And they had the nerve to call Hillary a ball busting bitch.

She was v v good.

She'll be around to plague us for years.

Now, I'd say both sides have their messiah ;)

I caught the few minutes of the culture war part on radio and it seemed too nasty.

I was able to sit down and watch the last 15 minutes and that part was boring, uninspiring, and she was clearly wishing the whole thing were over.

The family walk out on the stage looked crappy, too. They should have been dressed up Alaska style.

The soul of George Bush in the body of Tina Fay.

As I said at Ezra's site, I found her speech to be incredibly inspirational. For example, it inspired me to give $250 to Obama.

From the little I saw, my take was that she did what McCain wanted her to do: take the limelight from Obama and rile up the base, but he's really not going to get any more out of it than that.

he's really not going to get any more out of it than that.
You mean, she's won the news cycle for McCain at the expense of long-term success?
But that's so unlike this campaign!

I doubt McCain, and the modern Buchanan would get along. Last week Pat went non-linear over the McCain using a paid lobbyist for the republic of Georgia. Culturally, sure, but not when it comes to war and peace.

I'm slightly concerned (in the annoying-thought-in-the-back-of-my-brain type of way) about the vice presidential debates:

Biden v Palin

Maybe I was watching a different speech, but I agree with Andrew Sullivan that this was an overly partisan speech that will not play well with independents. She seemed juvenile in her attacks. This will work with dittoheads.

I think that if this is all they've got, Obama's looking good.

Where was the connect to the average American? The guy who's plant is closing, the community who's main employer is going offshore, the family that's one missed paycheck or one illness away from losing everything?

No mention.

"This election's not about me. It's about you." - that's the winner.

I don't agree. I think she came off as mocking, nasty, lecturing. I think her delivery is pretty annoying.

Frankly, I'm surprised. I thought they'd go for something a little softer.

For an introductory speech there was way too much smirk. She simply doesn't have the standing to adopt the tone she did.

Did we see the same speech? The rigid body language? The forced hand gestures? The robot like affect? I saw Palin as being in way over her head. I was saddened that someone so obviously unprepared was thrust onto the national stage. As my wife put it, "it was like she was running for student council".

The potential upside for the republicans: if Biden doesn't hold back and treat her with kid gloves, it will look like an unseemly bloodbath and actually hurt the Democratic ticket.

My guess is that Palin's career is nearly over. If she survives troopergate, she's still a one term governor and historical footnote.

Go to Andrew Sullivan's blog - he really nails the speech.

"Palin echoes Giuliani's attack on "cosmopolitan" elites. All the buzzwords are there. Elite. Elite. Elite. This is a culture war speech - and she is becoming a symbol of red America. This is what they have to do top win: divide and polarize again. We are half way through, by the way, and we have not heard a single policy proposal. But we have heard contempt for someone who works as a community organizer in the South Side of Chicago."

"I have to say that the affect is of someone running for high school president."

"Obama wants to reduce American power and prevent energy production. The mockery of Obama from Palin is striking. I don't recall anyone mocking McCain at the DNC."

"However admirable it is to be a mayor, is it really necessary to drip contempt for people who work as community organizers? It seems to me that Palin doesn't quite have the stature to be putting down someone who has won millions of people's votes. This is a much more partisan speech than I was expecting."

I thought she was grating and mean-spirited, but I can see her appeal. She's good-looking and ostensibly simple. She lies unblinkingly. I think she overplayed her hand by going on for so long, but that may just be partisanship talking.

If I were a rightwing religious wacko I would be overjoyed.

Don't agree that this was a very good performance. For her first big introduction, she spent very little time defining herself and spent a whole lot of time fluffing McCain. Maybe this is because she doesn't have a really thick highlight reel, but still. Seems like she almost wasted the spotlight she was given to put people more at ease.

I do agree with commentators above that this speech was also a bit on the snippy side, which surprised me. It was full of the sort of red meat that will play well with a room of delegates, but I don't think that stuff will go down well with the larger, more independent, crowd. Seems almost juvenile.

I figure the Republicans have a new star and unless she self-destructs (which may still happen--she hasn't done an interview yet and scandals are a-brewing) she'll be a star in Republican circles for years to come.

But all the condending nasty remarks? Wow. Maybe good for getting the base excited but she's not reaching anybody new. If you like what she said, you're already a true blue R.

This was the line that really got me:

"What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?"

The girl needs to get a grip. Maybe that flies in AK but where I live we expect a little more respect from our leaders.

"Iran doesn't control a fifth of the world's energy supply"

They regularly threaten to close the straits of Hormuz, and they
have pretty much done that beforehand. Without possessing nuclear weapons.

Try to keep up, stupid.

Kevin - When I heard her say about Iran controlling or putting at-risk the "fifth of the world's energy supply" (I don't remember the exact quote) I understood it to mean Iran can threaten supplies from Iraq, Kuwait, Audi Arabia, Qatar, etc that go through the Gulf, not just shutting off their own supply.

We frequently talk about how we wish Democrats would go on the attack, but we comfort ourselves that that stuff won't go over well tonight.

I couldn't be more in agreement with people who feel her resume is all fluff, except for where it's complete lies--but she killed.

Once again, we're left to hope that the middle third of the electorate can see through Grade-A bullshit, because in our reality-TV culture, Sarah Palin is America's Idol tonight.

I don't think this speech is a loser for the Republicans because, while it will stir the base, the base can't win this election. The biggest loser is Sarah Palin. Her introduction to the national stage is as a hatchet woman. By tomorrow morning her reputation will be of a very snarky and mean attack dog. If she doesn't win in November her career will be over. Since this speech will not change the fundamentals of the campaign we have just witnessed the high water mark of Sarah Palin on the national stage.

100% standard GOP.

Don't give me a job.
Don't even explain where mine went, and why.
Don't give me health insurance.
Don't give me a clean environment.
Don't give me a saner world.

Don't tell me the truth.

Just give me someone to hate.
That'll keep me warm, doctor my ills, fill my stomach, save my life.

The honest liberal in me feels duty bound to point out that Brian Schweitzer and Obama both evidence some level of support for clean coal...

...which always makes me wonder if it really IS nonsense.

*

They regularly threaten to close the straits of Hormuz, and they have pretty much done that beforehand. Without possessing nuclear weapons.

That oil belongs to Iran, not "the world" - just like the energy supplies in the form of coal in Appalachia belongs to the U.S.- not "the world."

Unless the Republicans are suddenly making the argument to socialize global energy supplies.

If she is more conceivable as POTUS to viewers/voters outside her base, then the speech was a success (didnt watch myself). If not, it wasn't. Simple as that: the threshold question isn't whether Palin is an effective spokesperson for the GOP, it's whether voters outside her base are comfortable with her being a McCain heart attack away from being leader of the free world.

*

Just as many Republicans looked to their defeat in '64 as the start of a new conservative movement, many hard-righters saw the '92 Buchanan culture war speech as the start of their own movement.

And now, here in '08, they are in charge, and McCain is going along for the ride.

The consequences of a McCain/Palin victory are now clear: this is war, plain and simple.

I give them a better than 50-50 chance of pulling it out. Because in a war, it really is "either your for us or your against us", and many will switch sides out of fear.

Thank God Alaska is a big state. They will need all that room when the camps open.

Purple State makes a good point here:

Sarah Barracuda--A Bit Too Vindictive?

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/09/sarah-barracudaa-bit-too-vindi-3.php

"Troopergate may have legs. This woman attacks her enemies. She's nasty. Vindictive. Look for people she's stepped on on the way up. They'll have good stories to tell."

Sarah Palin's speech was short on any vision for the Greater Good and long on passive aggressive sarcasm. It was disturbing to watch Republicans cheer as she delivered her snippy jabs. If she represents any portion of America, no wonder the country is in such a mess. So much for "good Christian values." This is just more evidence that progressives need to take back America's future. There is just too much at stake.

Remember when the GOP tried to run Alan Keyes against Obama in the senate race? The memories.

Sarah Palin's speech seemed stiff and petty. Maybe she's new to all this or something. Giuliani was entertaining - but kinda like an alcoholic in a bar at closing time.

The images of the crowd at this thing are horrifying and ghoulish. This convention makes me want to schedule a doctor's appointment.

*

[Your reputation precedes you, and you aren't getting a foothold here. -Mod]

My guess is it'll put a dent (at least) in Obama's polling lead. These snarling attacks are the basis for the GOP's campaign, and they'll have some effect. Probably not enough to get McCain further than close behind Obama again, though.

Palin will definitely stay on the ticket, barring some sort of Perry Mason moment. The anti-Palin scandal strategery is to beat up on McCain's erstwhile base in the press, claiming all the nasty stories are the result of misogynistic liberal bias.

Next up, debates (as long as we can stay awake through McCain's acceptance speech).

[Kevin isn't deleting you, I am, and as I said, you aren't getting a foothold here. Your reputation precedes you. I told you that, too. -Mod]

From a comment over at the Fix: If Palin is a Hockey Mom and a Hockey Mom is a Pit Bull with lipstick, what does that make her?

Palin delivered a dreadfully sophomoric speech written by young smart ass Rovian speech writers. I had expected better. They have solidified "the base" but the Republican base is not as large and the Democratic base and I suspect Palin's Christianist theological ties will alienate the crossover voters (formerly known as Independents) who rejected those folks in 2006.

The R's need an "enemy". They picked the MSM which has actually been in their corner recently. Now they've alienated them in "solidifying" their base. The R's organization was too cute by half.

[Hello, McCain Blog Outreach Coordinator - your shills won't get any points posting here. Maybe you should take Mother Jones off your targeted blogs list and save us both some time. -Mod]

JRS Jr: Harry Reid just called her remarks "shrill". I'm sure comments like that will go a long ways with women voters.

Huh? I'm a woman and called Palin "grating". So what?

The Republicans' sudden embrace of political correctness cracks me up. Weren't they supposed to hate that sort of thing?

So Joe Biden can act like a rabid attack dog, but... blah, blah, blah.

I wish I were watching the campaign you're imagining in that pin head of yours. To my great disappointment, Biden hasn't let out with anything yet.

Good work, Yvonne. Rack up those McCain Points...

Scary black guy -- check.
Empty suit -- check.
Sen. "Bomb-bomb Iran" the real peace candidate -- check.

The whole list, in a very economicial package.

Yvonne--parody or not?

You know, I came over here to check if anyone would be honest. That was one great speech. Be honest, for once.

I agree with other posters who cited a "high school" quality in the speech, which is pretty much the level of Republican political discourse.

I want to see the Obama campaign overtly telegraphing that, if Palin claims she's experienced and tough, she shouldn't complain afterward if Biden shows no mercy in the VP debate. The assumption that a woman who claims to be presidential material must be protected by Victorian sensibilities is illogical. If she can't find Finland on a map, she deserves to be relentlessly mocked.

Putin wouldn't give her a break.

Throwing snide comments at your opponent qualifies you for the presidency. And people eat it up. Pathetic.

"What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?"

The girl needs to get a grip. Maybe that flies in AK but where I live we expect a little more respect from our leaders.

There is only one reason this line works, and you know it worked, and you know why it worked.

Obama discussing his nomination said people would look back at the day of his nomination and realize this was “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”.

People who are so presumptious (sp?) that they think they can heal the planet deserve to be mocked, and mocked often. If Obama had never given her the material, she couldn't deliver the rebuke.

"You know, I came over here to check if anyone would be honest. That was one great speech. Be honest, for once." -- John Hansen

No, it really wasn't. Honest. It went on too long, the delivery was mediocre, and she regurgitated the same claptrap we've heard for years.

What was so special about it?

Hansen, you unreconstructed ideologue, you have heard the speech she was mocking and know that obama himself was mocking the "messiah" mantle that the right has been trying to hang him with.

And no, I was not impressed. If I was grading her presentation, I would give it a C-. She certainly does not have the standing to be as bitchy as she came off looking. Besides, she's a bald-faced liar. I especially liked the part where she trashed "Washington insiders" when Bush speechwriters penned her screed.

But hey, it's about what I expected from Trailer Park Barbie.

I have to say, I was really, really surprised by this speech. My wife thought people who were uninformed might find it compelling. I, however, haven't heard her speak and was especially interested in seeing how she came across.

"Unpresidential" was the same idea that kept coming to me over and over as I watched and listened. It could have been the voice. It could have been how uncomfortable she looked. I've seen a lot of speakers over the past two weeks who seemed much less rehearsed. And I think, for many undecideds and independents, seeing if they could imagine her as president is important. They had a very big opportunity. Whatever short term gain this nets them, I think it's a long term loss. They aren't going to have any other opportunity to define her.

I don't know, really, but I was expecting much more from her, figuring that she had some great dynamic quality. Then again, I've thought Bush was remarkably bad from day one. But even he carried off the folksy charm that suggested he knew more than he let on. Staying so far from anything concrete—and lying so blatantly about the few specifics she mentioned—is just setting them up to fail, you would think.

Ha! I did exactly the same thing.

Joe Klein:

Palin established herself as a major-league performer, a very effective messenger for the perennial Republican themes of low taxes and strong defense. And a new theme--government reform--that changes the terrain of the election and will have to be forcefully countered by the Democrats.

Sarah Palin is a person who believes that God has put her on the national stage to take America into the last days of the End Times. Scratch beneath the surface of this speech, and you will hear the faint drumbeat of the current administration suspending the election in November and simply staying in power. WAKE UP!

USA, WE ARE SCREWED! AND HERE'S THE PROOF:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSTZe1ousMI

Are you for real Yvonne?

Sara Palin scares me precisely because of what I know of her. She is a vindictive and corrupt politician and a liar.

As small-town mayor, she hired a lobbyist with connections to both Don Young and Jack Abramoff who helped Wassila land earmarks worth over $4000 per resident. Despite the infusion of all that cash, she left the city with over $20 million in long-term debt including $15 million for a sports complex that still hasn't been built because of her insistence on using land the city didn't own. And now she tries to portray herself as a reformer and lies about opposing the 'bridge to nowhere'.

As mayor, she asked the city librarian about how to ban books and threatened to fire her for not being supportive. She did fire the police chief for wanting bars to close earlier in response to a rash of drunk driving incidents. As Governor, she fired the Alaska Public Safety Commissioner who wouldn't go along with her family's vendetta against her ex-brother-in-law and lied about the reasons for the firing.

As for your complaints about Obama, you do realize that McCain has reversed himself on literally dozens of issues since becoming a candidate for the 2008 election. Personally, I would much rather have Obama who has consistently shown his knowledge and judgement of international affairs rather than McCain who uses unthinking belligerence as a substitute for diplomacy and thought.

They made a huge mistake not trying to broaden her appeal to people who don't strong identify as republican-- instead she was snide, sarcastic and, well, angry and bitter. Nothing about what brought her to politics, what American means to her, none of the regular-- this is me, this is what I'm about stuff. What she just told everyone is that she's a pit bull with lipstick. Reminds me of Cheney-- minus the lipstick.

It was her big introduction on the political stage and she blew it by spending far too much time revving up the already excited base. Her attitude and delivery represented the kind of politics the other side is railing against-- Obama is a bridge-builder and Palin is a bridge-burner.

Liberals have a problem with religion because PC is not logically consistent.

If liberals were to be forthright and point out that Catholics and Evangelicals want to establish their dogma as law, and the Pope is on our very doorstep trying to run the Supreme Court, then they would have to admit that diversity doesn't always mean assimilation into the melting pot. Maybe JFK didn't prove that Catholics can accept freedom of religion over allegiance to Rome after all.

Best to stick you head in the sand by calling religion "conservatism."

I wonder if Palin may have suffered by going on after Guiliani -- her speech sounded nasty and smug in a particularly juvenile way. But I think it came off as being even more so by association with Guiliani's warm-up, in which he sounded like a vicious, raving lunatic. I can't imagine anyone who's not already a hardcore right-winger watching this display with anything more positive than bemused befuddlement. They're the ones who have been in power for the last 8 years, and they're so fired up and pissed off -- about what, exactly? Themselves? And why is it that Republicans only seem to really come alive when they get mean and childish, as they did at great volume tonight?

Republicans have clearly shown us that they will mercilessly attack Obama and Biden without regard for truth. I wish Obama's campaign hits hard on the numerous lies and exaggerations coming out of the repubs. They have to tackle McCain's grand leap from military veteran and POW to experienced foreign policy hand. The repubs are making a big deal about Palin's "executive" experience. Someone has to point out that McCain doesn't have any executive experience either. Repubs are making a big deal about McCain's role in the Surge. Someone has to point out that the Surge is one battle in a larger disastrous war.

I'm just wondering -- people say that Palin will connect the GOP with small towns. But she reminds me of the smug, condescending woman who is the President of my homeowners association -- and my guess (OK, my hope) is that her snide, snarky attitutde WILL remind people, in small towns and large, of their PTAs and parish councils. As others have said -- very Tracy Flick.

As usual, I did not, I guess, see the same speech as the pundits. It wasn't particularly well delivered or very smart but somehow the narrative came down as how it was 'great' speech. Sigh.

I was a tiny bit encouraged by the press pushing back a little and saying that 'great speech' notwithstanding it was their job to investigate her record. But appalled by the press seeming acceptance of a strategy of Palin staying away from the press. Finally, the whole 'family is private' stuff is off the table as far as I'm concerned. For all the verbiage about the gift of special needs children, they used that child like a prop. And funny, how the pregnant one seemed much more pregnant last night (not trying to hide it any longer).

Game on.

Ummm, she wore a Buchanan button while mayor of Wasilia. Sounds like she supported him back then to me.

Are we sure this wasn't Rudy in drag again! Let's not talk about it let's get them out for good. I'm exhausted from the past 8 years! The catchy phrases were fine one liners but what in the end did she say. Granted I'm no fan but really get on board with a message or thank you for turning the undecided. Obama '08 !

AS THE MOM OF FOUR, I PERSONALLY KNOW, UNLESS YOU HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY TO SPEND ON CHILD CARE, YOU CANNOT TAKE CARE OF FIVE CHILDREN, SPEND QUALITY TIME, AND BE A VICE PRESIDENT. THEN THERE IS HER "PERIOD" TIME, HORMONES RAGING TIME, OH OH,,,,,MAYBE THAT IS WHY SHE WAS SO BITCHY IN HER SPEECH, SO WE SHOULD GET USED TO IT??
HER LOOKS WILL FADE, HER HUSBAND WILL SUFFER,HER CHILDREN WILL ALSO, HER STATE WILL HAVE TO FIND A NEW PTA MAYOR,, AND HER DOG HOUSE WILL HAVE TO LOOK FOR A NEW PIT BULL! PITY OUR COUNTRY IF SHE WINS, MORE MORE YEARS OF NASTY SARCASM,,, REMEMBERING HOW BUSH FINALLY HAD TO APOLOGIZE FOR HIS "BRING UM ON" "DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS" CRAP,,,,, YES SURE, AND THE TERRORISTS DID JUST THAT,AND BROUGHT IT ON. DUMB SARCASM , SHE IS MORE LIKE GEORGE,CLOSE SET EYES EVEN. YOU WILL NEED YOUR LIPSTICK SARAH.

I recall the great (manufactured) outrage on The Right over Michelle Obama's comment over being proud of America for the first time in her adult life. As Sarah Palin said, in small towns they are always proud of America. Except perhaps for her husband, Todd, who loves America so much that he joined a political party desiring the secession of Alaska. Can you imagine what FOX news would say if Michelle Obama had come within two miles of an organization advocating secession, much less joining one?

Sarah Palin is dangerous. She lacks discernment, judgement and humility, This insufficiency certainly does not make her an appropriate candidate for Vice President of the U.S.. She is a petty, arrogant person, oblivious of her own insufficiency --Of course, I”m ready to be V.P. or president tomorrow morning! It is also deeply disturbing to see the kneejerk adulation of the republicans around her.

Palin didn’t have time to outline any direction on key issuse in her speech because she used her time to take cheap shots at Obama.

She sounded like a catty grade seven girl spreading vicious rumours. She demeaned Obama’s accomplishments and qualities. Here’s just one example. The fact that Obama was working to help feed people in dire poverty is worthless, in her opinion and not count as a responsability. Is that because there was no fat budget attached to it? All the more credit to Obama for seeing what matters.

Of course It is easy for Palin to dismiss Obama’s ivy league credentials, and his humanitarian accomplishments, since she could never achieve them and cannot fathom their value. Once in office, he will frame many documents and they will be well-reasoned, sound and fair, not flighty.

Honestly, this person is dangerous. She is already urging republicans to stoop to a pathetic level and it is very sad that they are so quick to follow.

hmm...the posting here are obviously one sided. After watching a mom succeed in the national spot light,the question to ask yourselves is are you really ready for change? Regardless of what you think or the media protrays, it's coming and her name is Sarah.

She says "How is raising taxes going to help the plant worker, the average american?" Um, let me tell you how: He's lowering taxes for 95% of americans, only raising them for the top two tax brackets. Don't blatantly lie, you inexperienced shrew.

After reading an article at about the increasingly monotone Republican party, I paid special attention to the crowd shots, when I wasn't throwing up.

In total, I spotted nine African Americans (not including Mr Steele, who we Marylanders finally dumped), one Asian-American, and possibly one Latin-American. Even if you double that number, it does not bode well for the good old US of A.

I could not help wondering if this is some sort of "silent apartheid", where an elite wealthy minority controls an entire country with ridicule and voter suppression.

I just realized what the Repubs and the scriptwriters meant by making the speech more masculine - bitchiness!

Can't understand what delivery pundits saw. I saw a schoolmarmy wooden delivery. When I listened to clips on news this morning it didn't get any better.

do you drive a car and heat a home ?????

...I think Mrs. Palin might be a challenge and real big trouble for the unprepared. In the least she's what the GOP needs to put some New Millenium into the McCain ticket. Most likely though, add her appeal to the immovable segments of population that WON'T vote for Obama because:
He's black, Arab, or both,
He's Muslim,
He's a mystery,
He has no track record,
He has a "Rev. Right" problem,
He's not from the South,
He's never managed even a "paper route",
He has no executive experience, etc., etc. and you have enough of the popular vote and enough of the regional electoral vote to win in a landslide. It might be the most lopsided election of the 21st Century!

You can't coalesce uncertainty with "pie-in-the-sky" eloquence

Interesting comments here. A VP's job in american Politics is to ATTACK the opponent. Get over it its politics. If you want to end the cultural war YOU on the LEFT who started it need to find a way to end it. This Cultural war didn't start until the Terrible and despicable treatment of Dan Quayle in '88. Then there was no FOX news to counter balance you all. You destroyed a man with 12 years in the Senate on the foreign relations committee. Because he didnt hold your values. It's the same with Palin you don't agree with her so she's "anti-woman".

I personally would love to see this war come to an end... to do that the dems on the left need to be willing to negotiate on critical issue. Get rid of the crazies in your own party! Abortion on demand partial birth abortion, late term abortion, don't let states vote on issue. Obama had a great appeal but you need to offer more than "I believe in God too" Until the left backs off it's crazy position these values voters are STUCK with the fiscal conservatives. Notice the words I used. We are stuck with them not because we like them but because the crazies in the left drove us here.

As an independent, I'm still not sure who I'll vote for come November. While I was impressed with Palin's obvious ability to work a crowd, I was shocked and more than a little disappointed with all the sarcasm and back-biting comments in her speech. I'm all for a woman asserting her power, but I fear because she is a woman, this will cast her in the light of "b*tch." IT's a shame she couldn't spend more time highlighting her qualities and qualificiations and less name calling. So much for the "moral" majority.

Amazing how she said nothing over these same few days to provoke any of these scathing and unfair attacks.

That is rich. Sarah Palin is a shameless liar. Imagine if Obama paraded a pregnant, unwed 17-year old daughter and her boyfriend at the Democratic National Convention. He would be crucified.

Palin wants to be Vice President, right? That involves a bit of scrutiny. Deal with it.

"And clean coal doesn't exist"

lol. What a ludicrous statement:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/clean-coal.htm

She was ok, but basically didn't say anything meaningful. She's the politician for our reality TV world, totally lacking in substance of a vice president, but she looks so different from a typical republican that she's an energizer for them.

A few comments here have noted the "highschoolish" aspects of this speech and the convention so far. I was struck by this too, especially the chanting (much more frequent and louder than at the Dem convention) that was so pep rally-ish. I wonder if that image won't backfire -- they can't win without some independents, but the image is of a closed group, who aren't inviting you in. The comment on community organizers wasn't just a snark on Obama, it was offensive to anyone who works at any kind of non-profit, and I just don't see this as doing anything except solidifying those who have already put Obama in the lead.

Her speech wasn't a home run it was a "grand slam", this lady can kick ass and take names, no wimp here!! This has got to be scary for the Washington elite and liberal media. Wow, what an introduction to all those that tried to bury her even before we got to know more about her. This gal aint going to roll over and play dead!!!

And if Palin truly believes that Alaska's cup runneth over with oil, then she shouldn't be the least bit concerned about Iran's oil...

So far by the looks of this convention – the Republicans would have trouble just trying to 'Change' a flat tire. As for Palin, I'm glad she can kill a Moose and be a pit bull wearing lipstick. But we need a leader who also uses diplomacy. Any 2 year old can say 'No' but apparently Palin's daughter cannot -hey Palin wants to scrutinize your family choices, so why can't we judge hers? As for Republicans -they gave us a B-Actor, & Curious George-a man w/the lowest IQ for President. So yeah anything is possible in America.

Very astute observations. Thank you!

As an independent, my research to arrive at a sensbible, educated decision in this race is very imminent. Seemingly, all is fair in war and politics, but I'm dejected by the lack of substance displayed by the RNC hitherto. It is quite unproductive to waste this national stage with unfounded, juvenille bantering, while taking no time to address the issues affecting the average American. She may in fact be successful in persuading the religious fanatic to buy into her family values tirades (i.e. abstinence) albeit she has failed to effectively sell it to her own daughter. This was not a well-thought out, well-formulated introduction.

So about Palin's daughter... would you rather she have an abortion? "Parading" her doesn't mean she approves -- it means she loves her anyway.

About Obama lowering taxes for 95% (while raising it for the "rich" 5%) -- have you stopped to figure out whether or not you're included in the 5%? If you're a dual income family with a decent job -- you might be surprised to find your taxes going up (I know we were).

Are you a small business owner or have aspirations to be? The thought of giving over 50% of your earnings to the government in taxes doesn't turn your stomach slightly? Our country was founded on "the American dream" -- being able to start businesses and make a life for yourself. Obama will squash entrepreneurs making it close to impossible to gain the start ups.

And foreign policy? That's where I start to get really scared.... While I admire the desire for diplomacy and negotiation... how realistic is that really? Those with an evil agenda will not negotiate with us. I'm absolutely NOT pro-war and I would love to see us out of Iraq with victory on our side. However... would you rather the war be on our soil? I fear with Obama, the war will come to us, because he's turning a naive eye to the reality of the world, and his smooth speeches hypnotize people into thinking that the world is a much safer place than it is.

Sarah Palin's speech was admittedly more "snarky" than I expected. But I can't say I disagreed with most of what she said.

I never thought I would have anything good to say about Dick Cheney, but after listening to excerpts of Palin's speech on the radio this morning, I heard a brief clip of Cheney speaking in Georgia. And I must say that Cheney's warm, sonorous, well-modulated speaking voice was a welcome relief from Palin's brittle, nasal, squawky yammering.

The woman is in serious need of a voice coach.

As to the substance of her speech, there was none. The message it conveyed was her absolute confidence and certainty that her Republican audience is ignorant, stupid and gullible and easily manipulated with blatant lies and transparent bullshit. What is it about Republicans that makes them swoon over "leaders" who hold them in such obvious contempt?

And clean coal doesn't exist.

Arguably that could mean coal-fired electricity plants with carbon sequestration.

I went to a technical lecture on this stuff. The estimates are the sequestration would increase the cost of net power generation ("net" because pumping the fluid CO2 takes energy) by about 30% at least for new power plants in geologically favorable areas. 30% more may sound like a lot, but that's actually still cheaper than alternatives in most cases.

There are a boatload of caveats of course. Most notably, there are only two truly major sequestration plants already online in the world (both of these are related to petroleum extraction not coal-fired electricity).

And clean coal doesn't exist.

Tell that to Al Gore who -- rightly in my view -- promoted carbon sequestration for coal fired power plants in his major speech calling for carbon-neutral power generation within 10 years.

I don't know whether Palin wrote that speech, but whoever did doesn't yet reach the constitutional minimum age for the presidency.

I think this speech showed whose votes McCain is really going after. He's not going after the "Hillary Hardcore". It's a red herring argument to say Palin is designed to attract them. She's not. Never was. That talking point was a pitch in the dirt and, as usual, the media swung at it.

She's designed to go after Reagan Republicans, independents who are tired of Washington and its single-digit approval ratings, and swayable MEN. Guys like me who harbor a little institutional guilt over the glass ceiling, but have had no way to do anything about it - until now.

Moderante men can vote for McCain/Palin and rid themselves of that little, nagging guilt they have that they've had it good their entire lives at the expense of womens' ability to move up.

BTW, folks, Palin's speech was short on economic specifics because a basic plank of the Republican platform is governmental non-interference with the economy unless and until it gets too far out of whack.

Contrast this with Obama: he has a gazillion entitlements and programs he wants to spend money on, so he HAS TO mention them.

Palin appears to want people to be free to make their own destiny in the world. This is an attractive starting point to me. I'm moderate. That means I want MODERATE government.

My concern with Obama is:

1. All talk, maybe no action.

2. Even if action, maybe too much.

3. And even if moderate action, the wrong kind of moderate action. We need policies that foster competition, rather than protectionism. If anybody is the next Buchanan, economically, it's Obama. America is great at personal innovation and ownership. I want policies that foster that, not policies that foster protectionism and reliance on government innovation and ownership. I consider these moderate positions. You all probably think I'm a right wing nut job for even uttering these things... oh well, it's not me who's out of touch.

Jean wrote: "So about Palin's daughter... would you rather she have an abortion?"

I would rather that Palin's daughter have the right to decide for herself whether to have an abortion.

Sarah Palin believes that neither her daughter nor any other woman should have the right to make that choice for herself.

In an America governed by Sarah Palin's policies, her teenage daughter's out-of-wedlock pregnancy would not be a "private family matter". It would be a police matter.

Sarah Palin believes that if a woman -- even a teenage girl like her own daughter -- is violently, brutally raped and impregnated against her will, that the government should force her to give birth to the rapist's offspring against her will.

Is that what you believe?

This speech plays to the base, who, predictably, loved it. It was well delivered--proof that she can read from a telepromter. But there's no evidence at all that she has given sustainted thought to the serious issues facing this country. That's what makes McCain's choice of her so cynical, and worse, so unpatriotic.

dave wrote: "... a basic plank of the Republican platform is governmental non-interference with the economy unless and until it gets too far out of whack."

Bullshit. The Republican Party of Cheney, Bush and McCain has practiced massive state intervention in the economy to benefit their cronies and financial backers and to support the ruthless class warfare of the ultra-rich corporate aristocracy against everyone else.

If more government of, by and for ExxonMobil is what you want, then by all means vote for the Palin-McCain ticket.

SecularAnimist -

My comment was addressing those who slam Palin for having an unwed, pregnant, 17-year-old daughter. Speculation here, but my guess is that neither she nor her daughter were "happy" with that, nor was it likely a "planned" pregnancy.

Her daughter DOES have the right, currently, to have an abortion. Yet she chose not to. I applaud that decision. And Palin doesn't, in any way, shape, or form endorse teen pregnancy by "parading" her daughter on stage, as another commenter put it. She shows that she loves her daughter anyway.

You ask what I believe; I'm pro-life (but you already knew that, I suspect). However, in cases of rape, incest, etc., or if the mother's life was in danger there could be an exception. I believe those violent incidents should be the ONLY exception. Obviously this wasn't the case with Palin's daughter, so my beliefs really are completely irrelevant in this discussion.

Seriously though -- as I said, it's not about what I believe in this case. It's about people criticizing Palin for having an unwed teen daughter... because at this point (i.e. now that she's already pregnant), there's only one way for her to NOT be pregnant anymore. So that was my question to them -- would you rather she have an abortion?

SA: that's most certainly true. I think that's why so many moderates and even conservatives are unhappy with Bush. I know I am. The only thing I'm satisfied with is the obvious: we haven't been attacked again. He gets a few points from me for that. But that's about it.

Jester667 wrote: "Along with other Conservatives and myself, I will venture to say that Mrs. Palin believes the government should NOT be the ultimate authority in this matter. The government does not need to be making life and death decisions (for the fetus as well as the mother) unless there is criminality involved against another citizen."

You are completely ignorant of Sarah Palin's actual views. She wants abortion to be criminalized, specifically including when "there is criminality involved against another citizen", namely in cases of incest and violent rape. That's the position she has campaigned on consistently throughout her political career. That's why the so-called "Christian" right-wing extremists are ecstatic that "one of their own" has been selected for the VP slot.

By "venturing to say" that you think Sarah Palin believes the exact opposite of her frequently stated, and obviously sincerely held beliefs, which she has repeatedly campaigned on throughout her short political career, you demonstrate that "Conservatives" such as yourself are mental slaves of whatever fake, phony BS they are fed by the Republican Party.

It's going to be interesting to see how the Obama folks deal with this overwhelming ground swell of conservatism. I'm afraid Gov. Palin has awakened a sleeping giant.

Jean wrote: "I'm pro-life (but you already knew that, I suspect). However, in cases of rape, incest, etc., or if the mother's life was in danger there could be an exception."

Sarah Palin has repeatedly stated that she believes abortion should be criminalized with NO exceptions for incest or violent rape.

Sarah Palin believes that a woman -- even a young girl -- who is violently raped and becomes pregnant against her will as a result, should be forcibly compelled by the government to give birth to the rapist's offspring against her will. If such a woman did in fact choose to terminate a pregnancy violently imposed on her by a rapist, Sarah Palin believes that woman should be prosecuted for cold-blooded, first degree murder.

Those are Sarah Palin's beliefs, which she has repeatedly, openly stated, and repeatedly campaigned on.

If that's the kind of America you want to live in, where rape victims are forced by the state to bear the offspring of their rapists, where women who refuse to carry the offspring of rapists are imprisoned or executed for murder, then by all means vote for the Palin-McCain ticket.

In response to Anonymous:

>>Is the child in the belly still alive? If you answered yes, does the act of the father (rapist, abuser) preclude that living baby from it's basic right to life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness?

Absolutely, unequivocally yes. The child in the belly is alive at conception. That question may be "above my pay grade," but I'm 100% confident of my answer.

IMO, the act of the sperm donor does not preclude that baby from its basic right to life. I would hope that the victim/mother would choose life and adoption for her unborn child. That's absolutely my hope and prayer. However, it's in these instances of violence that I would be able to concede a choice for the mother. I will always hope that choice will be life though.

Two things changed my mind from being staunchly pro-life to being willing to concede in huge exceptions. (1) My husband saying that if I were pregnant and dying and the doc could only save one of us, he would chose to save me and abort the baby. A huge revelation, seing as he's also pro-life. (2) Working with troubled teens who are the product of a rape, live with their birth mother, and know without question that they are "unwanted" and the product of violence. These children are so damaged, often suicidal, and are hurting so deeply. I don't believe for a second that there is no hope for these kids or that they don't deserve the same rights as any other human, nor do I wish they would have been aborted or think that would have been the better choice for them. While I applaud their Mother's choice to give them life despite the circumstances, I wish their Mom would have chosen adoption.

Anonymous:

Let me chime in here on abortion, if I may.

I think the whole issue is miscast.

Very few on the right want to see abortion made illegal at the federal level, whether by law or by Constitutional amendment.

Most take the Federalist position: that as a health and safety issue, the proper place for governance (or non-governance) over the issue is at the state level. Thus, the beef with Roe v. Wade is that it creates a Constitutional right that erodes the states' rights.

In essence, from a Federalist point of view, the proper squabble here should be state governance vs. personal right, not federal/Constitutional governance vs. personal right - and then, have at it!

At least that's my take on the issue.

SA: I would like your thoughts on the Rezko bribe issue before the topic shifts permanently and predicatably to abortion rights, as it always seems to...

BTW, the last two posts by Anonymous were by me. I haven't figured this thing out yet.

>

I'll readily agree with that. I didn't intend for one sentence in my original post to turn the discussion to abortion, as I don't believe the social issues were even mentioned by Palin last night.

Truthfully, while I have an opinion on the social issues, I worry that this campaign and all the water-cooler talk will get stuck there.

Personally, national security is a bigger concern for me in this election than stances on abortion.

Jean: So about Palin's daughter... would you rather she have an abortion? "Parading" her doesn't mean she approves -- it means she loves her anyway.

I believe you are referring to my earlier comment about how Obama must abide by a double standard. You failed to grasp my point that Sarah Palin is not just given a pass but praised to the skies by the family values ideologues who would have vilified Barack Obama had he been in Palin's predicament. It's the hypocrisy, stupid.

Yet in your alacrity to impute a position to me that aligns with your ideological pieties, you assume that "I would rather she have an abortion". How dare you.

This is why I support a constitutional amendment requiring a 35 year old minimum age to vote for federal office. Nobody should be allowed to vote for president until they're old enough to actually BE President. By then, I figure they've encountered enough real scoundrels in their lives to be able to see through them.

Lucy, I didn't assume, I asked. I'm not assigning you or anyone else a position on the matter.

I asked because I'm truly baffled by the vilification and critique of Palin's daughter. What would you (or those criticizing her) have Palin do? Shun her daughter, put her in hiding, require an abortion?

Hypocricy abounds -- it's politics. It's seen on all sides.

I think some folks may be underestimating the hunger for humanity in a candidate that many people are feeling after the obvious disconnect from the general population we have seen in the current administration. The fact that Palin's family is reflecting her stated principles--her son going to Iraq, her daughter choosing to not have an abortion, her pride in her newborn child with Down's syndrome--is going to move so many people. People are moved by family more than by political issues, it's not stupid, it's human. It's the sheer NUMBER of political issues, the vast amounts of contradictory soundbites, and the predominance of ambivalence (meaning "feeling two ways," not meaning apathetic) so many voters feel that most people watching these conventions feel. It's very soothing to them to see this hockey mom with her fisherman husband who is also a member of a union and a sportsman, her children experiencing difficulties like other working class children, etc., as one of them. I think she is a formidable opponent because people can identify with her, not because of her politics. Bush seemed so unreal, Obama can seem so distant and intellectual, but Palin gives the impression she digs into life and gets her hands dirty and lives in the world most American families inhabit. And most people care more about their family in immediate terms they can see than in long-range things which can affect their families like environmental issues where they hear so many conflicting reports that they can almost choose what to believe and what to please god just not think about any more.

Anonymous wrote: "I would like your thoughts on the Rezko bribe issue ..."

There was no "bribe", there is no "issue", and you are a deliberate liar. Those are my thoughts.

It is really pretty comical watching self-deluded so-called "principled conservatives" running away from Sarah Palin's strongly held and often stated view that abortion should be criminalized, with NO exception for victims of incest and violent rape, and that victims of violent rape -- including underage girls like her own daughter -- who choose to terminate the pregnancy that was violently imposed on them should be prosecuted for murder.

If there are any actual "principled conservatives" reading this -- as opposed to weak-minded, ignorant mental slaves of fake, phony Rush Limbaugh "conservatism" -- you need to wake up and realize that the Republican Party of Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and John McCain does not represent you, or your values, or your principles.

It represents the blatant and rapacious corruption and criminality of a gang of career white collar crooks and war profiteers who use the power of the State to enrich themselves, their cronies and their financial backers at the expense of, and to the detriment of, the American people.

And to gain the power to do that, it relies on a "base" of Taliban-like right-wing extremist so-called "Christians" who are violently opposed to anything resembling "libertarianism" and want the government to forcibly impose their religious beliefs on everyone else.

But if you want to continue to deceive yourselves and be willing dupes, and make up things that you wish Sarah Palin stood for and pretend that she stands for those things when she has repeatedly stated the exact opposite, then you are just the gullible fools that the Rove machine thinks you are.

well i jus turned 17, an I really think that it was bad that Sarah Palin had nothing positive to say about the person that has a good chance to be the next president of the unitedstates! i also dont think that she should bring up exsperiece, based off of past progress because she left the city of 9,000 people in debt an to governing a state of under 100,000 people to selling a private plain on ebay! contrary to Obama which is one of the 2 senators that works for a state of over 10 million.

Jean wrote: "I asked because I'm truly baffled by the vilification and critique of Palin's daughter."

There is no "vilification and critique" of Palin's daughter. Every Democrat who has even mentioned the issue -- including Obama and Biden -- has said that it is a private family matter that should be completely off-limits during the campaign. The nonexistent "vilification and critique" of Palin's daughter is a strawman invented by the Palin-McCain campaign so they can complain about it and divert media attention from Palin's extremist views and her track record of mismanagement, corruption and abuse of power.

Historically, "vilification and critique" of teenage girls who become pregnant out of wedlock has consistently come from the right-wing "family values" crowd. How quickly the "cultural conservatives" change their tune when the pregnant teenager isn't an African-American girl from the inner city, but the white daughter of one of "their own". The flagrant hypocrisy from the right-wing on this is really comical.

Jean: Who are these "those" who have vilified and critiqued Palin's daughter? Please point to one person on this forum who has done so. Regardless, you are simply throwing up a bunch of rhetorical hot air to evade justifying the flagrant hypocrisy of the right when it comes to "family values". Palin rightly insists that her daughter's "choice" be respected yet an opportunity to enact her agenda would deny choice to every other American woman.

That "hypocrisy abounds" does not absolve any given instance of hypocrisy. Sorry, you will have to do better than that.

SecAm slipped in before me and said it better.

Wow, the reflexive dishonesty of rightwingers is a nuisance, isn't it? Anonymous:

Jean said: I asked because I'm truly baffled by the vilification and critique of Palin's daughter.

Not of Palin, mind you, a public figure who aspires to the vice presidency of the United States and is subject to due diligence, but her daughter.

But of course the right wants to make Palin's daughter an issue to distract the public from the Republican party's atrocious record these past 8 years and the fact that the GOP is positioning Bush in a Skirt to be one heartbeat from the presidency. It's not going to work, and this rightwing wet dream of have a religious extremist snowmobile the republic to Armageddon is not going to happen.