I think this is a red herring the media throws out. I think most voters care about the actual platform of the candidates more than anything. As I recall, Arnold Schwartzenegger had no political experience before running and winning the governorship of California. And funny enough this once inexperienced Republican is now one of the key speakers at the RNC.

There is experience on both sides of the ticket and each side can argue until they're blue in the face or red if you like, about who has the more pertinent bonafides. However, the important thing is every voter can find out exactly what each candidate believes in, and see if their own beliefs align.

I have looked at their respective platforms, and find Sarah Palin's to be diametrically opposed to mine so therefore I won't vote for her. I don't care about her gender. Her having a litter of kids is irrelevant to me. She digs hockey. Hey so do I, but that's not a very good reason to vote for someone. Her love for killing moose while charming, doesn't move me either. However her stand on a woman's right to choose, her views on global warming, her lack of views on the war in Iraq. Her apparent problem with ethics. Her anti-science stance. This is the red meat of her beliefs that she brings with her to any office she occupies. A set of beliefs I find appalling and scary. I admire her accomplishments, but as a possible commander in chief, I find her frightening.

I'm not endorsing Schwartzenegger, only pointing out a fact. The Republicans who have been falling all over themselves for several months pointing out Obama's celebrity and supposed lack of real political experience, throatily endorse the guy who is in charge of one of the biggest economies in the world who was voted in precisely because of his celebrity and lack of experience. Funny world ain't it?

I was surprised to see my letter referenced here. For what it's worth, I wish I had come up with the name Spraynerd, but saw it used awhile ago on the Adult Swim show Tim&Eric Awesome Show Great Job.

That this gets used as an opportunity for the Republicans to try to erase the memories of Katrina. The response to Katrina was shameful, horrible, and disgusting. On the good side though, it really opened the eyes of some who may have thought Cheney gave a shit. We got to see the deep levels of cronyism that now put real lives in danger.

There is so much at stake in this election. We can replace the greedy power hungry Cheney administration with politicans, who far from perfect, at least acknowledge a need for real change. What would be great is if the media reported on the real transgressions that have taken place under Cheney's watch, and then show McCain talking about how wonderful Cheney has been as commander in chief. I know it won't happen, but maybe Salon can start doing a lowlight of the day that focuses on one egregious Cheney lie or act that screwed the American people. It would be a start.

I've been a Salon reader for about 7 years, and was a subscriber for two or three, and I don't recall another time when I've seen so many Republican trolls. At first it was funny, but now less amusing. Not to single you out but Benny, you must realize when you use words like Barackanalia you immediately call yourself out as a GOP stooge.

To those trying to acively participate in real back and forth dialogue, I'd recommend Greeenwald's letter section as a better choice. At least those threads are usually more focused. For the rest of you trolls, I guess keep doing your thing, but understand most people read your letters as if you're characters from an Onion editorial.

I didn't cancel it, but I did it let it lapse. I used to believe the content of Salon was worth the 35 bucks a year I used to pay. Now, I wouldn't pay 35 cents a year.

"what does it mean that he rushed into his Palin pick, having spent almost no time with her, and very little time vetting her? "

It means exactly what you and everyone who has discernible looked at this story means. In fact, you mentioned it earlier in your editorial. He caved to the Repbulican puppet masters. Simple as that. There's the brave maverick for us all to see again. He wanted someone else, but he went with someone he didn't really bother getting to know in any meaningful way.It's almost like he snubbed his nose at Rove. "Fine, you don't want my guy, I'll go with the one I know nothing about and then it's on you guys."

Picking Palin wasn't just bad judgement, it was pandering in the absolutely worst way. Along with a number of people, I don't see how Palin remains on the ticket with so much going on with her, but we'll see. In the meantime, I agree with you that Obama couldn't have put out a better statement. It was classy and thoughtful.

It's been what, four days and already I'm sick of hearing about her. Flat out exhausted. Maybe that was McCain's intention. Pick someone who has so many troubling stories that after awhile people will just cry uncle and say "fine, whatever."

I need a nap.

The water carriers for the right will spin the negatives, and continue to find excuses for McCain's incompetence in vetting his choice. The unfortunate truth is that it would take a murder cover up type scandal to get Repubs to reconsider voting for McCain. That leaves the Independents who I fear also couldn't care less. I really fear for this country if we end up electing this ticket. I hope the majority of the nation feels the same way.