Tread Carefully Regarding Palin

Steve M makes a point worth repeating:

[S]ome of the more piggish individuals on the Democratic side need to step back and take their cues from Hillary about how to handle [Palin] with class and respect. If Democrats are openly derisive regarding Palin's experience, it becomes chapter 2 of the "fairytale." Women will not like seeing her mocked any more than blacks liked seeing Obama get knocked around for his lack of experience.

I would add that Obama does not need to be arguing how important experience is. Let me also add that when Tim Kaine, who has exactly the same experience as Palin, was treated by the Media and the Dems as a serious and acceptable potential pick, it opens up charges of a double standard.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< First Reaction to McCain's Choice of Palin | Sarah Palin Announcement >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    My feeling would be to stick to the issues (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:32:44 AM EST
    with Palin.

    For sure (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:44:10 AM EST
    And judging from some male commenters in the last threads, it would be wise to learn from the primary mistakes.  

    Reading some of the comments, (5.00 / 3) (#83)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:04:11 AM EST
    it seems that some people have totally forgotten what went on during the primary.

    Yeah, that's gonna happen (none / 0) (#139)
    by myiq2xu on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:20:49 AM EST
    The He-Man Woman Haters Club and MSNBC must be freaking out

    Well Andrea Mitchell is (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:25:17 AM EST
    already speaking as if all those women who loved Hillary will be jumping for joy.  This tells me just how stupid that woman is.  Does she really think that those of us who were diehard Hillary fans were only going to vote for someone with ovaries????

    What idiots!

    And while I will jump in on any sexism used against Palin, the truth is that Palin is an anti choice, pro voucher, anti liberal person who happens to have the same physiology as me.   Anyone who thinks most women vote based on gender ought to wake the hell up.  Hillary is, imo, the smartest, the toughest, the best choice for the job because of the issues, who happened to be a woman.  

    No way, no how is this choice anything but an in your face insult to women.


    I actually don't think this is about (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:31:44 AM EST
    Hillary voters or women voters very much.

    I totally agree with whoever said in a previous thread that this is about boosting McCain's "maverick" image into the stratosphere.


    Oh please. As jjc above (none / 0) (#187)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:35:38 AM EST
    noted, echoing my comments earlier,this one is another GOP token pick, an insult to women.  

    Nothing to do with McCain's bogus 'maverick' label, though it does have something to do with McCain's legit age and serious health problems.


    I have to disagree (none / 0) (#194)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:42:49 AM EST
    I think this is the "see we can pick a woman too" game...it's a token and like I said before it is the "Anti-Hillary" choice.

    A wise assessment (5.00 / 4) (#27)
    by mg7505 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:25 AM EST
    Palin seems to have no relevant baggage. Her political battles have been important, but not on a national level. I respectfully disagree with BTD that this will cost McCain the election. Palin isn't likely to cost him any voters, but the potential payoff in working-class voters and women voters is huge.

    Also, did someone say politics of contrast? Compared to Obama, Palin seems like the more palatable "alternative" candidate. He's black, she's white. He's a man, she's a woman. He's globalized and international; she's an All-American WASP beauty pageant contestant who eats moose hamburger. But they're both very photogenic. I wonder how good of a public speaker she is.


    Check out wikipedia (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by abfabdem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:02:48 AM EST
    She was s journalism major and was a sports commentator, so I would guess she has the public speaking thing down.

    She's also (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:27:33 AM EST
    anti choice......hello Hillary was pro choice.
    She is anti public education....pro voucher.  Hillary is all about supporting public education and teachers.
    Palin is a creationist......apparently believing she is doing "God's work...."

    Any woman who was a true HRC supporter could never pull the lever for a woman who is so anti the issues Hillary stood for...


    Sorry (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:49:38 AM EST
    That's a very weak tea argument.  You are assuming that all women who supported HRC were all pro-choice and they weren't.  There are many ethnic women in PA and Ohio who supported HRC who are Catholic and against abortion and they were as true HRC supporters as you or I who are pro-choice.  HRC herself has made speeches talking about the necessity of reducing abortions while still being very pro-choice.  

    The abortion argument is just not a good one because even without McCain's win abortion is one very unsteady vote (Kennedy's) from Roe being overturned.  And, even if it is, that doesn't mean it will be outlawed as the Fed law will not effect State law.  Also, if the Dems to their job in the Senate should McCain be Prez and appoint a pro-life Jurist, the Dems should do their advise and consent job and block that appointment.  But, I'm just not buying that abortion will be overturned any time soon.  It's a red herring to spook some women.  And, this year it won't work, imo.  


    You are 100% right (none / 0) (#191)
    by mg7505 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:40:24 AM EST
    but we learned long ago that the consequences of this election are not going to be rational. This whole thing may come down to snap judgments on election day. You can't blame people for being ambivalent, especially when they've been told their vote doesn't matter (by BOTH Repubs and Dems). Voters in this election have been treated like children by both sides, first by multiple factions within the Dems, and now by the Repubs with this VP pick. I admire BTD and Jeralyn for acting like adults in this scenario; I just want to forget it all and not vote. And how can I blame anyone for acting on emotions that I feel like following too?

    If there was one thing that makes me sadder (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:18 AM EST
    than Hillary Rodham Clinton losing the nomination, it's this choice of Palin as the GOP choice. In all of my 48 years of life on this planet, I have never seen a more cynical, evil calculating political move. Let's be clear ladies and gentlemen--this pick was meant to stir hatred, resentment, and discourse and provoke the very worst in humanity. If this McCain canard works, it will crush the hopes of millions. The GOP ticket is wrong for America. I respected McCain before today. I no longer do. I will fight this with everything I have. McCain WILL get pushback for this.

    push back from who? (5.00 / 7) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:06 AM EST
    none of the people who might "push back" would have voted for McCain anyway.
    but this pick turns the gameboard upside down.
    we are at square one.  and please, surf outside the echo chamber if you think this is not a brilliant pick.

    I am reeling, too, because (5.00 / 6) (#72)
    by abfabdem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:01:32 AM EST
    it IS a brilliant pick.  And no one can say anything about her lack of experience because all McCain has to do is say, "well, usually it is the person at the top of the ticket who has the most experience.  The Democrats just got it backwards this time."  This could really change the dynamics of the race.

    Oh I didn't say it wasn't effective, (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:10:44 AM EST
    and I mean pushback from true progressives like myself. I see this as a personal threat now, and many of my liberal friends see it the same way. I have one latina friend that just said to me that this reeks of tokenism. Hillary EARNED her place among her supporters(I hope so at least... maybe it was all about gender vs. race). I was just going to vote for Obama but now I will campaign and donate with an additional purpose of defeating this sick abomination. This turns my stomach.

    with all due respect (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:12:33 AM EST
    this pick was not for you or any of your (or my) liberal friends.

    with all due respect I didn't say it was. (none / 0) (#134)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:19:00 AM EST
    And btw Obama's choice was a personal one that many may have disagreed with. I NEVER said who you or anyone else should vote for, I just stated my opinion on the matter. Your vote is your own and my opinion is my own. Thank you.

    my point is (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:24:03 AM EST
    our base was already fired up against McCain.
    no change there.  but NOW McCains base is fired up.
    that is a big change.
    and the other change will be with independents and some dem women.
    McCain was never interested in getting our votes.

    No way (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:13:28 AM EST
    McCain should be ridiculed for talking about experience and then hiring someone who has LESS than Obama.

    Laughable really.


    Not exactly. (5.00 / 5) (#144)
    by rooge04 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:21:29 AM EST
    McCain is talking about Obama at the TOP of the ticket. Roles are reversed. It makes complete sense to have your VP have less experience than you. Not so much the other way around.

    I don't see it as brilliant (none / 0) (#166)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:29:06 AM EST
    I see it as an insult to women.
    I see this as the anti Hillary pick.

    FWIW (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by daria g on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:04 AM EST
    I think millions feel their hopes already got crushed by Obama in the primaries.  

    Hatred? Cynical? See the Dem primary. (5.00 / 3) (#113)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:10:49 AM EST
    Another argument that won't work against the GOP, not with the behavior of the Dems.  And their nominee.  The videos are there for posterity.

    Yep, it's the old GOP cynical tokenism (3.00 / 1) (#96)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:07:57 AM EST
    at work again.

    A few years ago, they gave us the hilariously out of his depth Clarence Thomas, and calculated that because of his race the Dems would be hamstrung in going too strongly against him.  They calculated right.

    And in 1988 Poppy Bush allegedly tried to go after women by naming pretty boy Danny Quayle to the ticket.  Women would swoon over Dan, they thought.  Hehee ...

    This time for the Goopers it's the more direct gender card -- just about any woman will do! -- and they again plan on Dems being hamstrung in their PC sensitivity to women such that they will basically roll over meekly and give her a pass on her woefully thin resume.  We already see the call here for Dems to watch their step lest it backfire.

    Yep, just like the Repubs would want us to respond.  



    Yeah (5.00 / 5) (#116)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:11:33 AM EST
    so in fact, go after her like a pit bull, hold nothing back whatsoever, women voters won't be offended.  Great political instincts you have.

    Oh, I don't argue for (none / 0) (#149)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:23:49 AM EST
    a Gooper-like scorched earth attack against her -- that's merely your morning strawman drink.

    I do argue for going after her glaring weakness -- the painfully thin and almost embarrassing lack of qualifications to possibly be CinC.  

    It's another GOP token choice that should offend a large group of voters, namely women..   Clarence Thomas was wildly overqualified compared to Palin.


    In fact (5.00 / 6) (#171)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:30:41 AM EST
    Your "Miss Congeniality" comment below already demonstrates that you have no clue how to raise this issue in a respectful way.

    I don't care if you believe that she is, in fact, a stupid beauty queen.  It is not an effective attack, nor is it especially cool, to go around saying "voters bought the pretty image" and "she has superficial qualities in appearance."

    And if you really want to cite the fact that she attended a state school as evidence that she lacks intellectual gravitas, you know what, I'm feeling pretty good about how my state-school chops measure up.  And you might keep in mind that Ohio State has a lot more alumni than Yale!


    See my comments below (none / 0) (#193)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:40:45 AM EST
    re state schools.  Nothing wrong with them -- unless you're trying stupidly to compare her background and qualifications to those of Gov Kaine.

    There is an issue when it's a backwoods college combined with little else academically or otherwise to distinguish her in the gravitas assessment.

    As for Miss Congeniality and the like, it's on the table once the GOP tries to promote someone who has used and will use her former beauty queen status to try to rustle up some votes.  

    Oh, and watch for McCain to have a line ready -- semi-jocular no doubt -- to the effect that he chose her to "balance" his Not Mr Congeniality rep ...


    Crush the hope (none / 0) (#85)
    by Wile ECoyote on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:05:04 AM EST
    of millions.  Please explain.

    Check out what I said about The Green Party (none / 0) (#124)
    by Desired User Name on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:13:43 AM EST
    and also, yes, I agree with you 100%.
    But it's no surprise McCain would be calculated, he wants to win! What's surprising is how long Obama took us HRC supporters for granted, acting as if we do not matter, as if we will be in lock step. He was tragically wrong.

    McCain was the smart one here, Not Obama.
    And now what? All politics is calculated and so again...maybe we really do need a new party so at least we can have THREE calculated and seedy parties? hahaha


    Ringmaster or Animal? (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Desired User Name on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:10:08 AM EST
    when Tim Kaine, who has exactly the same experience as Palin, was treated by the Media and the Dems as a serious and acceptable potential pick, it opens up charges of a double standard.

    Well what BTD says above shows that the circus games have already begun...but will the DEMS be the ringmasters or the animals?


    I was just telling a friend (5.00 / 5) (#182)
    by Iris on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:33:23 AM EST
    that I dread seeing the sexist and misogynistic comments leveled at Palin by Obama supporters...I expected it to be a gradual thing, then I open up my bookmarks and see the folks over at DKos can't help themselves.

    Who wants to lay odds that the McCain campaign is counting on it?


    Hah, good luck BTD (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by daria g on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:41:37 AM EST
    A wise post, but was your smart advice heard when you were giving it before?  This is very, very interesting.

    There will be more sexism, all right.  As I wrote on the last thread every time we hear a prominent (male) Democrat or reporter calling her "feisty" it's going to win McCain more votes.

    So identity politics (none / 0) (#89)
    by cardcarryingmember on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:05:56 AM EST
    trumps all? Women voters will simply jump on board the McCain train and vote for a pair of anti-choice candidates who oppose everthing Hilary stood for because one of them gets subjected to sexist abuse (not to mention the ageism being heaped on McCain from many quarters, especially DK)? Aren't women smarter than that?

    Then again, many women voted for Bush. Twice.


    Some will, others will based on (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by nycstray on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:10:13 AM EST
    the "type" of woman she is.

    BTW, many MEN voted for Bush twice also. Might want to watch the implications there  ;)


    Talk to white men about that (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:32:30 AM EST
    They're the ones resistant to Obama.  

    Jeesh.  Did you see the topic of this post?


    They Can't Help Themselves (5.00 / 6) (#6)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:43:26 AM EST
    This presumes sexists can reign it in.  I don't believe some of the fauxgressives can.  It's who they are.  Olbermann didn't start with Clinton.  Neither did Matthews.  Neither did Kos or Aravosis.   They don't even recognize half the time that they are being sexist, which means they won't be able to control it.  

    And there's at least a 10% chance Biden or Obama will personally say something sexist, they have before.  Obama doesn't really call all kinds of people sweetie, you know.

    I agree (5.00 / 7) (#38)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:09 AM EST
    They won't be able to control themselves, and they will only make it worse for Obama.

    Because the contrast we'll see is this:  If any part of the Republicans revs up sexist attacks themselves, McCain's people will clamp down on that like lightning.  They will defend her will the kind of crazed intensity that only the recently converted have.  For Obama, the recently converted and liberal white guilt emancipating passion led to rank division; for Republicans, it will work in the opposite direction.

    If the Democrats or the Obama Mouthpieces of Sauron (Oblberman, Tweety, etc) try to pick up the misogyny banner yet again, not only will the Republicans come after them, but half the country too.

    All that disingenuous handwringing a few months ago, accusing feminists and Clinton supporters pre-emptively of not sticking up for Michelle Obama against sexist attacks is right out the freakin' window -- they will be proof against sexist attacks as well.

    And Palin is exactly the kind of woman everyone loves -- guntoting, bold, played championship sports, attractive -- she's like Xena from Alaska for pete's sake.  The Dems are SO hoist on their own petard.  I bet Dean is wishing he spared a few minutes to watch cable news during the primary now.


    Let's be honest (none / 0) (#128)
    by mg7505 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:15:54 AM EST
    Olbermann is bad, but McCain is the biggest sexist of them all. He is shamelessly using Palin to lure Hillary's voters, and to cast Obama as a threat. This all has the nasty scent of Civil War-era fear mongering. Can you imagine how angry racists will get when they see a black man (Obama) taking even the slightest jab at a white woman (Palin)? Of course Limbaugh et al will be right at their side, egging them on. And of course the Media won't call out these men's years of rank sexism. The hypocrisy is mind-blowing.

    Are angry racists (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Emma on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:25:35 AM EST
    voting for McCain somehow more consequential that placid racists voting for McCain?  This is nonsensical.

    The argument is (none / 0) (#179)
    by mg7505 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:32:33 AM EST
    that this fires up McCain's base to vote for him way more than it motivates anyone to vote against McCain. It would be "nonsensical" to deny that this kind of racial dynamic doesn't exist in America. And if you've ever met these kind of "angry racists," you'll agree that McCain's move is brilliant -- because this is a somewhat large group of voters who don't otherwise go to the polls.

    Note: I'm not saying that this racial dynamic is the only reason Palin a good pick for McCain. She's a staunch conservative who rallies his base for a lot of other issue-related reasons. For what it's worth, I see the whole thing as a disgusting and sexist strategy; see my other posts in this thread.


    I could not disagree more. (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by kelsweet on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:45:56 AM EST
    I am not a cheerleader for either camp, BUT from what John McCcain has been saying consistently is that he wants someone who shares his values and she fits the bill as far as I can see. I for one think I will like her. I happen to be in the exact demographic they are looking for. I am 47, I am truly in the middle, I lean slightly to the left. I REALLY REALLY wanted Hillary, but not because she is a Democrat.. because I believe in her.
    I like guns, I like strong independent women, fast cars and rock n roll.. :) I see this as a very smart choice.  Speaking for me only, but i suspect my view is not the exception.

    Exactly (5.00 / 6) (#49)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:04 AM EST
    And, if Palin is attacked by the Media or other Dems as Kaine wasn't when each has similar experience, will smack of sexism and unfairness.  

    And, the thing is, you will see just how fast the Republican Party itself will come out fast and fierce to her defense unlike the Dem Party who stood by and watched while HRC was bloodied by the Media not only for being a Clinton but sexism has been well-documented.  And, the Dem Party did not a damned thing to stop it.  Not until May 31st when Dumb Dean opened his mouth about it and then only in a very tepid manner.  

    When this happens and the Republican Party comes out to defend Palin against sexist (or not) attacks, the contrast of the do nothing Dem Party when it came to the vicious attacks on HRC will be herculean.   That contrast alone will be so loud, the noise will be almost deafening.

    I can see the outcries now:  the Republicans don't stand by while the women of their Party are viciously attacked unlike the Democratic Party which sat still and did nothing to stop the vicious sexist attacks on a good, loyal and brilliant Democratic woman, HRC.  Dems don't put their money where their big mouths are.  I can see it now.  


    Yep (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by cmugirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:12 AM EST
    The Republican Party would never stand for some of the sexist comments and rhetoric that came out of the Democratic Primary. There would be talking heads on TV decrying it so fast your head would spin.  

    The Obama camp and the DNC will not be allowed to get away with it twice.


    Agreed (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:29:21 AM EST
    They will not stand for it even if what happened to HRC didn't happen.  They protect their own unlike the Dems who sometimes eat their own as we saw when it came to HRC this primary season.  I will never forget how those of us who posted on various boards as Clinton Dems were treated by Obama dems and what they said about her as vicious an attack as any rabid Republican.

    It's an inspired choice by McCain (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by bmc on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:43:56 AM EST
    I don't think it's that risky. She's hugely popular with all other governors, she's got a reputation as anti-corruption, is known as something of a maverick within her own party, has a reputation as a reformer, which highlights McCain's own reputation as a reformer pretty well. Palin is a social conservative, but is fairly independent on gay rights, and is from the WEST, with a solid conservative view on gun rights [hunter, lifetime NRA member, etc].

    The 'experience' thing isn't that big of a detriment for the VP as it is for the Commander in Chief.

    It really does show up Obama not picking Clinton, and it takes away Obama's news cycle coverage from his speech.

    Caution: More misogyny from MessNBC will only drive voters closer to McCain/Palin. So keep it up, Keith, Chris, Joe, and David. You're going to remind us every single day of what happened to Hillary Clinton.

    Apparently, Rush Limbaugh loves Palin. So, this pick shores up his support from the wingnuts out there McCain needs to have his base secure. And, it makes the wingnuts look good supporting a woman.

    McCain's made an inspired choice from a purely analytical, political viewpoint.

    Jack Kelly in June:

    Pick Sarah.


    Inspired? (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by TheRealFrank on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:18 AM EST
    Just because she's a woman?

    Sarah Palin is someone who:

    • is anti-abortion
    • gung-ho about drilling (in Alaska or anywhere else)
    • sued to have Polar bears removed from the list of endangered species
    • denies climate change exists

    All I see is someone who is wrong on all the issues.

    I didn't support Hillary because she was a woman, I supported her because she would make a great president and is on the right side of the issues.

    I don't give a damn about Sarah Palin's gender. She is very, very wrong on the issues.


    The drilling (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Emma on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:06:47 AM EST
    won't be an issue.  Obama just flipped on offshore drilling and people want gas prices to go down and they want to hear that domestic drilling = energy independence and being able to drive their SUVs around.  Flipping on offshore drilling makes it harder for Obama to fight against the falsehoods on the last two points.  IMO.

    Drilling (none / 0) (#136)
    by TheRealFrank on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:19:30 AM EST
    I agree that it was dumb of him to give way on that issue. The way to deal with it was to point out that more offshore drilling won't even affect the oil prices until 15-20 years from now, and that the effect will be minimal. It's a boondoggle to the oil industry.

    Sadly, as usual, the Democrats retreated instead of holding their ground.

    Though I was heartened to read an op-ed by Joe Biden in a Delaware newspaper in which he did actually hold his ground on the issue.


    Did you expect (5.00 / 3) (#176)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:31:46 AM EST
    That teeh Republicans would pick someone who agreed with you on the issues? This pick wasn't for people who are pro-choice, anti-drilling. Quite the opposite.

    Issues don't matter anymore Frank. (none / 0) (#77)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:02:48 AM EST
    This election has just become a fight for the very soul of our country, for our democracy. Barack Obama is the person who is RIGHT and the republicans are STILL wrong. I will not let my children down. I hope the Dems recognize that they will have to fight this like never before.

    Too (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:12:08 AM EST
    bad Obama only started talking about issues yesterday. If he loses, that will be one of the reasons.

    The major reason (5.00 / 3) (#195)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:43:03 AM EST

    If Obama had campaigned from the beginning like he did last night, I'd be a supporter.  I think one of the things the Palin choice does is almost force him to continue what he started last night and stick to issues.  The magicalness of his identity politics has just been made useless.


    Hearing the rightwing radio blowhards (5.00 / 6) (#73)
    by daria g on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:01:34 AM EST
    Ardently defending a woman.. it's truly going to be through the looking glass.

    Especially when the left wing (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by abfabdem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:09:03 AM EST
    blowhards were so vile and sexist throughout the primary.  What planet are we on now?

    Kinda like seeing liberals deride (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by rooge04 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:11:35 AM EST
    Hillary with misogynist bile.

    If you step gingerly to the orange place (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:44:15 AM EST
    you can already see the sexist attacks in the comments.

    Unnecessary and stupid.

    Holy cow. I just got up turned on the TV and (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by Teresa on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:52:29 AM EST
    screamed out loud. I can't believe he did this. Wow. A total play for Clinton voters I think.

    The people on DK better be careful. I think the media will treat her as the anti-Hillary.

    I will be so mad if our first woman to win on the ticket was a pick to steal votes from Hillary. If Obama had picked Hillary, he probably would have picked Mitt.


    Well, folks who are offended by sexist (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Coral on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:52:40 AM EST
    attacks, don't go there too much anymore. So it's just a lot of hot air.

    But There Is No Sexism (5.00 / 9) (#39)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:17 AM EST
    in the Democratic Party.  I was told that repeatedly during the primary.

    And here's where the chickens will come home - the GOP will not sit silently if MSNBC and others engage in sexist attacks like Dean, Pelosi, et al, did with Hillary.  Just that contrast is going to hurt Dems with women.  It may not drive them to McCain, but I know I'm already not thrilled with Obama and the Dems over their acceptance of sexism and the GOP standing up for one of their own is only going to remind me of how pathetic the Dems have been (but, hey, it's not Dean's fault, he doesn't watch cable).


    sexist attacks (5.00 / 6) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:35 AM EST
    will only help her and drive more women to the ticket.
    I am sure McCain is hoping for just that

    Been There Done That (5.00 / 4) (#45)
    by Athena on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:55:02 AM EST
    They will just repost what they wrote about Hillary.

    Their thunder got stolen today.  Big time.


    It's remarkable isn't it? (5.00 / 3) (#138)
    by ks on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:20:44 AM EST
    I mean, they have learned NOTHING from the primary. In an earlier post, I half jokingly said I was looking for a word stronger than pathological to describe their behavior but now I'm serious.

    At least the voters have had 18 months (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by steviez314 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:45:19 AM EST
    to decide if Obama has the experience or not.

    They will have 2 months and John McCain's word on whether Sarah Palin does.

    That said, it's just enough for the issue to be taken off the table by this, without any Democrat actually making it an issue in reverse.

    McCain's statement says Palin has the experience to be President.  You cannot say that and yet insist Obama doesn't.  It isn't logical.

    She has more executive experience (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:15:42 AM EST
    than Obama, Biden -- or McCain.

    And if McCain and Palin win, she will have 4 more years of executive experience in 2012.

    Be afraid; this could mean 8 more years of the GOP, at least.  Maybe 12.

    When the Dems diss the gender of 57% of their voters, they ask for this.


    Hmm (none / 0) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:47:25 AM EST
    They have had 26 years with McCain.

    A losing argument.

    I would not make it.


    Bad Choice (5.00 / 0) (#12)
    by Kevin on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:45:35 AM EST
    I think this really puts the biggest negative for McCain right out in the open - his age.  People are going to see this crusty old man with a history of cancer, and seeing him beside this young, attractive female will only make that more obvious.  And people are going to ask themselves, "uh...if he doesn't make it...do I really want what's her name to be president?"

    And isn't her husband heavily involved in the oil industry?  So many things wrong with this.  Bold, but ultimately, I think it will be seen as a mistake.  

    (i hope that all the people who said any other female other then Hillary is a slap in the face take a step back before rushing to praise this choice...)

    It would have been a slap in the face (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:47:35 AM EST
    if OBAMA had chosen any other woman than Hillary.

    Of course, women are not interchangeable, so it isn't like McCain can pretend to present a generic Hillary to the world.


    he didnt try (5.00 / 4) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:52:04 AM EST
    but if you think the fact that she is a woman will not attract a lot of women, even pro life ones, then you need to surf around the web and read some comments

    Again, tacky (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by cmugirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:23 AM EST
    The whole "McCain is close to death" meme is tacky.

    And I believe her husband is a commercial fisherman.


    And a stay-at-home dad now (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:19:46 AM EST
    So progressive of the Palins.  Now let's see if they live in a mansion and manage to pay for ballet lessons despite being a one-income family vs. the two-income family that complains about it.  

    And adorable as the Obama daughters are, wait 'til the country sees the five Palin kids, including the one -- as those of us with special-needs children know -- means costs far beyond ballet lessons.

    Ouch.  I saw the Palin trial balloon being flown months ago and thought it was an interesting long shot -- but that was before the dissing of Clinton and thus of all women got even worse.  So it could be a slam dunk.  We'll see.


    hes cute too (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:30:08 AM EST
    hope thats not OT

    Hmm (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:38:38 AM EST
    He actually is, isn't he.  And I'm straight, as far as I know.

    he can stay at my home (none / 0) (#196)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:43:09 AM EST

    According to AP, Palin's husband (none / 0) (#184)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:34:50 AM EST
    is a blue collar pipe line person.  Earlier I read he is a commerical salmon fisherman.  

    What bugs me... (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by p lukasiak on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:46:25 AM EST
    about much of the analysis is the concentration on "Hillary's women."

    But the anger and disaffection toward the GOP right now has women -- regardless of party -- supporting the Democrats in droves despite the sexism of the primary season.

    And it is the overall female demographic -- not just "clinton supporters", that the Palin pick puts in play (wow!  alliteration!)

    BTD is right, insofar as it re-invigorates the media's "Hillary" narrative, but the impact of the Palin choice goes much, much deeper than that when it comes to women voters.

    GOP Women (5.00 / 4) (#97)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:02 AM EST
    were down this year in the primary.  They've simply begun to disappear from the party.  This gives the party a chance to pull some of them back in.  I don't think it's the Hillary Democrats that Obama has to worry about.  It's the swing voters and Republicans that were leaning Democrat.  If she does great this week, it gives them a reason to stay with the GOP - she's a chance to vote for a new future.  If she sucks this week, then that's another matter.  That's the risk for McCain.

    Yup, and her biography screams (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by vicndabx on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:13:37 AM EST
    of women can be whatever we want to be - in spite of her supposed stance on abortion.  Even that argument I think won't work too well.  All she has to say is I'm personally opposed to abortion, but it's not up to me to decide another woman chooses to do.

    Not so (none / 0) (#55)
    by BrianJ on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:57:21 AM EST
    Obama is doing no better, and probably worse, with women than Kerry or Gore at this point.  Gallup had him ahead 47-41 for the week before the Democratic convention.  Just 7% of all GOoPers were supporting Obama at that time, which obviously limits how well he could be doing among Republican women.

    I'm already seeing the sexism (5.00 / 5) (#18)
    by janarchy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:48:03 AM EST
    from the Obama supporters I know. They really don't want to go there. And it's disgusting too. It's just going to show that they're hypocrites and b.s. artists which the Republicans are going to play up. Even though the Rs are mostly the same way, they have a great talent for making Dems look like bad guys.

    Saying stuff like "McCain's got a trophy wife, now he has a trophy VP" or "Oh, he's acting out his librarian fetish" or whatever is not the way to counteract this.

    Sorry the GOP just p!ssed in their cornflakes but throwing tantrums because the world didn't stop and hand Obama his crown after his speech just proves how stupid they are.

    Well, (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by horncheggit1 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:49:22 AM EST
    "If Democrats are openly derisive regarding Palin's experience, it becomes chapter 2 of the "fairytale."

    To be perfectly honest, I don't know a great deal about her experience, quite probably because she has none of any substance relative to national office.

    That said, I do know a thing or two about her views, and what I know means that I could never, ever consider voting for a presidential candidate who had her on the ticket.

    (1) She's stridently pro-life.

    (2) She supports the teaching of creationism and intelligent design in our schools' science classes.

    Sorry, but both of those are absolute deal breakers for me. McCain just blew whatever slim chance he had of winning the nomination by picking this distasteful nobody as his running mate.

    Hmm (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:43 AM EST
    It never would occur to me to vote for John McCain no matter who his running mate is.

    Do you know what this post is about?


    I would occur to many (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:53:39 AM EST
    but like I have been saying, McCain just lost many hard core dems.  like me.
    but he gained far more.

    Well, (none / 0) (#114)
    by horncheggit1 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:11:10 AM EST
    "Do you know what this post is about? "

    if this is meant to imply that I'm missing the point of your post I would counter simply by pointing out that it's your post that misses the broader point entirely, in my opinion.

    The real question here is nothing to do with her experience; it's a canard, just as it was with Obama. Instead of worrying about whether "women" (a politically monolithic demographic indeed) are going to be hypersensitive about seeing Palin mocked about her lack of experience, the point is that Palin's views are distasteful enough to most Democrats to provide plenty of other justifiable, substantive targets. Evidently, she's the type of politician for whom ceaseless mockery and derision are completely appropriate.

    Any politician - regardless of their sex - who claims that creationism should be taught in a school-level science class deserves to be treated with nothing but contempt. As, for that matter, do those who would imply that "women" aren't sophisticated enough to discern between unwarranted sexist criticism and the perfectly justifiable criticism of a politician for ludicrous beliefs.


    Then we would be talking about issues (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:21:47 AM EST
    again, and we would get off all this "what's wrong with the women?" crap -- when women are supporting Obama, and it is men who are not.  And for that, I would be grateful to McCain and Palin.

    Can't vote for 'em but can be grateful to 'em.


    I didn't know she was a creationist. (none / 0) (#35)
    by steviez314 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:53:33 AM EST
    I'd like to think our politicians believe in the scientific method, but I guess I'm a dreamer.

    My daughter just called me on the phone........ (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by BronxFem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:50:07 AM EST
    very happy and saying "Obama is going to win,  Obama is going to win."  She mentioned Palin is anti-environment, to put it mildly.   Happy...happy...joy....joy.....

    Global warming (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:26 AM EST
    in now a plank in the republican platform.  In fact, republicans are starting to agree that it's an issue that must be addressed.  

    Global Warming A Republican Plank (none / 0) (#141)
    by daring grace on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:21:02 AM EST

    If that weren't a serious issue, the idea that it's a Republican plank would be hilarious.


    Here it is (none / 0) (#158)
    by cmugirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:26:05 AM EST

    While the platform advocates expanded oil and gas drilling to meet the nation's energy needs, the 112-person committee agreed to omit language calling for drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a plank in the party's 2004 platform. McCain has voted both ways on the question of drilling in ANWR, but has said this year he believes it should remain off-limits to energy exploration.


    The platform's energy section breaks with the past on several fronts. For the first time, it acknowledges that human activity has contributed to climate change.

    "The same human activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere," the document reads. "Increased atmospheric carbon has a warming effect on the earth."

    But the platform sidesteps the question of whether to cap carbon emissions on the federal level, an approach McCain endorses.

    We don't need (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by Lahdee on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:50:59 AM EST
    a repeat of the misogyny directed at Hillary, for sure, but I hope that doesn't mean that criticism of her lack of experience and her conservatism are off the table. Contrast is still a legitimate tactic, and yes it should be respectfully applied.

    Her lack of experience (none / 0) (#32)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:52:18 AM EST
    vs. Obama's?

    Possibly (none / 0) (#59)
    by Lahdee on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:58:31 AM EST
    I'm curious how this will play out. I understand that it may not be to Obama's advantage to play the experience card with Palin, but who is to say that Biden can't. I'm just not convinced yet that the experience card will bite him if it's played properly.

    the advantage here (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:01:04 AM EST
    is the experience issue is taken off the table to some extent.

    Do not bring it back up.


    That's fine. I'll defer to you (none / 0) (#86)
    by Lahdee on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:05:10 AM EST
    on this one.

    rock and hard place. (none / 0) (#102)
    by Teresa on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:24 AM EST
    My step-daughter is turning cartwheels. She doesn't know about issues. Good thing she's 16 and can't vote, I guess.

    She probably can't be criticized (none / 0) (#37)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:53:54 AM EST
    for her lack of experience. At the same time, McCain is going to have to shut up about Obama's lack of experience.

    I Don't Know About That (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:57:45 AM EST
    Palin is his VP nominee.  It's not that uncommon for VP nominees to have less experience.   I don't think McCain would say Obama has too little experience to be Vice President.  I think he'll say the Dem ticket is upside down and their using the number two guy to shore up the number one guy, which we know from the last eight years doesn't work, when what you should be doing is using the number one guy to teach the number two gal (I admit I'm going to like having to use the feminine pronoun again in talking about this race).

    When you choose a VP nominee, you're saying (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:03:09 AM EST
    "this person is ready to be President."

    If Sarah Palin is ready to be President, why not Barack Obama?


    also (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:09:12 AM EST
    I think it shows that the primary attack against Obama will not be experience.  they have plenty with out going there.

    The problem is that they've already gone there (none / 0) (#111)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:10:33 AM EST
    So I agree that this pick looks camp McCain look scattered and desperate.

    It does shake up the race, though.


    and vice versa (none / 0) (#100)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:21 AM EST
    He doesn't need to ... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:00:34 AM EST
    Any discussion of the experience issue is more of a negative for Obama than for McCain.

    The Obama campaign doesn't want to talk about experience.


    exactly (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:01:53 AM EST
    that is if they are smart

    No he doesn't (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by cosbo on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:17:37 AM EST
    McCain is the one running for president based on his experience. Obama is running for president with seeming inexperience while Joe Biden is more experience. Typically the person in second command is acceptable with less experience.

    McCain still has the upper edge on the experience argument.


    And now, who are the DC insiders? (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:23:34 AM EST
    The Dems.  Ouch.

    well (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:50:59 AM EST
    all you have to do is some surfing to see  how this is being recieved.
    it is a freakin home run.  out of the park and across the street.
    I completely disagree with the argument that this is substantially risky.  she seems the perfect republican to me.
    I disagree with the experience argument.
    the fact is most people will see her as having more relevant experience than Obama does.

    It's not an argument you have to make. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by steviez314 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:25 AM EST
    It's enough to just take the line of attack away from the other side.

    Experience will be an issue... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:29 AM EST
    to those who worry about McCain's advanced age.

    I mean the guy is 72...average life expectancy for a white male is around 75 and change.  McCain needed experience in his VP pick if he wants to put those who value experience at ease.

    Personally, if they've held office for one day they are too experienced for my taste.

    Too experienced... (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by oldpro on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:09:52 AM EST
    I hope you don't use that theory as a gauge when hiring an electrician or a surgeon.

    Actually -- And Actuarially (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by The Maven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:38:52 AM EST
    The average future life expectancy for a 72-year-old American male was slightly over 12 years in 2004, and the figure has been slowly creeping upward by about 0.1 per year.  75 is the approximate future life expectancy for a male child born now, not in 1936.

    Interesting, and good advice for Obama and (5.00 / 3) (#43)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:26 AM EST
    friends. This choice takes away certain lines of attack from McCain, but does not open up lines of attacks for Democrats. Hopefully our "liberal friends" in the press and blogosphere will not get confused.

    I will not mock Palin, (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:55:43 AM EST
    but I sure will question the old boys network when I see it in action.

    I remember what happened to Geraldine Ferraro and the dashed hopes for women holding high office that resulted for years afterwards.

    SNL (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:39 AM EST
    Although Tina Fey was a strong Dem Hillary supporter, I think she will have to make guest appearances playing Gov Palin. We all agree in the office that there is a strong resemblence.

    The train already left the station (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by lambert on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:57:51 AM EST
    Check the comments at Kos.

    jezeely crow (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:21:20 AM EST
    are we not smart enough to see that this is EXACTLY what they hoped for and were counting on?

    every misogynist slur will make one more McCain voter.  at least.


    More probably, one less Obama voter (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:24:45 AM EST
    for each comment.  More stay-at-home voters.

    And Dems' hope always is turnout.


    Just to clarify (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:58:51 AM EST
    I of course know that Bill Clinton never used "fairytale" in regard to Obama's experience, but only his stance on the war.

    But it came in the context of Clinton saying that this guy would be a roll of the dice, nominating him would be a big risk, etc.

    And there were some African-Americans who were put off by that, not because it was "racist" of Bill Clinton, but because here you have the first serious black candidate and he's basically getting dismissed, told that he's not ready to step up.

    Even if your reaction to that is "but he WASN'T ready to step up!" the point is that the message needs to be communicated in a respectful way.  We need to watch out for what offends people even if we don't intend to be offensive at all.

    That's the best (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Emma on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:22:03 AM EST
    explanation of that moment that I've seen.



    Yes, excellently said. n/t (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:29:51 AM EST
    Skeptical (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Rashomon66 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:01 AM EST
    Provocative pick for sure.
    Obama and his team just need to keep their sites on McCain. I think the whole inexperience meme is now off the table for both sides.
    The reason I am skeptical this pick will work for McCain is because he is doing it as a reaction to Obama's popularity and because Obama didn't pick Hillary. When you begin to react to the actions of the other candidate it doesn't always work in your favor. As for disaffected Hillary supporters I am not sure they would suddenly embrace the GOP platform just because a woman is on the ticket. Remember when the GOP selected Alan Keyes to go up against Obama in Illinois?
    Will be an interesting campaign season.

    Clinto won almost 30 primaries... (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Dadler on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:00:28 AM EST
    ...Barack Obama won many votes.  Palin has been SELECTED by a man, given permission to be his running mate.  She represents NONE of the things Hillary does.  Saying you will vote for her simply because she is a woman is akin to saying a black person would vote for Alan Keyes simply because he was black.  Do it if you wish, it's your right, but it is the road to ruin for both sides if that is how we are casting votes.  Obama may not be perfect and far from it (and I, at least, didn't find his speech last night all that enlightening), but Palin is an anti-choice, anti-gay marriage, anti-everything-we-stand-for hyperconservative.  To repeat, her interests are exactly OPPOSITE those of Hillary Clinton (and Obama).  We are now entering a time of self-censorhip and nonsense that is reaching the level of pathological dishonesty.  

    I won't tread anything when a candidate is so clearly in direct opposition to the interests that I, and any Democrat, supports.

    Our sickness is morphing into terminal self-delusion.

    To be clear (5.00 / 4) (#87)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:05:15 AM EST
    this comment is one example of how not to be respectful, although in this case, it's not Palin you're disrespecting but women voters in general.

    If you see a woman thinking about voting for Palin just because she's a woman, the way to persuade them is not "HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY VOTE FOR HER JUST BECAUSE OF GENDER???"  Just trust me on this.  A much calmer approach is necessary.


    Thank you, Steve M (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:09:15 AM EST

    but you see (5.00 / 3) (#91)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:06:13 AM EST
    in spite of what is being said, this is not about democrats.
    he lost my vote with this pick.  but it was not my vote he was interested in.
    independents.  this was about independent women and men too, and about whatever dem women he can peal off.
    I expect the number will be far greater than many expect and I base that on reading comments at places like river daughter this morning.

    So far (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by TheRizzo on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:03:06 AM EST
    From the reaction of Dems on MSNBC they are actually pretty scared of this pick.  I got a sense of panic and attack in their voices in trying to fight this one off.

    I don't know enough about Palin to know whether or not they need be worried but from everything I am reading the base of the republican party is universally happy with it and that is no small feat when it comes to McCain.

    The GOP will win this. (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by rooge04 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:06:48 AM EST
    Simply based on the fact that when the liberal boyz and MSNBC attack this woman, they will defend her and stand behind her. The polar opposite of what the DNC did when Hillary was attacked.

    Palin's also a bit of charmer ... (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:41 AM EST
    in the video I've seen of her.  If that projects nationally, a tired press corps might drop their Obama crush for a new fall fling.

    We'll see.

    Chris Matthews may have more than (5.00 / 3) (#159)
    by theybannedmeinboston on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:26:08 AM EST
    a tingle up his leg. She's a charmer.

    BTD, (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by lizpolaris on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:14:45 AM EST
    I'm begging you to monitor this blog as closely for misogyny toward this VP candidate as you and Jeralyn have successfully done up to now with the Democratic primary.

    Please keep this the sane refuge I've found it to be up to now.

    seconded (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:17:50 AM EST
    Thirded. (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by rooge04 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:24:26 AM EST
    Good advice (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by joanneleon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:22:53 AM EST
    I've had my own first gut reactions to the choice, but I think we should at least see the woman speak before we voice strong opinions.

    The Obama campaign may have been a bit quick on the draw with their statement about Palin.  I think they should be more careful to show a little respect and let him introduce her, and let her speak first.  This type of reaction has hurt them before.  It can't hurt to wait at least a half day.  They can just say they are finding out more about her, and such.  It's a perfectly normal response and seems more respectful than coming out and slamming her right off the bat.

    Thank you, BTD (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:29:00 AM EST
    Well said.

    This is where we find out how much of the anti-Hillary crap was actually just anti-Hillary and how much of it was really a much broader misogyny.

    I for one will be watching very carefully.

    So are we going to now criticize McCain for caring (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by Richjo on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:30:58 AM EST
    about breaking the glass ceiling? It seems to me that Barack Obama doesn't care one bit about breaking that glass ceiling considering that he passed over the strongest candidate he could have chosen who was a woman for someone else. By no means should that alone be a reason for voting for McCain, but we should credit where credit is due.If the Democratic Party is sole place for women in this country's politics then women are always going to have the same problems they do today.

    There is no doubt that Pallin being a woman played a role in McCain choosing her, of course anyone being honest would agree that the same thing was at play in both Obama and Hillary's success as well. This is a historic moment that people should take a second to step back and appreciate. I now understand why McCain aired his congratulatory ad last night. He was gracious and recognized the historic nature of Obama's run, and today Josh Marshall and the left blogs couldn't be more petty in their political attacks.

    How will Joe Biden be able to attack Palin's inexperience when he so blantantly flipped flopped on the same charge against Obama. The same for every other major Dem including the Clintons.

    McCain and the Republicans are playing the Dems like a harp from hell. Let's hope the Obama camp and his goons in the press can show the restraint that they so severly lacked in the primary or else this election is going to get a heck of a lot more close then it already is.

    Obama now can applaud Palin (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:43:46 AM EST
    for cracking the glass ceiling, too, for his daughters.  

    (If he quotes Clinton correctly this time, instead of saying she broke through the glass ceiling for his daughters.  That was a bad mistake, indicating lack of knowledge of what the metaphor means.)


    The Palin payoff (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by Prabhata on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:33:35 AM EST
    Palin solidifies the conservative base that Bush carried with someone who has the certificate.  She's the "cling to gun and Bible" kind of gal.

    Steve Benen at Political Animal (5.00 / 2) (#198)
    by esmense on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:44:21 AM EST
    has already declared Palin's pick as "odd," compared her to Dan Quayle, and labeled her "untested and untried."

    That might all be fine if so many Democrats hadn't just spent months viciously trashing an experienced and qualified woman while promoting an "untested and untried" man.

    It not only looks like, is IS, a sexist double standard.

    Putting an "untested" man at the top of a presidential ticket; historic. Picking an "untested" woman as a running mate -- "amazing" and "tremendously desperate."


    Couldn't agree more. (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by Matt in Chicago on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 12:54:36 PM EST
    I just read a post about "Do you really want a woman with no experience to be within a heartbeat of the Presidency?" and all I could hear was the McCain conter-argument, "Do you really want a MAN with NO experience to BE the President?"

    God, that is just scary... I feel in my gut that this will play with people.

    AND, McCain's response that he thought the Obama campaign had learned about attcking the experience of women?

    Personally I don't think McCain could have done better than this.  That SOB :)  She bolsters his base (reformer, pro-choice woman) and offers appeal to disaffected Hillary voters.  Biden is excellent in terms of helping to Govern but he isn't that great for even bolstering Obama's base.

    Like I said, she's a good choice...  On the upside, she is going to have to debate Biden and is he going to be tough (as long as he stays on point : )

    In my opinion, I think this election just got very interesting.

    A Disrespect to me as a women... (1.75 / 4) (#46)
    by laila on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:55:29 AM EST
    God God what an incompetent hypocritical low-down decision by John McCain.  A barbie for a wife and a beauty pageant contestant for a vp pick...
    Imagine this all you right wing crazies...
    "just in late breaking news but John McCain died peacefully in his sleep at 73 years old.  Susan Palin is due to be sworn in tommorrow morning to take over his position."  God save America, the conflict with Goergia and Russia, Afghanistan, the Iraq war, does he honestly expect me to put my life in the hands of Palin.  She has a very small child with downsyndrome because over 40 she decided she would do what doctors have been begging women not to do.  What a life for that child.  I wonder if she believes in Birth control.  Now I am scared for America, if this spineless wimp McCain wins.  He is a war hero, and this is his pick.  Is he immortal, does he think he is God and he will live forever.  What if he dies.  Talk about a liar.

    Whoa. (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:59 AM EST
    What a life for that child.

    You need to calm down and stop posting stuff like this.



    Yeah, trust me, that isn't the (5.00 / 6) (#154)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:24:53 AM EST
    way you want to go.  You really, really don't want the Democratic Party to go the route of doubting the intrinsic value of being human just because they have Down's Syndrome.

    I thought the sexism during the primaries turned my stomach; this comment is worse.


    Cindy McCain (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:51 AM EST
    is no barbie.  Unless you consider women who engage in a wide range of charitable activities and run multi-million dollar enterprises to be barbies.   They aren't and it's sexist to suggest otherwise.  

    Also, way to deny women the choice over their own reproductive freedom.  I know Palin would do this as well, but there's more than one way to deny women control over their bodies.  


    awful (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:40:40 AM EST
    but you know what, with ever comment like this that I see I am more convince that this was a brilliant pick.
    that may be a hard eyed assessment in view of that comment, but the republicans are nothing if not smart and manipulative.

    The life of someone with Down Syndrome (3.66 / 3) (#164)
    by sher on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:28:47 AM EST
    has value to those who love them!

    old lecherous man selects pretty girl running mate (1.33 / 6) (#177)
    by candideinnc on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:31:47 AM EST
    Oh come on!  The ideal woman for the Rethugs is a beauty pageant queen, and we are not supposed to roll our eyes and moan?  Did you catch the big event, highlighted by cheerleaders with pom-poms?  If nothing else, old man McCain gets to enjoy his campaing by surrounding himself with pretty young things.

    I agree about the "experience" (none / 0) (#2)
    by zfran on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:35:19 AM EST
    card and spoke about it previously. Howard Wolfson just said Palin is a good pick, at least for now, and that it seems after the message of Obama's speech last night and now McCain's pick of woman shows that Hillary's 18million voters are the key voting bloc this cycle. Love strong women and Palin seems so. Want to know more about her.

    Palin was first elected to office in 1992. Obama (none / 0) (#3)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:38:50 AM EST
    was first elected to office in 1996. She has executive experience as a Mayor, Governor and Ethics Comissioner. These were all positions in which she represented only a small number of people, but it's still more then enough to compete with Obama on experience.

    National experience (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:43:40 AM EST
    Obama has been in the  Senate for over 3 years.

    Clearly, Obama is more qualified than Palin.

    Now, Tim Kaine is no more qualified than Palin, and he was treated as a serious possible choice.

    If I were McCain, I would use Tim Kaine as my foil.


    I tried to post this in a previous thread, but (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:46:37 AM EST
    it didn't work. Kaine has a fair amount more experience than Palin. Virgina and Richmond are both much bigger than Alaska and Wasilla.

    Excuse me (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:48:57 AM EST
    You are arguing that a bigger state adds experience? That makes no sense.

    To me at least.


    I live in a town with about 8,000 people (none / 0) (#41)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:25 AM EST
    in it. Even if my Mayor has been in charge for 20 years, I'd say Bloomberg has more relavent experience toward being President. There are just more responsibilities and usually more problems for the person in charge of larger organizations.

    Interestingly (none / 0) (#82)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:04:01 AM EST
    I would disagree.

    But I am not a big fan of experience.

    BTW, Alaska has more than 8,000 people.


    Agreed (none / 0) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:25 AM EST
    Alaska's population is not quite as big as Austin, Texas...Wasilla is one-fifth the size of my local junior college.

    Sorry, but Kaine has been (none / 0) (#51)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:21 AM EST
    gov of a far more populous, diverse and important state than Palin with AK.  Kaine, a Harvard grad, served 4 yrs before gov as Lt Gov, then had mayoral experience in a fair-sized VA city before that.  Palin -- Univ of Idaho??? -- has only city council before gov, to go with her (ahem) beauty pageant experience.  Oh, almost forgot, she does have experience in the area of producing issue.

    Kaine in respect to mid-sized state exec experience and quality education is about what Jimmy Carter brought to the table.  Palin has barely gotten her toes wet in exec office of a very tiny and non-diverse state, and unlike Kaine has no intellectual heft whatsoever.

    Dems would be fools to be scared off from going after Palin's Quayle-esque experience/intelligence problems.  


    I see nothing to suggest that Palin is not (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:18 AM EST

    Apparently, in her debates for (none / 0) (#132)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:18:00 AM EST
    gov a couple yrs ago, she gave often very vague and unspecific responses, that according to NPR today.  But voters there in that peculiar, isolated and tiny state bought the pretty image and decided to roll the dice.

    Also, attending the Univ of Idaho (and nothing more?) doesn't exactly equate to intellectual gravitas.  

    Though I'm sure she has some superficial qualities in appearance and in the Miss Congeniality dept that might win over wavering independent white male indies .. .


    Whoa dude (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:20:54 AM EST
    You're already going over the line here.

    Their terms are the same (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:02:59 AM EST
    Your argument is this - Virginia is bigger than Alaska.

    I would NEVER make that argument politically.


    Huh? (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:06:09 AM EST
    Are you so damned thick that you don't see how sexist and elitist your comment is?  Jeebus Crispies.  How figuratively deaf and dumb are you? I truly hope other Dems who feel as you do, zip it NOW.  

    You are overestimating the reverence (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:11:26 AM EST
    Americans have for an Ivy League education.  Yes, the 'creative class' gets all worked up about it, but the rest of the U.S. does not.

    Trust me, the message of Univ of Idaho will be that she's just plain folks, like you and me.  Do you not remember how well that worked for Bush in 2000?

    Sarah Palin IS who most of America would like to have a beer with, men and women.


    Another Gooper argument, the (none / 0) (#181)
    by brodie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:32:58 AM EST
    hilarious "test" of whom would you like to have a beer with.

    Last time it was trotted out, it gave us Geo W. BUsh over Al Gore.

    I don't argue we need to pick only from the Ivy League -- after all GWB went there (legacy admittee, for sure).  But I do contend that with someone new to the scene, with only a relatively unknown and undistinguished educational institution to her academic credit, we do have the right to ask whether she's up to the job.

    Reagan, another small-college grad, was sort of able to get passed this "up to the job" hurdle given his two terms as gov of the most important and populous state in the union.  Palin cannot fall back on the large state gov argument.  SHe has only her looks and charm -- great qualification for a beauty pageant, not so great for applying for Potus ...


    It's not necessary (none / 0) (#75)
    by cardcarryingmember on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:02:41 AM EST
    to go after Palin's experience. In case any "Democrats" are seriously thinking of voting for McCain, we simply need to remind them that they are now thinking of voting for not one, but TWO vehemently anti-choice candidates, one of whom seems to have creationist tendencies. Truly a breathtakingly cynical move on the part of McCain, even more foolish than Bush 41's choice of Dan Quayle to calm down his right wing.

    We're not worried about losing the votes of (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:05:38 AM EST
    liberals. It's moderates/swing voters. Moderates aren't going to be terribly turned off by an anti-choice person who believes in God (a very large percentage of the people in this country are creationists).

    True, but nevertheless (none / 0) (#105)
    by cardcarryingmember on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:09:10 AM EST
    this has to be viewed in part as a play for those so upset at Hilary losing that they've gone public in their support for McCain. Is that not an insult to their intelligence?

    No (none / 0) (#129)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:16:53 AM EST
    because at the end of the day for many, many (I would say the majority of those who vote) men and women, the heart/emotions trumps the head/intellect in what motivates people to pull that lever for person A and his/her running mate over person B and his/her's.   I think many of us kid ourselves if we don't acknowledge that fact.  



    I have PhD, (none / 0) (#169)
    by theybannedmeinboston on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:29:53 AM EST
    and I don't feel insulted.

    he's been campaign for half of that ;) (none / 0) (#95)
    by nycstray on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:07:36 AM EST
    International experience. (none / 0) (#160)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:27:27 AM EST
    She deals with Canada and Russia (pipeline, offshore fishing) daily.  

    And national experience now translates for the Dems to -- DC insiders.  

    Just saying.


    Palin Competes With Obama (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by Desired User Name on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:47:11 AM EST
    on the experience front...I agree. She does have ample experience in comparison with Obama, but surely not in comparison to Biden. It's the weirdest dynamic and yet another exclamation point to a race that has been the strangest political experience of my lifetime. I mean, hey, I thought that ROSS PEROT was the craziest-weirdness but now...

    How will Biden debate her and NOT put his loafers deep into his mouth? Hmmmmm...

    The media however will fawn over what a HOTTIE Palin is and that too will be sexist nonsense, but she IS a HOTTIE.


    I think Hills paved the way for other women and I do not think that any other woman will ever be as ABUSED as The Former First Lady was...


    We're already in (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by mg7505 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:07:11 AM EST
    over our heads. The media didn't know what to make of a black man, a woman and a senior citizen in the race. Now we have a tag team that resembles the stereotypical older man/younger woman.

    Nonetheless I'm happy that one of the four possible future Presidents is now a woman. I also appreciate how much this puts the Right wing's collective feet in their mouth. Fitting punishment for years of bashing Hillary in the most sexist and vulgar ways possible (a certain nutcracker comes to mind). Not that the Media will call them out on this flip-flop; I'll bet they all gush over how "progressive" McCain is. Ugh.


    And McCain just recogized (5.00 / 4) (#163)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:28:40 AM EST
    the anniversary of the 19th Amendment, as the Dem nominee did not.  And some of us noticed.

    Why can't they pick the right kind of music? (none / 0) (#4)
    by stefystef on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:39:20 AM EST
    I'm watching CSPAN.
    They have a rock band????  ROCK BAND???
    Oh no!  They didn't go there!!!  I hope that band is from Ohio.

    I didn't expect it.

    McCain is getting hip???

    No friggin way.

    I worried that it would be ABBA (none / 0) (#173)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:31:09 AM EST
    which is McCain's fave.  And ABBA rocks.  I much prefer it to hip hop.  Especially "Dirt Off My Shoulders."

    Be grateful that it wasn't ABBA.  Some of us are enjoying all sorts of signals this season.  See Pantsuit, Orange.:-)


    What a creative choice! (none / 0) (#19)
    by caramel on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:48:39 AM EST
    No matter what her experience is or not, the Republicans score big with this choice for sure. The Dems need to be more creative and soon...

    Kind of like Mondale (none / 0) (#66)
    by musicsleuth on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:49 AM EST
    choosing Geraldine Ferraro 24 years ago. I'll be interested to see all the quotes that Palin has made over the years on foreign policy.

    I'm anxious to hear what Ferraro (5.00 / 2) (#188)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:37:00 AM EST
    has to say about McCain's picking Palin as his VP.  

    Lots of them. Deals daily wth Canada (none / 0) (#186)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:35:35 AM EST
    and Russia.  Pipeline, offshore fishing rights.

    To an Illinoian, offshore fishing is in Lake Michigan.  Try again.  This VP pick means trouble, and you have to do better at defining why.


    Trepidation, here, personally (none / 0) (#20)
    by daria g on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:48:56 AM EST
    Awaiting more of my fellow Democrats and liberals going overboard with flat out sexism and misogyny.     For real. The ones who were having a hard time finding more reasons to trash Hillary just got themselves a new target.

    All in all I see McCain may well, at the convention, really present a new and unexpected image of the GOP.. people (and the media) have short memories.. he'll have Palin, Bobby Jindal, Pawlenty up there.. maybe Jindal will give the keynote?  Interesting indeed.

    I can't imagine... (5.00 / 4) (#84)
    by p lukasiak on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:04:13 AM EST
    I personally can't imagine how you can see the "Palin is a bad choice because of her lack of experience" argument from Obama supporters as anything but sexist, considering they don't find Obama's lack of experience disqualifying in the least.

    But its worse than just sexist -- it highlights Obama's lack of experience itself.  

    I mean, what I'm already seeing is "Don't vote for McCain because he might die because he's old and his VP doesn't have any experience".  For me, what that says is "Don't vote for Obama, because he won't die, and we'll have an experienced president for four years."

    The way I see it, if McCain doesn't die within 2 years, Palin will have more national experience than Obama did when he decided to run -- and since he's decided to run.  And Palin's experience will be direct and relevant -- and her executive experience will make it much easier for her to transition to the job of governing than Obama will.


    Senators vs Governors (5.00 / 3) (#142)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:21:06 AM EST
    When all the candidates were senators, the lack of direct executive experience was a wash.

    But being a governor is direct executive experience that is an up on legislative experience in most voters minds.  I don't think that when you have to by counting by months comparing Obama to Palin that she really loses much, if any at all.

    I also think that if the narrative goes the direction of comparison Obama's inexperience to Palin's they've already lost the argument.

    Slightly OT, but I'm watching McCain now, and however they got all those people into whatever venue he's in did a very good job -- he's standing  in front a hugely cheering crowd that won't shut up (like Bill at the DNC), and this has been missing from most of the McCain images -- they are super excited.  This is a big boost imagewise for him.  Total contrast to that weird thing they did on the last day of the primaries, where he stood in front of a weird green wall and it looked like he was speaking to an audience of 12.


    Very bold and volatile choice (5.00 / 3) (#174)
    by sj on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:31:37 AM EST
    Awaiting more of my fellow Democrats and liberals going overboard with flat out sexism and misogyny.    

    And with that, offended Dem women, who may have been walking back to the party, will once again be made unwelcome.  

    This is sure to mix it up.  I hear men at work talking about her lack of experience.  I hear women at work sounding intrigued.  

    These particular men aren't being affected one way or another by the VP pick.  The women, on the other hand... I'm thinking they're going to be deciding the election.  

    And the Obama backers have picked up some very, very bad habits.


    David Gergen just saidof the pick: (none / 0) (#47)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:55:39 AM EST
    "You could have knocked me over with a feather."

    He agrees it's a big gamble for McCain though.

    How is this not... (none / 0) (#52)
    by mike in dc on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:31 AM EST
    ...a slap in the face to Clinton supporters?

    Does John McCain think that they will support him just because he picked a vastly less qualified  woman (who happens to be anti-choice) than Hillary Clinton to be his veep?

    It's a pretty blatant play both to mollify his conservative base and try to "woo" former Clinton supporters.  I can't imagine the latter will work all that well.  

    Ha! (5.00 / 4) (#71)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:01:06 AM EST
    ...a slap in the face to Clinton supporters?

    Some of the Obama supporters got plenty of slaps in at Hillary supporters during the campaign.  Surely you can't be serious here.


    Yes, even if it's a slap (5.00 / 2) (#162)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:27:56 AM EST
    (which it's not, btw), it's only one slap.  What's the score now?

    It's not because (5.00 / 8) (#79)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:03:05 AM EST
    it's not like McCain had the option of picking Hillary instead!

    Not to reopen things, but the reason it would have been insulting for Obama to pick Sebelius is that the message is like, "I didn't want to pick Hillary, but you'll all be just as happy with this one, right?"

    Choosing Palin is a pander, but what people miss is that pandering is also a sign of respect.  Even if a woman completely realizes that the Palin choice was a blatant play for women voters, the message is "I care enough about women voters to make a play for them."  If pandering were always viewed as a horrible insult by the target group, politicians would never pander, but in fact they do it all the time.


    Pandering is a sign of respect? (none / 0) (#119)
    by steviez314 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:12:12 AM EST
    Holy cow....pandering is a sign of how LITTLE you respect the intelligence of the people you're pandering to.

    Okay (5.00 / 4) (#135)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:19:17 AM EST
    You keep going right ahead with that theory.  But lots of people really like it when politicians say "hey, I want your vote badly enough that I'm willing to pander for it."

    I don't think you understand how this works on an emotional as opposed to an intellectual level.  People often understand that they're being pandered to and don't mind one bit.


    We have the issues on our side (none / 0) (#57)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:57:50 AM EST
    Dems need to stick to that.  I think Obama himself will, as will the Clintons.

    The media will ask the experience questions, and Dems just need to get it back to the issues.

    THE GREEN PARTY [Farrakhan} SO WHAT (none / 0) (#62)
    by Desired User Name on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:59:01 AM EST
    only needs 5% of the vote to become legitimized as a party. We all need a 3rd Party!

    WE ARE NEEDED NOW, BIG TIME on both sides!

    I'd hope that NO Hillary supporters vote for McCain...that instead if they can't side with the trickery and slime of the Pelosi/Brazile/Dean takeover...they instead use the protest vote to help the Green Party.

    Some say they'd not vote for Cynthia McKinney because she has ties to Farrakhan, but even if that were true it is of NO MATTER because the vote is for The Green Party and only The Green Party because we all know that Cynthia has NO CHANCE of winning. So again if she has ties to Farrakhan, WHO CARES!!!

    I think we need a new party. We don't need a TWO ANTI-WOMAN's LIFE candidates in office.

    what they looked for (none / 0) (#101)
    by pixpixpix on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:22 AM EST
    great line from Steve Benen at Washington Monthly

    "When looking for a running mate, Barack Obama looked to someone who could help make him a better president.

    When looking for a running mate, John McCain looked to someone who could help him look like a better candidate."

    That's a crock. He picker Biden because (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:12:35 AM EST
    people didn't think he had the gravitas to be President and McCain was walking all over him. Any suggestion otherwise is ridiculous.

    It's funny (none / 0) (#125)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:14:21 AM EST
    because that is EXACTLY the line the GOP was going to use against Obama if he picked someone like Kaine to help him in a swing state.

    Needless to say, it's fair game, although the caution about showing respect still applies.


    "I do believe that McCain has to do something to reshuffle the cards, shake up the establishment, do something unexpected and Governor Palin...has all the kinds of things that McCain might see as a way to shake things up. I think (her selection) would be something similar to Dan Quayle...Dan Quayle proved to be sort of an embarrassment as a campaigner. Being thrust on a national stage like that could be very tough. Now Mondale tried to shake things up by going with Geraldine Ferraro...she proved to be a disaster as a running mate. And as a campaigner, she was absolutely awful. And so I just think that it is very risky for McCain to do this, but it may be all he has left."

    I don't think those kinds of statements are helpful.

    Can someone attempt to explain (none / 0) (#204)
    by cardcarryingmember on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:53:14 PM EST
    why McCain didn't pick Kay Bailey Hutchison, if he was set on picking a woman? At least she has experience (substantially more). It would have been a much more respectable choice and would have made it much harder to launch the inexperience attack. Or is she not conservative enough to please the freaks on the far right?

    i don't need to mock her, or obama for that (none / 0) (#205)
    by cpinva on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:27:11 PM EST
    matter, regarding their almost total lack of any kind of relevant experience, it's a self-evident truth.

    Choice? (none / 0) (#206)
    by rasqual78 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:40:28 AM EST
    "Palin is an anti choice, pro voucher..."

    That's such a funny juxtaposition. Being in favor of vouchers is very much being in favor of choice. Being against them is very much an anti choice position.

    One may choose to kill unborn children, but once born, parents who cannot afford private education are obliged to let others choose where their kids are "educated" (see stats for Obama's home state on education).

    Citizens are obliged to roll over and pee for the big dogs in the teachers unions.