Althouse isn’t buying Merritt’s historical claim on Eagleton’s importance — and it’s true, McGovern did get walloped — or her argument that “Obama presented himself for 17 months to the American people, they heard him debate more than a dozen times, they made their own decision that he was ready for the job and the Democrats voted him their nominee.”

“Did they?” she retorts. “I remember early excitement, among Democrats, followed by months of difficulty fighting back Hillary Clinton, who had let the nomination slip away by failing to do the math early on and to take the caucus states seriously enough. The Obama campaign figured out a clever strategy. Was this really the public vetting him? He pulled off a surprise early on, got some people very excited, and ultimately edged out the more qualified contender. How was that a decisive test? When the testing really got serious, Hillary surged. But it was too late.”

Toby concludes, "Well, there’s plenty of time for testing now …"

Since I'm at work today, it will be tonight before I can respond, but here's a place to continue the discussion. As I said in the post, my description of the McGovern-Eagleton fiasco came from watching the new documentary, Gonzo, about Hunter S. Thompson. I have a screening copy and watched it three times so I could get the take correctly -- both George McGovern and Gary Hart were interviewed about it in the film.

My point was:

Voters don't know Palin from Adam. What they do know: She's under investigation in Alaska and she's got no relevant experience. And that only now, after selecting her, is McCain sending his team to Alaska to fully vet her.

Voters are left with only two conclusions: Either McCain didn't vet Palin which is shockingly, near-criminally negligent or he did vet Palin and still picked her, which has got to be the most desperate, jaw-droppingly reckless political move in decades.

Sarah Palin is not ready for prime-time or the Vice-Presidency, let alone to be one heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

And please note, this has not one iota to do with her being a female or her personal life which we do not mention here.

It's the media interest in the story I suspect will doom her. When they latch on, they don't let go and they seem to be latching onto troopergate, her lack of national experience and whether McCain failed to vet her.

I'm speaking as a citizen and a voter and only for myself. I'm not even an activist, let alone a strategist. But I do know a media storm when I see one.

As to why I hope Palin drops out, I think she is energizing the radical right and evangelicals who will pump a ton of money into McCain's campaign. The Republicans were apathetic and resigned to McCain's probable loss, now they are excited.

I don't want the radical right controlling the election. Or the White House. Or the Supreme Court. Or the Justice Department.

For me, the questions are: Is she competent? Is she ethical? Does she exercise sound judgment? Does she know enough about the world to take over the presidency if that becomes necessary during her first months in office? All the people who say "just talk about the issues" are missing the fact that her ability to govern, if necessary, IS an issue.

And, as I wrote here, this is about John McCain's judgment. From his book, as stated in the New York Times:

At the very least, the process reflects Mr. McCain’s history of making fast, instinctive and sometimes risky decisions. “I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can,” Mr. McCain wrote, with his top adviser Mark Salter, in his 2002 book, “Worth the Fighting For.” “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”

There is not a single reference on TalkLeft to her personal life or family issues, discussion of which has been prohibited. This is about Palin's record, lack of record, position on issues, official conduct while in government service and preparedness and ability to govern.