http://www.reason.com/blog/show/128450.h tml

I wonder if the base knows that she is an admitted pot smoker?

"Can the Republicans make the case that Palin is ready to lead this country should the need arise?"

Even though it may not be politically correct to make inferences about McCain's age and health, that's absolutely what will go through the minds of people when they look at this ticket.

They are ecstatic about the choice of Palin.  So I guess we know who McCain was trying to win over.  It's the evangelical base which we were not going to win anyway.  The Republicans must be very worried if they went so far just to shore up their base.

She straight out lied today when she said "I told Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that bridge to nowhere."  The New Republic already has the story that this is a complete lie:

Republicans have been touting Sarah Palin's reformist credentials pretty heavily, with her supposed opposition to Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" Exhibit A. But how hard did she really fight the project? Not very, it seems. Here's what she told the Anchorage Daily News on October 22, 2006, late in the race for the governor's seat (via Nexis):

5. Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?

"Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."

So she was very much for the bridge and insisted that Alaska had to act quickly--the party of Ted Stevens and Don Young might soon lose its majority, after all. By that point, though, the project was endangered for reasons that had nothing to do with Palin--the bridge had become a national punchline, Congress had stripped away the offending earmark, shifting the money back to the state's general fund, and future federal support seemed unlikely. True, after Palin was sworn into office that fall, her first budget didn't allocate any money for the bridge. But when the Daily News asked on December 16, 2006, if she now opposed the project, Palin demurred and said she was just trying to figure out where the bridge fit on the state's list of transportation priorities, given the lack of support from Congress. Finally, on September 19, 2007, she decided to redirect funds away from the project altogether with this sorry-sounding statement:

"Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer," said Governor Palin. "Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Governor Palin added. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."

I agree, the move reeks of desperation.  Palin's overt pandering with the "glass ceiling" comments and Hillary shout out will not fool real HRC supporters.  

True Clintonistas will be appalled at the McCain Camp's attempt to win their favor with a conservative pro-lifer who stands opposed to all that Hillary has worked for.

The fundies may like the pick, and some a healthy chunck of the PUMA crazies will love it but we weren't getting those votes anyway.

Wait until the cheesecake pictures of Palin make their way from the Internet onto the newspaper pages.

when Joe B marginalizes Palin by ignoring her

It is not a pick without risk.  

However, I think a lot of my fellow Democrats are again missing the point by disecting all these facts and figures and coming to a rational opinion on the quality of McCain's pick.

The average undecided voter isn't going to do any of that.  The average undecided voter looks at the whole ball of wax, the speeches, the news clippings, the soundbites, the looks or appearances, the attacks, the clothes, the hobbies, the spouses, the debates, and a thousand other silly little things and decides who they like the best.

Palin has an interesting bio.  She may win some people over.  She may turn some people off.  In the end I don't think VP do much to move the needle.   But if she moves John McCain 5 points with the womens vote then she was probably worth the pick.

One thing I think is clear today.  McCain got past the risk of splitting his own party.  We are know looking at a good old fashioned red state, blue state election just like the last two.  It is clear that Obama isn't going to flip Mississippi or Alabama, Georgia, or South Carolina, like some thought he might.  

Like the last election it seems our best chance to flip states is in the west where Democrats have had a lot of recent success and migration has continued to add voters that may look favorably on our message.

short term bump, long term disaster. that's why i don't get it.

This is yet another chip off the old "maverick" label of McCain.   While the bible thumping wingnuts are agush (supposedly) with Palin, the fact is McCain sold is soul here to get in tight with the religious right again and collect on their soley needed cashola to run his campain.   These kooks are all about pro life issues and could care less about a woman who has no experience of any kind except for mooseburgers and salmon fishing being a heartbeat away from a 72 yo cancer survivor.   Screw national security as long as women no longer have pro choice rights.   I guess she will be a great resource for the 101st mounted snowmobile light infrantry from Tuk, Alaska

Barack Obama picked Joe Biden as someone who could help him govern.  Obama is putting America's interests first.

John McCain picked Sarah Palin because he hoped she could help him win.  McCain is putting his own interests first.

Windfall profit taxes.  It turns out the that the biggest chunk of what she called oil "revenues" that she returns to consumers is actually a windfall profit tax, something McCain opposes.  From the Seattle Times:

Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska's Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry -- a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared.

At a time when Americans are feeling the pinch at the gasoline pump and oil companies are racking up record profits, Alaska's choice foreshadows one of the sharpest debates in the upcoming presidential election.

Democrat Barack Obama supports a national windfall-profits tax, while Republican John McCain opposes it.

Alaska collected an estimated $6 billion from the new tax during the fiscal year that ended June 30, according to the Alaska Oil and Gas Association. That helped push the state's total oil revenue -- from new and existing taxes, as well as royalties -- to more than $10 billion, double the amount received last year.

While many other states are confronting big budget deficits because of the troubled economy, Alaska officials are in the enviable position of exploring new ways to spend the state's multibillion-dollar budget surplus.

Some of that new cash will end up in the wallets of Alaska's residents.

Palin's administration last week gained legislative approval for a special $1,200 payment to every Alaskan to help cope with gas prices, which are among the highest in the country.

That check will come on top of the annual dividend of about $2,000 that each resident could receive this year from an oil-wealth savings account.

I totally agree - between last night's speech and the opportunity to make the Alaska GOP a campaign issue, I'm having trouble seeing a downside here.

Obama did most of the work to pull the party together over the past few days, so I am optimistic, but I'm not as sanguine about Palin's effect. Seems to me she presents a whole series of traps for us, and so far the blogs, Democratic surrogates and initially the Obama campaign are falling for them.

Biden's first statement was the wisest of the bunch, probably because of his very sharp communications director Ricki Seidman. The new joint statement from Obama and Biden is much smarter than the idiotic Burton comments:

"We send our congratulations to Governor Sarah Palin and her family on her designation as the republican nominee for Vice President. It is yet another encouraging sign that old barriers are falling in our politics. While we obviously have differences over how best to lead this country forward Governor Palin is an admirable person and will add a compelling new voice to this campaign."

The most dangerous trap is to underestimate and dismiss Palin. Burton's reaction, the Quayle comments at DK, and Cokie Roberts giggling on NPR all fall for that trap, lower the bar for Palin, raise the bar for Obama, and make it easy for Palin to show them to be sexist fools if she can make it over that lowered bar. The "abandoning her special needs downs kid" is another sexist, predjudiced trap and could turn into an abortion trap, just ask Michael Berube.

I'm also not convinced of the "Hillary can save us from this!" argument. We just spent four days putting to bed the notion that the primary was about Hillary Clinton, how does making Hillary Clinton a focus of the general election help Obama?

Even a rock can make a big splash. But what after that?

This is a brilliant move, it absolutely will solidfy the evangelical base: She is pro-live and even a borderline creationist.

And, THIS is the master stroke, for all those bitter Hillary folks.

Take a poll here? Our Pumas, SwitchingSides, Nekkid, you name them, are throwing aside ALL those criticism they made of Obama for all the "present votes" and becoming champions of Sarah.

Even Candadian Girl seems to be holding her powder.

It won't matter a bit that she is Pro-life, nothing will override that McCain picked a woman and Obama didn't.

This was a fricking genius move from the Republics.

I think, this is gut check time, and, this is the WORST thing that could have happened to democrats.

They will run her and her kids out nationwide as "the womans champion?"

She is already gushing over Ferrao and Hillary.

I have ONE five dollar bet on this election, and as of right now, I have never felt that money more in jeopardy.

Here's an interesting summary of Palin's "executive" experience in Alaska, along with a more detailed description of "trooper gate."

http://mudflats.wordpress.com/

Once people see the picture of downtown Wasilla, I think that part of the argument will disappear.

I liked this post

I found this on another blog... kind of interesting

Eric August 29th, 2008 2:20 pm ET

Today we found out that the Republican Nominee for Vice President is Governor Sarah Palin. I have watched all the debates after her acceptance speech and no one brought up the fact that she, in front of a worldwide audience, broke Operational Security the Military prides itself on. She announced the MOS of her son serving in the Army, and went on to say the exact date and the country her son's unit will deploy too. She has not only endangered the life of her son, but all the other soldiers in his unit. Senator John McCain never talked about his own son's service for that very reason. I think it shows the lack of Judgment on the part of McCain's Camp to not screen her speech and shows her own inexperience on the National Stage. For a candidate who prides himself on National Security his Vice Presidential choice just blew that argument out of the water. So why are we not talking about this issue?

That's the most frightening Subject Line ever entered at mydd.com.

we are naive to think that hillary supporters (even pro-choice ones) will not vote for mccain/palin simply because palin is pro-life.

and we are also naive to think that somehow her lack of experience or quayle-like comparisons will turn people off. remember bentsen drummed quayle in the 1988 VP debate, but bush drummed dukakis in the general election.

we are also naive to think that evangelicals will be turned off by her female ambition. palin is pro-life women with 5 children (one of which is about to leave for iraq) and she is a lifetime member of the nra. all of that trumps her female ambition.

we are naive to think the republicans are desperate or have written this election off. that's exactly what they want us to believe.

we are naive to think that mccain or the republicans are stupid.

this election will be difficult to win and obama knows that. that's why his campaign and others have worked so hard to register new voters. we will definitely need them to win. And we need to continue to donate to and volunteer for his candidacy.

take absolutely nothing for granted.

I don't think that this is official!

http://wonkette.com/402363/your-first-lo ok-at-mccain-palins-america

underestimate the stupidity of the average American voter. Remember we represent one tiny fraction of the electorate in that we actually pay attention. I've already had to clarify two of my friends that she is anti-choice. Being relatively unknown may help her.

From a political point of view, this is a potentially a home run (and actually a very predictable pick once Obama picked Biden as VP - I predicted a month ago that McCain would pick a woman). Palin excites the Republican base and will be attractive to suburban white women (soccer moms). She'll also be attractive to 35-50 year old working class women.

I've read statistical studies which suggest that Republican women make strong candidates in general elections. One study  (albeit very old) showed that Republican women are the strongest general election candidates. In the study, Democratic men came in second, Republican men third and Democratic women were the weakest candidates. The study was done when Democrats were the majority party. I suspect, the gender factor which favor Republican women candidates is particularly strong at the presidential level.

However, the risk for McCain is Palin's possible scandals. There is also the Harriet Myers factor. If the Democrats can convince the public that this is an "affirmative action" pick, then this selection could backfire. However, given Obama's own lack of experience, this argument will be difficult to make. I think Obama's best argument is that he is a far superior political talent than Sarah Palin.

I think Democrats should by and large lay off the experience point for the moment.  There is time for that to come out and it is not helpful in the short term.  Let the media do its work without getting our hands dirty.  Same with McCain's age.

Do hope she gets the equivalent of a Dukakis question from the media at the debates.

"Gov. Palin, you are opposed to allowing women to choose abortion even in cases of rape and incest.  Imagine the worst thing a parent fears has occurred and your daughter Piper was raped and impregnated.  Can you help American's understand what you would say to your daughter about why she should bring her rapist's child to term?"

Maybe better yet: "Gov. Palin, you are opposed to allowing women to choose abortion even in cases of rape and incest.  Can you share with the American public how you would justify to that daughter and her family your view that the government should compel her to bring her rapist's child to term?"

Too harsh?  Not suggesting the question come from Dems, but what if it came from a reporter?

Palin's addition to the ticket takes Republican faux-feminism to a whole new level. As Adam Serwer pointed out on TAPPED, this is in fact a condescending move by the GOP. It plays to the assumption that disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters did not care about her politics -- only her gender. In picking Palin, Republicans are lending credence to the sexist assumption that women voters are too stupid to investigate or care about the issues, and merely want to vote for someone who looks like them. As Serwer noted, it's akin to choosing Alan Keyes in an attempt to compete with Obama for votes from black Americans.

I can't help but be, oh, a little bit skeptical of Republicans' sudden interest in the glass ceiling. After all, this is the party that threw women like Lilly Ledbetter under the bus, in favor of businesses that practice wage discrimination. The party that stymied the Equal Rights Amendment. The party that not only wants to force women here and abroad to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, but also wants to deny them access to a range of contraception options.

Not to mention hypocrisy at play. Republicans directed an inexcusable amount of sexist vitriol at Hillary during the primary. As Michelle Malkin said on Fox News about Hillary, "If that's the face of experience, I think it's going to scare away a lot of those independent voters that are on the fence."

hat tip:  The American Prospect

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?arti cle=mccains_sexist_vp_pick

I disagree with you in a way. This campaign till now has been framed by both candidates as a contest of personalities and not ideologies. Selecting Palin does the following things:

1. neutralizes the soft media stories of Obama's life

2. tries in a big way to co-opt the idea of change and new direction for the GOP

3. makes this a campaign of competing personalities now. You have Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin, it's McCain's way of saying that he is for change while Obama is for status quo

4. shores up and energizes the conservative base and also the civil libertarians. Palin is a self-described conservative yet she is intentionally ambiguous on gay rights and Roe.

Which brings me back to my point which I had diaried on. This election cannot be about post-partisan schtick and unity on the capitol hill. Obama can do all that once he wins till then he has to energize the base, run along Democratic and ideological party lines. Blurring the lines between progressive and conservative, Democrat and Republican as some his advisers (Daschle, Sebelius, McCaskill etc) are prone to do is perilous. The people have to be given a clear choice. I believe we have the better platform and that is what he needs to highlight all the time.

" Palin, like about 60 percent of Alaska voters, favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Her environmental credentials are, at best, mixed. She favors what we in Alaska call "predator control," including, gif necessary, the hunting of wolves from the air. Just recently her Dept. of Fish and Game pulled some wolf cubs from their den and shot them as part of a program to improve moose survival.

She also opposes the listing of the polar bear as an endangered species."

She's not the least bit cool. She's an asshole.

1. She's a nobody. She should be treated as such. Biden should say hello at the debates, then hammer mc cain.

2. Obama has the right idea: acknowledge Palin, pat her on the head, then get right back to "90%, 90%, 90%"

very good analysis of the "Biblical womanhood." argument. a lot of deeply evangelical women voters will understand, just like a lot of female hillary supporters, that this is just a cynical, political ploy with no real change affecting women's rights or their "place in the home."

on the flip side, i dont see how this choice appeases the business side of the republican coalition. romney understood them. palin is governor of a state in which everyone receives subsidies based on oil revenues to live there. what business model supports that situation?

all in all, a gift to obama, with a focus on putting up a woman to run against hillary in 2012 or 2016 (yes she can!).

I can see the brilliance of picking a woman sportscaster, but shouldn't he have rewarded one who had risen to the top of her profession- like Hanna Storm?

I think we are underestimating the value of this pick to McCain.  In a year when the Democrats have such a large "generic" lead, the only way a Republican can win is be winning over large number of centrist voters, including independents and some Democrats.  McCain is perhaps the only Republican candidate that has a chance to do that, because of his record as a maverick.

However, he was somewhat boxed in in his VP choice.  If he made a non-traditional pick, such as Joe Lieberman or Meg Whitman, he would have infuriated his right-wing base.  But if he picked a candidate that satisfied his right-wing base, he would have undermined his message as a maverick.

Palin has solid support from the right-wing base -- probably as much as anybody else under consideration.  However, because of her gender, her quirky background, and her successful fights against the corrupt Republican establishment in Alaska -- she also strongly reinforces McCain's maverick reputation.  Her pick thus allows McCain to pivot from the nominating contest, when he had to reassert  his conservative credentials, to the presidental campaign, when he will reemphasize his maverick tendencies, thus allowing him to better appeal to centrist.

Finally, this pick will also allow McCain to dramatically capture the media narrative the next 1-2 weeks, which could possibly be the weeks in which this campaign is pretty much decided.

Let's look at the bounce the Republicans get in the next two weeks.  If McCain Palin are able to take a lead in the polls following the Republican National Convention, it could be a very tough campaign ahead.

McCain's base was going to vote for him anyway, they were just going to hold their noses.  Now, they'll be enthusiastic about it.  He's also making a play for the women's vote and he'll get the disgruntled PUMAs who'll never vote for Barack Obama(like that chick on Chris Matthews).  I think at least 85% of women who supported Hillary supported her b/c she was the first qualified woman to ever run for the top spot, you could put her in there and feel comfortable with the decision.  The other 15% are just women voting based on gender and most likely Obama wasn't going to gain them back anyway.