But sarah got a gun
thats what McCain is thinking - lol. have a safe and blessed weekend

Here's a list of names/terms that, at minimum, any person qualified to assume the highest office in the US should be familiar with. If you can find a single quotation before her selection Friday where she has used *any* of these terms, I will be shocked. (Go ahead and try.)

Shiite
Kurd
Abbas
Olmert
Sderot
Maliki
Nasrallah
Musharaff
Bhutto
Sharif
Ahmadinejad
Khamanei
Chavez
Castro
Zawahiri
Revolutionary Guard
Georgia (the country)
nonproliferation
Medvedev
Hu Jintao
Katrina
FEMA
credit crunch
habeus corpus
establishment clause

Now, I know *you* are familiar with all these terms. How can you expect anything less from the VP to a guy who's 72 and a multiple skin cancer survivor with bad cholesterol? Has Palin even *been* to Israel before? (I checked---the answer is no.) 90% of your posts are about Israel's security, and you aren't bothered by this? Are you just a hypocrite, or what?

This selection was an absurdity. But in this culture, if McCain had picked a lizard as his VP, you can bet that there'd be equal time on TV devoted to all sides of his choice. It's like that old joke of Eban's about what would happen if Saudi Arabia propose a resolution in the General Assembly that Earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it.

Don't get me wrong---Obama is no paragon of experience. (Although he is polling way ahead by a wide margin among current IDF soldiers---those wobbly kumbaya-singing commies.) He's weak on experience. Don't turn around and claim that I'm arguing otherwise. I'm just saying that if you aren't a hypocrite, then you should be even more upset with Palin! And the fact that McCain picked her after speaking to her on *two* brief occasions! Do you really feel that Israel is safe in her hands? Do you think any Israeli looks at this flake and feels safe?

Your inability to shed your partisan clothes for even a brief moment and look at this VP selection with clear eyes is abundant evidence of your hack-ness. No sane person would entrust the US to this person. She has no training in law, let alone constitutional or federal law, has never held any kind of national office, has never written on foreign policy or national security (does she even have a passport?), and probably hasn't even thought about any of these things her whole life. She's never run a serious campaign, let alone defeated the Clinton machine. Can she even list all the amendments to the Constitution? Do you think she even knows how many there are?

This is absurd. People close to McCain are pointing out that this was a gut pick, a last-minute decision. McCain has a long history of reckless and foolish gambling. (Not to mention using attractive younger women to get ahead.) And now he's actually turned the Democratic ticket into the "safe" choice. That McCain would make this person his potential replacement is the most irresponsible thing a candidate has done memory. Can you even imagine her running the US? Has she ever even visited D.C. before? Does she know any senators? Does she know where the White House is?

She's far less qualified than even W. was. Have we learned nothing about putting people with no education and no qualification and no experience into the White House?

Why couldn't McCain have picked somebody who knows what the hell he/she is doing? I don't know, like *any* of his other choices (including the other women he was considering)?

Why isn't anybody even laughing at McCain for this absurd choice? She hasn't even been governor for two years yet! The *total* number of people who voted for her twenty months ago was about how many people fit in the Mile High stadium on Thursday!

Insanity. Doesn't anybody have a shred of integrity around here? Is everybody so blinded by partisan ideology that they can't see straight?

Whoops. My mistake. A conservative did something. He must be correct. (Unless it's Pat Buchanan, Bob Novak, Paul Findley, or John Sununu, of course. Oh, wait, Palin was a vocal supporter of Buchanan's---in 1999!!! Although she's tried to backtrack from that now.)

All I'm asking is that you forget for a moment who's Republican and who's Democrat and use your incredible powers of observation on this person. If that's possible.

rawdogbuffalo, I enjoyed the comment thread on that post. You have an interesting set of commenters.

Barack Hussein Obama says he never heard Rev. Wrights "I Hate America" sermons, over 20 years at the church?

Either Obama is lying, or he is too dumb to be President.

Too bad that Michelle Obama hates Hillary Clinton so much that it prevented her husband from selecting her for the Veep slot.

Obama is the weakest candidate the hijacked Democrat party has ever fielded.

Matt raises some interesting points, though I do question how inexperience at the bottom of the ticket seems to weigh more heavily than inexperience at the top.

That said..........I am unenthused about the selection of Palin. Her selection removes a major arrow from McCain's quiver (The "inexperience" argument), and she won't bring many, if any, Clinton supporters over to the Republican side. In terms of battleground states, which ones will she sway over the "R" column in November? Will Michigan or Pennsylvania now go Republican? The answer, near as I can tell, is no. Will she help protect the Republican wins in 2004 in a state like Ohio? I just don't see it.

Was she an "outside the box" selection for McCain? Absolutely, and I give him credit for that. But, I don't see how his choice of her will keep Barack Obama out of the White House. And yes, her past ties to Pitchfork Pat Buchanan ARE a concern to me..........

BHG

As someone who will vote for McCain in November, I was disappointed by the selection of Palin. I think this decision makes a joke out of the entire election process and insults anyone who takes it seriously.

The top of the ticket still favors McCain, but how can all these folks who never heard of her a few days ago now speak about what a great selection this is?

Obama isn't ready to be President, has a disturbing history and holds views that would translate into policies which would weaken our national security. Still, ideology aside, his resume makes him more prepared than her to be President (though let me repeat that he is inadequate in the qualifications arena).

Palin was mayor of a town of 6000-9000 people. I grew up in a town of 30,000 people and it would have been unthinkable for the mayor to run for governor, let alone vice-President. Two years as a Governor of a state with a small population doesn't make a person qualified to lead the free world

While this was my opinion before learning she was a supporter of Buchanan, she backed him for President in 1996 after he had been thoroughly discredited in most conservative circles.

My mistake! I just looked it up, and she *does* have a passport! She got it ONE year ago to make her first trip abroad.

Now I'm reassured.

Perhaps I'm just disturbed by the Orwellian way that the Republican party, and all its promoters, have been shouting "Inexperience! Inexperience! Inexperience!" for so long and so fervently---it was going to be the central official theme of the convention for heaven's sake, with domain names like notready08.com---and then, in a 24-hour period, has done a complete U-turn and now declares "Experience? What? Who cares?" Now that's a Communist-style turnaround. (I know I need to use language that people around here understand.) Were they simply lying all that time?

I say all this, by the way, as one of McCain's strongest supporters a few years ago. I would have voted for him over Gore any day. I was even considering voting for him this time, especially if he chose a good VP and presented himself as a man with sense. In his first major decision, he has betrayed all the sense that we all thought he once had. His choice was reckless and irresponsible, a crazy gamble, and everybody knows it. How could he risk putting this VP in charge of the US should anything happen to him? Are all his decisions as president going to be so reckless? Yes, I question his judgment and his temperament. The US isn't one of the riverboat casinos where he plays high-stakes craps.

FYI, Palin openly supported Buchanan in 1999, not just in 1996. And yes, he's a dripping anti-Semite. And he's on TV, and commands a significant following. It's disgusting. And it's disgusting that so many people are so adamant about overlooking it. Obama should never get a pass for Reverend Wright. And he hasn't. It's deserved. But if people here have any integrity, they won't give Palin a pass just because she chuckles and plays down her former support of Buchanan.

Alaska's border with Russia and Canada gives Alaska Gov Palin more foreign affairs experience the Sen Obama.

Palin has supported nazi buchanan in the past.

Someone must ask her if she STILL supports buchanan.

On the other hand Obama supports his Rev. wright for 20 years (except for a temporary break for the campaign) and wright supports calypso louis farraklan.

We vote for a President, secondarily for Vice-President.

Alaska's border with Russia and Canada? You're joking, right?

She did not have a passport until last year.

Why aren't national-security Republicans worried
about her? Joe Lieberman has been fuming about the Democrats not taking foreign policy and national security seriously enough---he was shouting about it on Meet the Press just a few weeks ago---and now McCain turns him down to pick Palin? Why aren't the people on this blog freaking out?

Forget that she's a Republican and forget about Obama---just for a minute---and just look at her. Look at her with an unbiased mind for just a moment. Her primary skills are catching fish and shooting mooses. Even the Alaska Senate president, a REPUBLICAN, was shocked, saying that she is totally unqualified. (Look it up.)

This is the person McCain has said is the person he wants to replace him if he is incapacitated. Is he serious? Is this really a serious choice? Is this McCain putting American first and his campaign second?

Would you feel comfortable putting her in charge? Everyone on this blog knows more about foreign policy than she does.

And that fact that nobody here is fuming about this selection is very telling. Very telling. You parse every word that comes out of the mouths of crazed morons on Iranian TV specials, and *this* doesn't frighten you? Does she even know the name of the language they speak in Iran? Somebody tell me why this doesn't scare you. Please. I know you find Obama scary---that's fine, so do I---but if you cannot find her terrifying too, then, well, you really are incapable of independent thought.

Oh, and for the record, it's not just the Republican candidates who have children serving in Iraq. Biden's son is shipping over there, too. (Obama's kids are too young, but the people who raised him were all in the army. But if you think Obama wouldn't let his kids serve, you may well be right. I won't defend him.)

Obama is toast.

There are enough questions about his background, is he a muslim?

He says no, but he also says he never heard Rev. Wright hate America sermons, despite being in the church for 20 years.

Too many people believe he was a muslim, and is a secret muslim.

Was Obama born in the USA?

Maybe. Why isn't his Birth Certificate on his official website to settle the question?

Did Obama spend his youth in the US or in an Islamic country?

He doesn't wear an American Flag lapel pin. Later he does.

His wife is FINALLY proud of the US.

CHANGE?

That's ALL he does - change his beliefs, positions, loyalties.

This is not a one-issue blog. I'm concerned about her support for Buchanan, but we'll see how that works out. The fact is Buchanan's basic conservatism appeals to a lot of people who feel the party has strayed far from principle and has a habit of putting up bad candidates. Not everyone is up on the "issues" he has with the things we are concerned about around here. She's a real conservative...and more, an anti-corruption conservative who's not afraid to buck the party (many are pissed at her in Alaska)...the national party needs that...bad.

I sincerely doubt McCain would have chosen a Buchanite paleo-con as a running mate, and for any number of reasons, Palin complements him well. McCain brings foreign policy and wisdom, Palin shows the Republicans aren't just focused on things across the ocean.

I am concerned for one country primarily -- The United States of America, and that means keeping Barack Obama and his leftist backers out of the White House. Israel and all other countries are number two...or lower.

You know, Joe Biden isn't that much younger than McCain, and he's had health issues...So if something happens to Barack, and something happens to Biden...who's next in line....hmmmm...

It's very early, I haven't seen much yet, but neither have I heard anything yet that worries me overmuch.

To me the US is #1.

A STRONG America is good for the World.

A weak America is bad for the World
and
good for islamofascism, socialism, euros.

islamofascists, socialists, euros want to hobble the US with:

- open borders
(unvaccinated people, criminals, changing demographics)
- free aid for illegal aliens
- reduced or no military funding
- no military recruitment

I suppose I was premature about you. I'm sure you will do as much digging into Sarah Palin as you've done into Barack Obama. I'm sure you'll spread false smears about her family, just like you've spread false smears about Obama's birth certificate being faked. Unless, of course, you're prepared to post a correction to that smear, especially since factcheck.org debunked the story a couple of weeks ago, as you can easily see for yourself (unless you're convinced that they, too, are in league with that pink-commie Obama):

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

You should really peruse their site sometime. You'll find plenty of *true* (imagine that!) material that you can use against Obama. You might even (gasp!) find something bad about McCain.

Maybe you're feeling so generously even-handed (I know, Palin's a conservative, so that's really pushing it) that you might bring up the fact that Palin lied through her teeth about her pork-fighting in Alaska, down to her famous claims about fighting against the "Bridge to Nowhere." (By the way, she kept all the money, and in part used it to build what is now the "Road to Nowhere.") That is, if you're willing to believe the leftist press, like the Anchorage Daily News:

http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html

or (I'm sure this one is really a stretch) the *LA Times*:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-earmarks1-2008sep01,0,909566.story

Or, maybe you prefer the down-to-Earth, ad hominem, anecdotal stuff, like, I don't know, the recent comments of her mother-in-law, Faye Palin:

"I'm not sure what she brings to the ticket other than she's a woman and a conservative. Well, she's a better speaker than McCain."

Or the fact that she recklessly endangered a plane-load of people a few months ago by jumping on a flight from Texas to Alaska hours *after* her water broke, a month early in an already high-risk pregnancy. (Though I'm sure you know this, the risk to the other passengers is that she might require an emergency landing, and that's why airlines usually insist on a doctor's permission before letting late-term women fly.)

Unless reckless foolishness is what gets you going. Like, I don't know, McCain picking her after speaking to her *twice* (and only once in person). In that case, so what if she doesn't know the difference between Hamas and hummus? On with the show.

Oh, and I'm also sure you're going to set up a clock that counts the days until Palin denounces Pat Buchanan and her prior support for him. (I know Pat was raving about her on TV just a few days ago.) I know I'm waiting. Are you?

Everybody brace yourself for the next Republican Orwellian frame-shift---"Abstinence-only education? What? Who cares about that?"

Then again, maybe the breaking news (this story is actually, amazingly true) that Palin's high-schooler daughter is now pregnant out-of-wedlock (she had *premarital* sex! heavens! evangelicals run for the hills!) will finally convince people that hiding real sex education from teenagers just gives you more unfortunate cases like Bristol Palin's. And maybe that having premarital sex isn't punishable by an eternity in hell.

I suppose nobody here will find this hypocrisy staggering. Certainly nowhere near as staggering as a party that screams about the existential threat to our national security and the central importance of the war on terror and then chooses a neophyte for VP who'd never even *thought* about such things until now.

Matt's Chicken Little approach to Palin and the issues in general is telling and provides bemusing evidence of either panic or, more simply, the long habituated, reactionary extremism that pervades far too many quarters among the Left, the Left/Dems and the Dems in general.

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" Matt exclaims.

When in fact, at high noon, the sky is a light colored, cirulean blue. But the Matts of the world are hoping no one will notice.

An no, Matt, there's nothing "hypocritical" about it. The entirety of your comment relies upon stereotypical and demonizing caricaturizations of any and all perceived opposition. Ironically though, you're the self-caricaturizing commentator.

I haven't expressed one actual factually incorrect statement, at least judging from the retorts above. You're all quite good at the ad hominem stuff, and name-calling, though, so congrats. But try and improve the spelling, would you? (For example, it's *cerulean* blue.)

I haven't gone out on any limb for Obama. Yes, I've pointed out false smears. (I'm still waiting for a correction to the one about the birth certificate. See the link above. Though I'm sure I'm going to be waiting for a while for a correction.) Like I would point out false smears for anyone---like I mentioned about that false smear about Palin. Like I would refute any false smears about McCain, none of which I'll even bring up because that would be giving them the undeserved light of day. Grown-ups don't need to use false smears.

I certainly wouldn't have voted for Obama in the primaries. No way. And I'm not sure about him now. But put that aside for a moment. The fact that none of you seem to get, and what even a lot of conservatives have now absorbed, is that Obama has spent the last 18 months running one of the most brilliantly *effective* political campaigns in history, whether you agree or disagree with the policies he claims he wants to enact should he eventually win. He has, among other things, defeated the well-oiled Clinton machine. Think Sarah Palin could have done that? There's no Rove here pulling the strings for Obama. The people in the campaign are taking Obama's orders. He's been an amazingly competent and effective manager of what is now a mega-million dollar organization with thousands of employees. And the majority of the votes has has received came from white (and non-Muslim) people. Dare I say, people who actually care about this country. (Woops. I forgot that voting for Obama necessarily implies that you hate America.)

These are the facts. Does his brilliance at *politics* translate to brilliance at *policy*? I don't think so. Certainly there isn't enough evidence to support that conclusion. But these are the facts.

And another fact is that McCain has run one of the most bone-headed and incompetent campaigns in recent history, again whether you agree or disagree with his policy views. He makes Bush look like a paragon of competence and caution. McCain's campaign went broke at one point for heaven's sake---do you think Bush would have ever let his campaign go broke? And McCain's decisions (not all of them) have often been reckless. (Not my words---the words of several Republicans.) If any Democrat had chosen his VP so recklessly as McCain has, with such poor vetting (as countless Republicans have already bemoaned), you'd be at his or her throat. But you're not. So, as it stands, I've been far more evenhanded than anyone here. That's another fact.

So call me names. I know you're good at that. Call Obama names. Call him "Nobama" or "Oh-nobama" or "Obamessiah" or, if brevity is your thing, simply "Hussein." Or call his party the "Dummycrats." I celebrate the powerful logic you are exhibiting. I celebrate your maturity, and your reflection of strong, conservative values.

Or declare Obama and Biden enemies of family values, when they are both happily married with no divorces and have raised, by all accounts, normal and well-adjusted, successful children. Meanwhile the families of the two Republican candidates are a total mess, between cheating, divorce, and an out-of-wedlock teenage pregnancy. And yes, it's an issue for Palin, because Palin strongly opposed anything but abstinence-only sex education in her run for governor in 2006, just twenty months ago:

http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html

The obsession of the Republican party with sexuality and abortion is inherently invasive of privacy. By definition they want to enter people's homes and take away from people the very privacy and personal freedoms that they are now standing on. They want government to enter your home and tell your daughter what she can do, but when it comes knocking on their door, suddenly they say that they left it up to the daughter to decide for herself. (Read their exact quote about who apparently decided on going ahead with the pregnancy.) If a conservative is just a liberal who got mugged, then a liberal is just a conservative who's teenage daughter got pregnant.

Or, by all means, declare Obama to be an enemy and hater of this country, or a secret Muslim bent on handing over the Christian world to the jihadists. That's not being Chicken Little or anything.

Or practice projection by calling *me* Chicken Little, when the majority of the blog entries here are about the existential threat posed by Islamist terrorism. Which, by the way, was once the pillar of McCain's campaign, until his selection of Palin shattered all of that.

Now you're reduced to jumping for joy when you find a tiny Israeli flag hanging in Palin's window. (Does she even know the name of the symbol on the flag, or what the blue and white colors and stripes represent? I suppose that would depend on how many tallit she has seen?) I'm sure every Israeli is now confident in her. (Any more than they are confident in Biden after he declared himself an unashamed Zionist in an interview a couple of years ago? Not that this detail would ever show up on this blog, since he's a---gasp---liberal!)

So bring on the name-calling. Please. Because if you came back at me with actual challenges to my facts, or any kind of logical argument beyond calling me names, then that might actually make me think for a second.

patrick jackasshole buchanan GUSHING over Barack Hussein Obamas acceptance speech.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0Fru4dZLGA&feature=related

Will BHO denounce and reject PJB's ass kissing?

P.S. How about BHO posting his Birth Certificate at his official campaign website?