy McCain is the CIC in her home and John McCain is Castrated In Chief in his.

But why think about that? He's just lowered the bar of the Presidency to the level of bake sales and PTA politics. If elected, McCain & Company will have a new mantra: "When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping." Now, take THAT Putin!

How funny is it to see Kevin suddenly getting all concerned about "experience"? Does anyone take this guy seriously any more?

The sobering fact is that Palin has more executive experience than McCain, Obama and Biden combined.

"How funny is it to see Kevin suddenly getting all concerned about "experience"? Does anyone take this guy seriously any more?"

then why are you still reading him and posting here, jackass? FYI--this was one of Kevin's trolls from WM, who doesn't take him seriously but follows him from site to site.

"If she was such a horrible choice, the majority of you wouldn't be freaking out on such a massive scale. "

I get it, if anyone correctly responds that she's a joke, then she must be good! Anyone who says with a straight face that she was the best choice, or even McCain's first choice, isn't to be taken seriously.

This nomination smacks of the worst sort of tokenism. There are several Republican women with vastly more experience than Sarah Palin: Olympia Snow, Kaye Bailey Hutcheson, Liddy Dole...

This just confirms that McCain is incapable of thinking beyond the end of his nose, as in, We need someone young and female; Oh I know, Sarah Palin.

I was impressed that Gov. Palin went to college Abroad before returning to Alaska--U of Idaho.;-) I'm one of those who believe motherhood and PTA/city council leadership are absolutely relevant forms of experience, but seriously, we're talking insufficient DOMESTIC experience here.

"I think Katie has just nailed it."

hey everyone, Katie just said that Katie nailed it. LOL!

don't forget to change your handle the next time you compliment yourself!

"I just want to add that as a Governer of an acutal United State (no matter how long she been in office), Palin now has more pure executive management experience than the other three senators in the race combined."

if by "executive experience" you mean abusing your power to fire your ex-brother-in-law, then yeah, she's got it in spades.

Have no personal opinion at this point, but just finished reading a Defenders of Wildlife reaction where they highlight one of her accomplishments as being to sue U.S. Fish and Wildlife to delist the polar bear so Big Biz can move into Alaska.. :\

The Alaska Wildlife Alliance website additionally states she is pro airborn killing of bear and wolves..

Hm. Northern Exposure, it ain't..

An act of pure and simple desperation on the part of Rove/McCain.

Stick to the issues and she is a right winger pure and simple. Her credentials: a member of the NRA, hunts/fishes, anti-choice, anti-gay, etc. etc. Just one of thousands of right wingers and after all of the RNC dog and pony shows and when it comes down to the voting booth, Obama/Biden is the only viable choice.

This choice is ludicrous! Ms. Palin has almost no real experience to run this country and McCain's advanced age could put her in the driver's seat. This is the ultimate example of McCain's poor judgement. She is further to the right than Bush, has an abominable conservation record, and wants to overturn Roe vs. Wade! Any woman stupid enough to vote for this pair is NOT a real Hillary supporter. I was shocked that she had the gall to loosely compare her historic moment as VEEP contender to Hillary's achievements. She is NOTHING like Hillary! I am looking forward to Hillary spelling this out clearly to American women.

"All you folks who are talking about her lack of experience? Let's talk about your experience: Did you predict the winner in 2000 and 2004? You didn't? Let's have the Obama people go after Palin's lack of experience...that'll be good for laughs."

Actually, I did accurately predict the winner of both elections. I also prediced before Bush took office that we would be in a war before his term was over.

I did not vote for him. I will not be voting for McCain.

I am hopeful that Obama will be able to guide our government back in the direction the PEOPLE would like - or at least lessen the strain and stress of every day life for the PEOPLE.

Thank you, Dan Mortenson, for the Alaskan perspective. I appreciate your taking time to tell us about your governor. And also, thank you for reminding us that the charges that she used her office to have her brother-in-law fired are only allegations and should not be taken as hard fact.

That said, I'm quite certain that her political career will suffer for this mistake. I do believe she was brought on the ticket with the idea that she could attract the Hillaryites. But the older female demographic is simply not going to go for it - passing over other qualified women with more experience is not something they will forgive. In their minds, she hasn't earned her place, the way Hillary had. Then again, I imagine McCain didn't name Hutchinson or Rice or Snowe or any of the women on the list above because they all would have seen this for what it was, and told him to take a hike.

Biden is going to make mincemeat of her in the vice-presidential debate.

come on. picking a woman was very smart, i think we all agree with that.

now, if you want conservative men to still vote for her, well, make sure she looks pretty, is a mom who obviously is against birth control, is right with god, and doesn't have a whole lot of experience or skill. she's not threatening. therefor, she won't scare off the republican votes and may woo over some swing votes. Whitman, et al, certainly are better choices, but would not fit this bill.

my question is to the clinton supporters who were leaning toward supporting McCain. Does this affect their decision? I can't see how a super hardcore anti-choice woman is going to woo them. even many republicans are not going to fight over the 'abortion is okay in the instance of rape and incest' clause. but not Palin. nope, she's a pro-life FEMINIST. ha ha ha haaaaaaaa

another question: how many men or women with children under the age of five have run for VP or Pres? It just seems like a bad idea to me.... and, no, i don't think it's a sexist topic. it certainly doesn't promote the 'family values' that republicans seem to think are so important.

either way, i'm kind of tickled that old conservative men will either elect in a black man or a woman.

In their minds, she hasn't earned her place, the way Hillary had.

I'm lost as to how this can be written in a serious tone. Hilary rode to fame on the coattails of a famous husband. Palin achieved her stature on her own initiative. Further, from a feminist perspective, her stature eclipses that of her husband, not so with Senator Clinton.

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard this announcement. The idea that McCain, who has been harping on Obama's lack of experience chose a running mate that has even less experience. At least Biden has the experience that if he should have to step into the Presidency, he will be capable of being a leader. I don't have the confidence that Palin is ready for that kind of responsibility. It's one thing to be a mayor of a small town and a governor for 20 months, it's totally different being the President of the most powerful country in the world. I can't help but feel that this choice was not made considering what's best for the country, it's who would appeal to the Hillary die-hards and the evangelical far right base. So much for thinking outside the box! BTW, I can't wait to see a VP debate between Biden and Palin. I bet he can chew her up and spit her out without battng an eye!

Jeff...Obama has lived in the lower 48. Has Gov Palin ever traveled south of Idaho? Does she know the fabric of the people of the southeast or midwest or New England...all her fellow Americans?? What does she know of her fellow African, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Applachian, Ohio Valley, Mississippi Valley, Southwest, southern Californiz Americans???

"I'm lost as to how this can be written in a serious tone. Hilary rode to fame on the coattails of a famous husband. Palin achieved her stature on her own initiative. Further, from a feminist perspective, her stature eclipses that of her husband, not so with Senator Clinton."

Reality check here.

It was Hillary's husband who rose to fame on the coat tails of a strong activist woman, mother and wife... even he has said many times theirs was (and always had been) a partnership and he would never have achieved anything of serious accomplishment without her. Anyone who really knows the biography of either Hillary or Bill knows damned well that it was she who possessed the strengths and ambitions that propelled his entire career. It can easily be argued that were it not for her stance and actions in the aftermath of Bill's own lack of judgement and self control, he would have likely been successfully impeached for his stupidity and been drummed out of Washington in total (instead of partial, as was the case) disgrace.

Further, in virtually every case, it is a fact of life and history - except perhaps in many Republican households) that very few men ever achieve anything of measurable greatness without the support, aide, encouragement and strengths of good women behind or with them. It is also a fact that very seldom do such women ever get any credit for this either, except for lip service when it serves to somehow exalt the public position or perception of the man.

Why do you think Bill was even more devastated and emotional about Hillary's loss during the primaries than even she was? It is precisely because he knows the truth of this,... Hillary has always been the real strength and power in that team. No offense meant to Bill and taking nothing away from his own abilities and accomplishments, but he knows the truth of that above statement better than I. He knows very well who is most qualified to be President in their partnership.

Further, the fact is, Hillary has spent most of her entire adult life in some sort of service to her community and country, even if not always in elected office or before the spotlight of the media. As life long activist and community volunteer on a variety of social, political, environmental, humanitarian issues - including many women's issues, whatever that means, all issues are women's issues in my view - I can attest to the fact it is the women who are always behind getting anything meaningful done and are the real agents of change and progress, not the men. And, most of the time, they receive scant credit for it, are relegated to being in the shadows, while men take the credit. I say this as a man who knows very well the truth of that.

All that said, getting back to the topic here,....

Choosing Palin was merely an act of political desperation, it was cynical, calculated and all too obvious as to what was hoped for in this McBush selection for a V.P. running mate.

Regardless of all other considerations,... it is quite obvious as to whom this choice was meant to appease. Sadly, for McBush, and great for America, it will not work, on either count.

It is amazing to me that so many people and political strategists actually believe this media play-up and hyperbole about disaffected Hillary supporters who don't like Obama and may vote for McBush. What a bunch of bunk.

If anyone was ever truly a Hillary supporter, for whatever reasons, whether democrats or independents, I simply can not believe that any of them would ever vote for McBush, regardless of anything McBush does, who he picks for V.P., etc. That is utter nonsense.

No republican women were going to vote for Hillary anyway, period. And any supposed Hillary supporters who would now vote for McBush, were never really Hillary supporters in the first place. Now, some disaffected Hillary supporters may choose to not vote at all or vote for some one else, but for McBush? No way in hell.

In my closely contested state during the primaries, Hillary won by a narrow margin but, of course, lost the overall primary nationally. But in the ranks of the democratic party here I have not heard one single former Hillary supporter, especially none of the countless women I talk with all the time, even mention entertaining the idea they would now consider voting for McBush.

The only women who claimed to be Hillary supporters who would now vote for McBush, were not real Hillary supporters anyway, they were the "plants", "agent provocateurs", sent to pose as Hillary supporters at the behest and encouragement of the likes of Rush Limbaugh. Has everyone so quickly forgotten that little subversive ruse to disabuse and debase the political process? I haven't, in my state many such "infil-traitors" emerged within the ranks of our party activists, and they were easily recognized for what they really were,... frauds.

"Hillary supporters for McBush", is as much an oxymoron as the moniker, "Reagan Democrats" was and is. There is no such animal. If you voted for Reagan you were not a real democrat, period. Same applies here.

Both are media and political strategist constructs with no basis in reality at all. One of these days I keep hoping the people will wake up and start thinking for themselves and stop buying into the spoon fed media constructions.

Yes, hope springs eternal, here,... in spite of the biting reality of our times.

Orwell, why on earth would any Hillary supporter in her right mind vote for someone whose views are 180 degrees from Hillary's? Women aren't as shallow as you seem to think they are.

TangoMan, I'd be willing to bet money that you were a big supporter in 2000 of someone who was the Governor of a state where the legislature meets every other year and the Lt. Governor is more powerful than the Governor. I'll bet you were all tingly about this guy, even though he'd held elective office for less than six years, had zero foreign policy experience and had no discernible qualifications for office (unless taking naps and playing video games count as qualifications.) I'd even bet money you didn't care that this same guy is a dry drunk, an ex-cocaine user, and a draft dodger. Barack Obama's brilliance and depth shine out in comparison to the wretched failure he seeks to replace. Oh, and one more thing--10 years ago Obama was in the Illinois legislature. Ten years ago Sarah Palin was selling snowmobiles.

Of course, I should point out Palin DID participate in a beauty pageant and, 2 years ago, was mayor of a town about one-tenth as populous as the State Senate district Obama represented for 8 years, so I guess that counts for something. Her brilliant record will highlight McCain's stunning legislative record of being in the Senate for 22 years and getting ONE--yes, ONE--major piece of legislation into law.

"Like choosing a black man, with no substantive accomplishments in his life that set him apart from his peers, to head the ticket simply because he is a black man,... "

First of all, the fact Obama is an African American (half to be exact), was merely a plus, icing on the cake, for these times.

Obama's real appeal had nothing to do with his race, it had to do with his positions on the Iraq war and others at the time,... don't forget at the time Obama announced his candidacy, the Iraq War WAS the primary and most important issue then. Party strategists believed that was the major issue that would most affect the outcome of this election.

Secondly, if you know democratic party history at all, you know very well Obama is not the first African American to run for the presidency as a democrat. He is merely the first such viable candidate who had proven to be able to get elected to public office, both on a state level and the national level who could appeal to people of all genders and races. he was merely the right man at the right time, history and the times was on his side.

Third, what does his writing an autobiography right out of law school have to do with anything related to this issue? How many unqualified and, to put it frankly, terrible writers, get lucrative contracts to write books, to write for network news departments, television shows, newspapers, all sort of media outlets, politicians, and even jobs within presidential administrations, who are right out of school or have achieved little of any major comport in this country? Far too many, in my opinion.

Thats has nothing to do with this issue at all.

The fact is, whether you like Obama or not, his story, his life story, even straight out of law school is a compelling and encouraging one, it is a good story of the American dream achieved, regardless of when he wrote it. He could have wrote his story the very first day he was accepted into Harvard and it would have been a very compelling, improbable and great story even then. I wonder if you have even bothered to have read it?

Now, I don't know about you and how you define "substantive accomplishments",.. but getting into Harvard Law School, for the majority of American's, would be considered a pretty big accomplishment! In my family, with my own kids, that would be very big! Especially when it was done without the help of a rich daddy who is a Harvard Alumni, but was actually based upon one's own academic abilities.

Beyond that, and that aside, you may not think he has accomplished much,... but just ask the people on the south side of Chicago and in Illinois if they think he has accomplished anything of "substance" for them. I dare say many will disagree with you.

Personally, if nothing else, the very fact he was one of the very few in public office of any creed, let alone among the general public at large, who had the courage to speak out and oppose the Iraq war - at a time when doing so likely got one branded as a "traitor" and as being "un-American" and while the majority of American's were blindly playing "follow the leader" - in my book, that is an accomplishment of great measure in and of itself. We need more people of such courage in public office, not fewer.

Lastly, I am the last to argue with anyone about cynicism in political strategies, in any political party,... both major parties in my view stink in that regard. But that is the nature of politics in America, like it or not.

Obama choosing to run as a Presidential candidate could only be considered an act of ''desperation" in the sense that at the time both the democrats and America, in general, were "desperate" for a change, as they still are now. When Obama announced his candidacy, no one knew who on the Republican side would get the nomination for their party, let alone if Obama could even succeed in winning his own party's nomination. It was a shot in the dark, and many considered it a very long shot, at that.

Well, Obama did win his party's nomination, chose his V.P. as wisely as he could for his V.P.s experience, public profile and strengths,... and didn't do so as a knee-jerk act of desperation that runs totally contrary to his own party's core and professed ideals and historical beliefs. Obama, at least, stayed stayed true to his own - and his party's - core, professed ideals, beliefs and history, unlike McBush, in making his pick for V.P.

That is the point.

Personally, for all I know, Palin would make a better President than McBush would. I strongly suspect if she were the nominee of her party, it is very unlikely she would pick McBush as her V.P. running mate,... at the very least, merely being a woman and mother, as with the majority of them - based upon my own observations and experience - she is probably a helluva lot smarter than that.

Most women, that I know, certainly are.

Pallin is another far right-wing demagog. She does share rabidly anti-gay and anti-choice beliefs with McBush, though. With McBush moving even farther to the right. How much more do these neo-conservatives (with their "Project for a New American Century" scarey agenda) have to do to the country and the world before the ignorant and bigoted average American voter (just read some of the incredibly ignorant comments even here on MOJO!) catches on and votes for a less militaristic, less aggressive and intolerant candidate who may actually spend some of the trillions in improving the lives of US citizens which Bush and Co. have squandered in making Haliburton and the other republican war profiteers and big oil bubbas richer while the infrastructure, health care and everything else in the US continues to crumble? Poverty in the US has been growing for the last 8 long years while the richest 1% have raked in the profits from this greedy, incompetent, corrupt bunch. With the most corrupt government in US history (second only to Reagan's and Nixon's - both republicrats) the US voters seemed to be so fed up that it was said the democrats could put up anyone and they would get elected. Ha! The repubs have put up another right-wing idealogue (two actually) who want to give the US and the world 4 more miserable robber-baron/war-profiteering years of war, increasing poverty, lack of healthcare, corporate welfare and more perks to the rich and yet the polls show Obama/Biden and McBush/Pallin neck and neck! The repubs always ruin the economy and the country and leave it to the dems to try to fix it and then blame them when they have to raise taxes (as if Reagan's largest tax increase in history doesn't count) to rebuild programs for average citizens. It is a vicious circle. And then there is always the pre-election dirty tricks of the GOP (that Ross Perot made famous) that will call a red terror alert or something else just before the election to frighten voters into voting for them (last time it was "terrorism" - which GOP policy helped cause - and equal rights for gays and lesbians - which shouldn't even be a voter issue in a so-called democracy that claims to be a leader in "human and civil rights".) With the conservative corporate sponsored, cheer-leader US "news" media it is hardly any wonder that the average US voter is so ignorant and so brainwashed into accepting anything the "conservatives" want to do. We give thanks every day that we now have Al Jazeera in English and EuroNews to watch to find out what is really going on in the world. You won't hear it on NBC, ABC, CBS or even the timid PBS for sure. The GOP dirty tricks has already started with the Bush bunch helping to orchestrate the Georgia/Russia tensions to help get their more militaristic, kick-ass candidate elected. Watch for more to come. (How much did the US media report on this Bush admin/CIA covert op? It would have been easy to miss. The other media in the world made it a top story, as it should have been.) If the US would stop stirring up trouble all over the globe and breeding new "terrorists" with their neo-colonialism trying to rule the world through puppet governments and bullying, the world would be a much more peaceful place and maybe the US could actually intervene in situations (with the EU etc.) to do some good, like in Rwanda (which they did absolutely nothing to stop the genocide - no oil, I guess)and other countries where the people are brutalized (many times by US backed dictators and robber barons) instead of invading Iraq et al which did not have WMDs, support Islamic "terrorists", but did have oil. It's enough to make you sick. Yet the average ignorant voter will back the most militaristic, militant, kick-butt candidate, as always to the detriment of the whole country and the world. The US is the world's largest exporter of state terrorism (and has been for decades) and still the only country to have used nuclear weapons (against a civilian, non-military target to boot - twice). Is it any wonder the whole world looks at it as a bully and a hypocrite?

There are a lot of arguments to be made against Palin--let's not fall into the experience trap, necessarily. But for the love of God, Republican trolls, Alaska is tiny POPULATION-wise. You have a Republican governor of the actual biggest state, California. He may be boycotting your convention! And Ron Paul might have his-own mini-convention! (Incidentally, has Ron Paul endorsed McCain yet? He hasn't? My, my.)

A few points:
1) While, this is a defensive pick, McCain has succeeded in energizing the Republican base, they were significantly non-energized before. There may still be an enthusiasm gap , but it's smaller now.

2) Palin clearly seems to be a decent campaigner, and ran prieur makes some good points about us not underestimating her (at www.ranprieur.com).

3) She may not be ready to *govern,* but she probably doesn't hurt McCain's *campaign* as much as we like. Certainly not as much as Lieberman would have (Repubs hate him), Romney would have (distrust/Repub base has issue with Mormons), or Ridge (pro-choice).

That being said, there is good news:
1) She's not Christy Todd Whitman, Olympia Snowe, or Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Any one of those three would have actually expanded McCain's appeal to independents.

2) Clinton voters are angry--they're not falling for it at all, and that even penetrated the Traditional Media--CNN was all over that.

3) Romney's angry, as well he should be. Obama didn't use any of his final 3 as bait--you can easily see Bayh or Kaine being on his list. Hopefully Romney's anger'll carry over to other Mormons...

I hope many people remind Hillary to react quickly and strongly.

As she proclaimed she will do everything to help Obama elected, this is the kind of things that she, the best can and should do.
This won't take much time from her life. No need to get out there and fight.
She just need to make a well though declaration to the press.
But she must do it quickly because some of her supporter are still a little sadden, and all this might have reignited the pain.
Hillary correct reaction will show her sincerity to place the Democratic ideals first.

Ah, I love it when I strip the hood off of one of these right wingers like TangoMan! You see, Tango buddy, in a town of 8500 being on the city council isn't a full time gig. Even being mayor isn't. And you hit all the buzzwords right on cue. Ayers! Affirmative Action! It's so cute when you get mad. You never seem to mind, btw, the ultimate affirmative action of being born into a powerful family and being given a legacy appointment to Yale--or Annapolis. And the accusation about the election you make is a farce. Obama simply asked for the rules to be enforced in the election. How shocking!

I just saw some of the videos posted on americansunitedforchange.org and I have to admit she was pretty convincing about the reasons for allowing Alaska to tap into their natural resources. I think this is a big issue for many people who think the EPA is an extreme organization and fear a democrat in the white house will be unrealistically "idealistic" about saving the polar bears rather than saving the American people. It is an issue Obama and Biden need to address to quell this fear if they want to get elected.

Sarah Palin would, if elected, join a long line of women who Republicans place in positions to show their diversity. These women, including Condeleeza Rice and Christine Todd Whitman have virtually no effect on the men who put them into power. Whitman