McSlime is insane and a liar. His running mate is completely in another world. Her interview with Charlie Gibson was a set up. The Republicans chose the site, the setting the questions and answers, and the person doing the interview (Charlie Gibson). You have been "Bushed". Does anyone believe all the garbage she spewed on the country that was listening?

It's easy to explain. McCain was against mayors and governors before he was for them.

The RIGHT WING CORPORATE MEDIA manages to keep talking about Palin as if she is next to God, but we all know better. Hopefully, the people will see what the media is doing, because they do the same thing every time there is a Republican/Democrat Election.

For the last 60 days before the election, REPUBLICANS hog their media from the Democrats, and do their right wing conservative REPUBLICAN propaganda proselytizing of the common population through their talk show propagandists on nearly all their programs to get the common population to believe without fact that REPUBLICAN rhetoric is the only way to God, while they lie, cheat and steal their way to get it done. Propaganda works and with control of the media, the right wing has the perfect medium to use their propaganda against the common population.

If you are of the common population, which is 70% to 90% of the population, you must vote for Obama/Biden if you do not want our society to be made into the haves and the have nots by the REPUBLICANS.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Sarah Palin is running for president, so maybe we shouldn't try to apply McCain's comments about candidates for the Oral Office to those who aren't seeking it. But if we're going to do that, we should likewise dredge up everything Obama had to say about other candidates (such as Joe Biden) in the primaries, and revisit that..., if we have an interest in fairness. Right, Mother Jones?
Right, Mr. Stein?

Is a governor qualified to be second in line?
Would Carter have been?
Would Clinton have been?
How about Dukakis?

Let's see what the US Constitution, the highest law of our land and the defining document of our government, has to say about the qualifications for being vice president:

Article II, Section 1

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President...

A natural born citizen, or a naturalized citizen in 1788? Yep.
Over 35? Yep.

I think that should lay the question of 'qualified' to rest.

Let's See Now,

I don't think you really see it at all. McCain's age makes it necessary to look at Palin as if she were running for President. Also, if you are going to use the Constitution as your basis for qualifying her, you'd better use it as the basis for evaluating her motives and actions to date. Hopefully, these Republican logical leaps that you people make will have less effect on the rest of us after Nov. 4.

LSN,

You've made some fair points. But when a 72 year-old man, with a history of cancer, tells me the point is that he "won't need on-the-job training" I am simply unable to avoid having the next thought in my head be that of Sarah Palin sitting down for the first time in the big chair behind the big desk in the Oval Office.

I don't really know about Dukakis, but in terms of intellect there is clearly no comparison between Palin and Clinton or Carter, or for that matter Romney.

Nothing could be more legitimate than viewing Palin as a question mark.

An equally important point in this case is that we have yet another example of John McCain saying anything that happens to be convenient at the given moment. To McCain's favor this could be viewed merely as being consistent, since the Republican party and their followers are known for having extremely convenient and selective values and morals - which they typically use to hold others to higher stands and greater scrutiny than they do themselves.