I would agree that Sarah Palin does not have the experience to be president. Indeed, by choosing Palin, the Republicans now have a much tougher time with the experience argument. However, the Democrats are being foolish in their attacks on Palin's inexperience, given that the top of their ticket happens to be the most unqualified person to ever attain a major party presidential nomination. I think for most voters, the choice will come down to this: would you prefer a ticket where the inexperienced candidate happens to be the VP choice, or a ticket where the inexperienced one happens to be at the top. Without hesitation, I know which ticket I would prefer.

I disagree with you. The Democrats have every right to attack her inexperience since McCain put that issue on the table in attacking Obama's and now he's made himself look hypocritical yet again. He should cease with the Straight Talk lies unless Straight Talk is the new term for untruths. Besides the Democrats are not alone. Even her own mother in law, along with other Alaskans are questioning her experience so the Democrats don't need to even say much. All they're doing so far is pointing out McCain's hypocrisy and he opened the door up with his selection.

Considering the VP is a heart beat away from the Presidency, I would be equally as concerned about the VP choice as the one for president. McCain's age and health are enough of a concern to make this a bigger issue for some voters. Not to mention this brings into question his judgment and motivations. At least the party voters chose Obama so that's on them. Palin is on McCain.

Somebody earlier asked me why McCain is so great. Well, here's why: McCain is exactly the bi-partisan politician that Obama himself claims to be. In fact, while Obama's votes in the Senate have always reflected the Democratic Party line, McCain has regularly sponsored major pieces of legislation with the Democrats, and attacked fellow Republicans for their corruption and irresponsible spending habits. Additionally, while Obama has zero legislative accomplishments during his time in the Senate, McCain has been one of America's most influential senators: among his achievements include (1) normalizing U.S. diplomatic relations with Vietnam via the work he did as part of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, (2) being the driving force behind campaign finance reform as the result of the McCain-Feingold Act, (3) co-writing the legislation that created the 9/11 Commission, (4) co-sponsoring a post-9/11 act that federalized airport security, and (5) working with Ted Kennedy on an immigration reform bill.

I guess it's hard to say what's great about McCain without having to put down Obama. What I admired about McCain seems to have gone by the wayside. What I like about Obama is not predicated upon a negative about McCain. I am more put off now by McCain's negativity and I want to laugh when he says he doesn't like to use the term Maverick since that is him saying he approved the ad that touts him as a Maverick. He made a better candidate in 2000 and he may have gotten my vote then.

I would prefer that elected officials vote for what they believe is right whether that is voting for the other party's legislation or for their own party's legislation. There's no point in voting bipartisan for the wrong thing. Now if that is the immigration bill that McCain sponsored and now says he wouldn't vote for then it's useless.

Now that I've explained why I am so solidly behind McCain, it's time for one of the many Obamaniacs to exlpain what it is that Obama has accomplished during his Seante career. Please be specific when mentioning (1) the times that Obama has taken on other powerful Democratic senators (and Hillary Clinton does not count, since those attacks were in the context of a presidential campaign), and (2) Obama's actual legislative achievements.

It looks like Roman responded to this. What's up with the term Obamamanic is that the equivalent of a McCainiac and is it possible for a person to support either candidate without having to be labeled unless they decide to call themselves (which I've heard people do)? This is all so groupie and cutesy for a presidential election but I guess it's a sign of the times.

Honestly, it seems Obama and Palin have about the same experiance. Except Oabma is running top bill, and Palin as a V.P. Major diff there.

Theyr eally are on equal ground, IMHO. Both have done a lot. Both seem to have done things for the better.

Between the two i would pick Palin. She is a bit extreme, okay a lot, and i dont agree with her on everything. But she seems to fight the system for change. And she egst results. She takes on her own side. I like that. But this IS NOT a Obama vs Palin race. This is Obama vs McCain.

Well I hope you feel sorry for Michelle Obama as well since she's not even running for office. It's unfortunate that there are people like that in society but I would hope that candidates for any office know beforehand that they are opening themselves up to criticism and misrepresentation.

And if it's irrational fear that's driving it then that says a lot about McCain repeatedly attacking Obama's patriotism and basically calling him a traitor in his thinly veiled attack that Obama is a politician and I guess McCain considers himself a non politician with strictly noble intentions.

Thanks for the response, Wales... And i agree, candidates should be fully aware that they are opening themselves up to criticism and misrepresentation. The problem I have is with criticisms of a personal nature that are not based on fact, or intentional misrepresentation designed merely to smear an individual without basis in truth. And surely you would agree that attacking Palin as a mother, or stating that there is incest in her family, is inappropriate.

Both candidates are politicians of the slickest order, absolutely. But I have made clear what I have an issue with in politics, and I have made it clear that I don't like it coming from either side. I haven't been partisan about that, or anything for that matter. Surely you would agree, your personal politics aside, that the personal attacks on Palin to date have been far worse than any on Michelle Obama. If someone has offered up some vile stuff the type of mother Michelle is, or if anyone has suggested her children are victims of incest, I would like to know what was said and where I can find it so that I can condemn it just as strongly.

I have a question for Max and it is this: since you feel Obama is the "most unqualified person to ever attain a major party presidential nomination" then I would love to know prior to him who you felt was the most unqualified and also who you felt was the most qualified.

As an update to what I said regarding the whole Alaska National Guard, Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard said that "he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations."

And instead of getting into a cyclical debate on experience since it's McCain's issue and not mine, I will say that I see it in terms of quality and quantity. A person might learn more in a shorter period of time than it takes the next person to learn something and some people never seem to learn. All of the candidates have had different experiences so I don't see how they're equivalent at all and in some cases those experiences aren't even relevant.

Thanks for the response, Wales... And i agree, candidates should be fully aware that they are opening themselves up to criticism and misrepresentation. The problem I have is with criticisms of a personal nature that are not based on fact, or intentional misrepresentation designed merely to smear an individual without basis in truth. And surely you would agree that attacking Palin as a mother, or stating that there is incest in her family, is inappropriate.

Both candidates are politicians of the slickest order, absolutely. But I have made clear what I have an issue with in politics, and I have made it clear that I don't like it coming from either side. I haven't been partisan about that, or anything for that matter. Surely you would agree, your personal politics aside, that the personal attacks on Palin to date have been far worse than any on Michelle Obama. If someone has offered up some vile stuff the type of mother Michelle is, or if anyone has suggested her children are victims of incest, I would like to know what was said and where I can find it so that I can condemn it just as strongly.

My point isn't whether or not vile things are being said when it comes to any candidates. The candidates obviously make a choice to open themselves up and indirectly their families up to ridicule and whatnot but I think it's worse when the families are attacked. I'm not saying it's not vile to say that Palin's children are victims of incest. Of course that's horrible.

Most of the attacks on Michelle Obama have been racist in nature and I don't know if I see them as any less vile than a charge of incest. And in her case not only is she looking at attacks on herself but she has to deal with people depicting her husband as a monkey and designing t-shirts that refer to him as their slave. I think if these were leveled at me or members of my family, I would be as hurt by charges of incest as being called a monkey. But at least if they were calling us incestuous than they're still looking at us as humans instead of monkeys.

You've made it clear that you'd be equally as offended despite at whom the insults are leveled so thank you.

My point isn't whether or not vile things are being said when it comes to any candidates. The candidates obviously make a choice to open themselves up and indirectly their families up to ridicule and whatnot but I think it's worse when the families are attacked. I'm not saying it's not vile to say that Palin's children are victims of incest. Of course that's horrible.

Most of the attacks on Michelle Obama have been racist in nature and I don't know if I see them as any less vile than a charge of incest. And in her case not only is she looking at attacks on herself but she has to deal with people depicting her husband as a monkey and designing t-shirts that refer to him as their slave. I think if these were leveled at me or members of my family, I would be as hurt by charges of incest as being called a monkey. But at least if they were calling us incestuous than they're still looking at us as humans instead of monkeys.

You've made it clear that you'd be equally as offended despite at whom the insults are leveled so thank you.

Thanks Wales, I think we know where each other stands on this issue and we're not that far apart on it. I haven't heard racist comments regarding the Obama's, then again I don't frequent places on the web or in person where that stuff is being hurled. Such racist comments, including the sexist comments I DID hear thrown at Hillary and now at Palin, are inexcusible and just discounts whatever points their opponents try to make.

As bad as I felt for how Hillary was treated, I also feel for Palin. People out there, including on the web and even here at SON, who focus on the personal stuff rather than actual qualifications, etc., are as nasty and vile as the accusations they make. I'm glad there are those like us, Wales, who can discuss rationally and find some common ground and agreement in this election.

Honestly, it seems Obama and Palin have about the same experiance. Except Oabma is running top bill, and Palin as a V.P. Major diff there.

Theyr eally are on equal ground, IMHO. Both have done a lot. Both seem to have done things for the better.

Between the two i would pick Palin. She is a bit extreme, okay a lot, and i dont agree with her on everything. But she seems to fight the system for change. And she egst results. She takes on her own side. I like that. But this IS NOT a Obama vs Palin race. This is Obama vs McCain.

Bull crap. Barack Obama has a helluva lot more experience. He's devoted his life to public service since graduating college. He was in the Illinois state Senate, and has been U.S. Senator for 3 years. Palin has ONLY been Alaska's Governor for 1 1/2 years (NOT the 2 years the GOP keep lieing about!) and before that was MAYOR of a small town of 9000 people. Oh yeah don't forget about her co-ownig a small business with her husband. LMFAO. The GOP actually thinks running a business is experience to be VP or President, lol (athough I really bet her husband does all the actual running of the business and she only co-owns it with him).

It is Obama VS McCain true. And their picks for VP are a good showing of how they'll be as President. Obama made an awesome choice with Joe Biden while McCain picks a woman who should be caring for her children for VP.

From Talking Points Memo:

Getting Real About Palin

08.31.08 -- 11:00AM

By Josh Marshall

I've noticed some people who should know better claiming that bringing up Gov. Palin's troopergate scandal is tantamount to making a victim of or defending her slimeball ex-brother-in-law who allegedly once used a taser on his stepson.

That's awfully foolish. So I thought I'd put together a post explaining why.

The person in question is state trooper Mike Wooten -- Palin's ex-brother-in-law who's embroiled in a bitter custody and divorce battle with Palin's sister. Back in the second week of August, well before Palin became a national political figure, TPMMuckraker was reporting on this story. And as part of the reporting we tried to get a handle on just how bad a guy Wooten was. Most people who are familiar with the ugliness that often spills out of custody and divorce cases know to take accusations arising out of the course of them with a grain of salt unless you know a lot about the people involved. And if you look closely at the case there are numerous reasons to question the picture drawn by the Palin family. Regardless, we proceeded on the assumption that Wooten really was a rotten guy because the truth is that it wasn't relevant to the investigation of Palin.

Let's review what happened.

The Palin family had a feud with Wooten prior to her becoming governor. They put together a list of 14 accusations which they took to the state police to investigate -- a list that ranged from the quite serious to the truly absurd. The state police did an investigation, decided that 5 of the charges had some merit and suspended Wooten for ten days -- a suspension later reduced to five days. The Palin's weren't satisfied but there wasn't much they could do.

When Palin became governor they went for another bite at the apple. Palin, her husband and several members of her staff began pressuring Public Safety Commissioner, Walt Monegan -- a respected former Chief of the Anchorage police department -- to can Wooten. Monegan resisted, arguing that the official process regarding Wooten was closed. And there was nothing more that could be done. In fact, during one of the conversations in which Palin's husband Todd was putting on the squeeze, Monegan told Todd Palin, "You can't head hunt like this. What you need to do is back off, because if the trooper does make a mistake, and it is a terminable offense, it can look like political interference."

Eventually, Palin got fed up and fired Monegan from his job. (Palin claims, not credibly, that she fired Monegan over general differences in law enforcement priorities.) This is an important point. Wooten never got fired. To the best of my knowledge, he's is still on the job. The central bad act was firing the state's top police official because he refused to bend to political pressure from the governor and her family to fire a public employee against whom the governor was pursuing a vendetta -- whether the vendetta was justified or not.

Soon after this, questions were raised in the state about Monegan's firing and he eventually came forward and said he believed he'd been fired for not giving in to pressure to fire Wooten.

After Monegan made his accusations, Palin insisted there was no truth whatsoever to his claims. Nonetheless, a bipartisan committee of the state legislature approved an investigation. In response, Palin asked the Attorney General to start his own investigation which many in the state interpreted as an effort to either keep tabs on or tamper with the legislature's investigation. Again, very questionable judgment in someone who aspires to be first in line to the presidency.

The Attorney General's investigation quickly turned up evidence that Palin's initial denials were false. Multiple members of her staff had raised Wooten's employment with Monegan. Indeed, the state police had a recording of one of her deputies pushing Monegan to fire Wooten. That evidence forced Palin to change her story. Palin said that this was the first she'd heard of it and insisted the deputy wasn't acting at her behest, even though the trascript of the recorded call clearly suggested that he was. (Hear the audio here.)

Just yesterday, Monegan gave an interview to the Washington Post in which he said that not only Palin's aides, but Palin's husband and Palin herself had repeatedly raised the Wooten issue with him and pressured him to fire him. And now he says he has emails that Palin sent him about the matter. (In an interesting sidelight, that may end up telling us a lot, Monegan says no one from the McCain campaign ever contacted him in the vetting process.)

The investigator appointed by the state legislature began trying to arrange a time to depose Gov. Palin last week -- in other words, in the final days before her selection.

So let's put this all together.

We rely on elected officials not to use the power of their office to pursue personal agendas or vendettas. It's called an abuse of power. There is ample evidence that Palin used her power as governor to get her ex-brother-in-law fired. When his boss refused to fire him, she fired his boss. She first denied Monegan's claims of pressure to fire Wooten and then had to amend her story when evidence proved otherwise. The available evidence now suggests that she 1) tried to have an ex-relative fired from his job for personal reasons, something that was clearly inappropriate, and perhaps illegal, though possibly understandable in human terms, 2) fired a state official for not himself acting inappropriately by firing the relative, 3) lied to the public about what happened and 4) continues to lie about what happened.

These are, to put it mildly, not the traits or temperament you want in someone who could hold the executive power of the federal government.

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidate...ndChannel=10112

Honestly, it seems Obama and Palin have about the same experiance. Except Oabma is running top bill, and Palin as a V.P. Major diff there.

Theyr eally are on equal ground, IMHO. Both have done a lot. Both seem to have done things for the better.

Between the two i would pick Palin. She is a bit extreme, okay a lot, and i dont agree with her on everything. But she seems to fight the system for change. And she egst results. She takes on her own side. I like that. But this IS NOT a Obama vs Palin race. This is Obama vs McCain.

Given McCain's age and history of cancer it's very much Obama vs McCain&Palin. McCain's VP pick is the most important ever because if in wins the chances that she will have to takeover are more than 50/50.

She's super extreme and given the news about her daughter being with child she dosen't teach what she's preaches!

GOP actually thinks running a business is experience to be VP or President, lol (athough I really bet her husband does all the actual running of the business and she only co-owns it with him).

It is Obama VS McCain true. And their picks for VP are a good showing of how they'll be as President. Obama made an awesome choice with Joe Biden while McCain picks a woman who should be caring for her children for VP.

This is precisely the crap I don't like to see. And, Mulder, I think these are some of the most sexist statements I've seen since Hillary was thrashed for being a woman. First off, are you claiming that because Palin is a woman, she couldn't possibly have the brains to run a business? You "bet her husband does all the actual running of the business"? Explain what bit of fact you've suddenly come across that the rest of us haven't seen concerning the family business...

And the statement, "a woman who should be caring for her children" is particularly outrageous. So, women can't run businesses and are only good for staying home taking care of children? How do you know how well Palin's children are taken care of? Oh, I suppose it is her fault her daughter got pregnant? Honestly, Palin is no more responsible for her daughter's desires than Hillary was for her husband's.

If I'm mistaken in my perception of your post, please tell me where I've gone wrong. Or is it simply a case of choosing the incorrect words? You've made other sexist statements here so I'm not particularly surprised... But the credibility of your posts suffer a bit when you personally attack people. Are you afraid Palin will attract those of us who are still angry over how Hillary was abused by her party and the media at large?

From Talking Points Memo:

Getting Real About Palin

08.31.08 -- 11:00AM

By Josh Marshall

I've noticed some people who should know better claiming that bringing up Gov. Palin's troopergate scandal is tantamount to making a victim of or defending her slimeball ex-brother-in-law who allegedly once used a taser on his stepson.

That's awfully foolish. So I thought I'd put together a post explaining why.

The person in question is state trooper Mike Wooten -- Palin's ex-brother-in-law who's embroiled in a bitter custody and divorce battle with Palin's sister. Back in the second week of August, well before Palin became a national political figure, TPMMuckraker was reporting on this story. And as part of the reporting we tried to get a handle on just how bad a guy Wooten was. Most people who are familiar with the ugliness that often spills out of custody and divorce cases know to take accusations arising out of the course of them with a grain of salt unless you know a lot about the people involved. And if you look closely at the case there are numerous reasons to question the picture drawn by the Palin family. Regardless, we proceeded on the assumption that Wooten really was a rotten guy because the truth is that it wasn't relevant to the investigation of Palin.

Let's review what happened.

The Palin family had a feud with Wooten prior to her becoming governor. They put together a list of 14 accusations which they took to the state police to investigate -- a list that ranged from the quite serious to the truly absurd. The state police did an investigation, decided that 5 of the charges had some merit and suspended Wooten for ten days -- a suspension later reduced to five days. The Palin's weren't satisfied but there wasn't much they could do.

When Palin became governor they went for another bite at the apple. Palin, her husband and several members of her staff began pressuring Public Safety Commissioner, Walt Monegan -- a respected former Chief of the Anchorage police department -- to can Wooten. Monegan resisted, arguing that the official process regarding Wooten was closed. And there was nothing more that could be done. In fact, during one of the conversations in which Palin's husband Todd was putting on the squeeze, Monegan told Todd Palin, "You can't head hunt like this. What you need to do is back off, because if the trooper does make a mistake, and it is a terminable offense, it can look like political interference."

Eventually, Palin got fed up and fired Monegan from his job. (Palin claims, not credibly, that she fired Monegan over general differences in law enforcement priorities.) This is an important point. Wooten never got fired. To the best of my knowledge, he's is still on the job. The central bad act was firing the state's top police official because he refused to bend to political pressure from the governor and her family to fire a public employee against whom the governor was pursuing a vendetta -- whether the vendetta was justified or not.

Soon after this, questions were raised in the state about Monegan's firing and he eventually came forward and said he believed he'd been fired for not giving in to pressure to fire Wooten.

After Monegan made his accusations, Palin insisted there was no truth whatsoever to his claims. Nonetheless, a bipartisan committee of the state legislature approved an investigation. In response, Palin asked the Attorney General to start his own investigation which many in the state interpreted as an effort to either keep tabs on or tamper with the legislature's investigation. Again, very questionable judgment in someone who aspires to be first in line to the presidency.

The Attorney General's investigation quickly turned up evidence that Palin's initial denials were false. Multiple members of her staff had raised Wooten's employment with Monegan. Indeed, the state police had a recording of one of her deputies pushing Monegan to fire Wooten. That evidence forced Palin to change her story. Palin said that this was the first she'd heard of it and insisted the deputy wasn't acting at her behest, even though the trascript of the recorded call clearly suggested that he was. (Hear the audio here.)

Just yesterday, Monegan gave an interview to the Washington Post in which he said that not only Palin's aides, but Palin's husband and Palin herself had repeatedly raised the Wooten issue with him and pressured him to fire him. And now he says he has emails that Palin sent him about the matter. (In an interesting sidelight, that may end up telling us a lot, Monegan says no one from the McCain campaign ever contacted him in the vetting process.)

The investigator appointed by the state legislature began trying to arrange a time to depose Gov. Palin last week -- in other words, in the final days before her selection.

So let's put this all together.

We rely on elected officials not to use the power of their office to pursue personal agendas or vendettas. It's called an abuse of power. There is ample evidence that Palin used her power as governor to get her ex-brother-in-law fired. When his boss refused to fire him, she fired his boss. She first denied Monegan's claims of pressure to fire Wooten and then had to amend her story when evidence proved otherwise. The available evidence now suggests that she 1) tried to have an ex-relative fired from his job for personal reasons, something that was clearly inappropriate, and perhaps illegal, though possibly understandable in human terms, 2) fired a state official for not himself acting inappropriately by firing the relative, 3) lied to the public about what happened and 4) continues to lie about what happened.

These are, to put it mildly, not the traits or temperament you want in someone who could hold the executive power of the federal government.

She very much has the mindset of a small City mayor.

This is precisely the crap I don't like to see. And, Mulder, I think these are some of the most sexist statements I've seen since Hillary was thrashed for being a woman. First off, are you claiming that because Palin is a woman, she couldn't possibly have the brains to run a business? You "bet her husband does all the actual running of the business"? Explain what bit of fact you've suddenly come across that the rest of us haven't seen concerning the family business...

And the statement, "a woman who should be caring for her children" is particularly outrageous. So, women can't run businesses and are only good for staying home taking care of children? How do you know how well Palin's children are taken care of? Oh, I suppose it is her fault her daughter got pregnant? Honestly, Palin is no more responsible for her daughter's desires than Hillary was for her husband's.

If I'm mistaken in my perception of your post, please tell me where I've gone wrong. Or is it simply a case of choosing the incorrect words? You've made other sexist statements here so I'm not particularly surprised... But the credibility of your posts suffer a bit when you personally attack people. Are you afraid Palin will attract those of us who are still angry over how Hillary was abused by her party and the media at large?

If the Clintons daughter had got pregnant the GOP would have had a field day. Palin is the one telling everyone else how to live and how to be moral and who can be married and that sex ed shouldn't be taught in schools so her daughter being pregnant very much matters!

This is precisely the crap I don't like to see. And, Mulder, I think these are some of the most sexist statements I've seen since Hillary was thrashed for being a woman. First off, are you claiming that because Palin is a woman, she couldn't possibly have the brains to run a business? You "bet her husband does all the actual running of the business"? Explain what bit of fact you've suddenly come across that the rest of us haven't seen concerning the family business...

And the statement, "a woman who should be caring for her children" is particularly outrageous. So, women can't run businesses and are only good for staying home taking care of children? How do you know how well Palin's children are taken care of? Oh, I suppose it is her fault her daughter got pregnant? Honestly, Palin is no more responsible for her daughter's desires than Hillary was for her husband's.

If I'm mistaken in my perception of your post, please tell me where I've gone wrong. Or is it simply a case of choosing the incorrect words? You've made other sexist statements here so I'm not particularly surprised... But the credibility of your posts suffer a bit when you personally attack people. Are you afraid Palin will attract those of us who are still angry over how Hillary was abused by her party and the media at large?

Where where u when Mrs.Obama was being called every name in the book from baby mama to a Terroriest?

Hillary wasn't abused by her party she lost by the rules her Husband and closest allys set up. An outside beats the people who made the rules and controled the party for 15 plus years and he's the badguy.

If the PUMAS want to go vote for Pailn be my guess but the come whining to me when the GOP control the High Court and the RightWingers control everything else and we're at war with EVERYBOBY!

Where where u when Mrs.Obama was being called every name in the book from baby mama to a Terroriest?

Where were you when I stated multiple times in this very thread that it's wrong, regardless of individual or party affiliation. I don't want Michelle Obama personally slammed any more than I want Sarah Palin personally slammed. I'm not taking a partisan stance on this issue and you would have noted that had you been reading carefully rather than reacting impulsively.

And it's quite clear that Hillary lost for reasons other than just rules. She was personally slammed for reasons that have nothing to do with ideology, and that is the tragedy of politics in America.