that they didn't bother to vet her at all (or not as much as others) and he picked her,

or

that they did "fully vet" her and decided to pick her anyway.

i don't know see how either of those situations speaks well about McAncient's judgment. truly frightening.

1. take some thunder out of the already-pathetic RNC.

2. force them to agree to your terms (you don't think obama is going to show up and get massacred, do you? plouffe and axelrod have proven themselves to be much smarter than previous Dem nominee advisors)

3. shut o'reilly up. he may go on and on for weeks later about how he nailed obama, but most people will only see the interview and not tune in again; as long as obama holds his own -- more than doable -- this will be a win for obama.

no one likes fox news, but they're not going away. better to beat them on their own turf.

and they refuse to call her out on lying about the bridge to nowhere and several distortions of her opponents? man, don't you just hate the liberal media, always backing down from nut-job conservatives.

the gloves come off.

ask the Daily Show to use their segment from last night of Republican hacks contradicting themselves in upcoming ads?

Because this is what the Republicans are, a fraud. Smaller government? Bush has grown the government more than most 20th century Democrats. McCain is anti-lobbyist? They are running his campaign. Obama the elitist? McCain's entire career has been bankrolled by his millionaire wife.

I think even for the great masses in Flyover Country, the cognitive dissonance of the incumbent party candidate running against his own party by stealing the opponents well-branded mantle of change and snatching a mean-spirited nobody from nowhere will finally turn some gears in their heads.

Or so I hope.

"Palin may not be [beatable]."

That is the scariest goddamn sentence I have ever read.

there should be only two things coming out of the obama campaign:

1) mccain/bush, bush/mccain, mccain votes 90% of the time with bush, etc.

2) john mccain said "doesnt know much about the economy"; and "the fundamentals of the economy are strong"

3) repeat (ad nauseam to the elitists, until it sinks in for others)

1) Your campaign is boasting about your foreign policy credentials because the state you govern is next to Russia and Canada. Give me an example of your interactions with Russia on an international level and what decisions you have made in that regard.

2) You have supported teaching creationism and evolution side by side in schools. How old do you believe the Earth is? What do you say to opponents of creationism who claim it has no scientific basis? How should the US formulate is scientific and education policy?

3) Your son will deploy to Iraq soon, as will Sen Biden's son. Given the well-known fact our military is overburdened, would you as part of a McCain administration attempt to ban Track's service to our country if he came out to you as a homosexual? How would we be serving "God's task" -- your own words describing the Iraq war -- by banning fellow Americans from proudly serving their country in the armed forces merely based on sexual orientation?

4) Do you believe in abstinence-only education? Do you believe it works? (don't even have to mention the daughter)

5) Earlier this summer you confessed that you don't have a good idea what the VP does. How would you make an impression in a McCain administration?

6) The Department of Energy admits that more drilling -- when leases to drill go unused -- will not lower present prices for oil. What other measures must a McCain administration take, keeping in mind that nuclear energy has not passed legislative muster in over 30 years?

the sooner we get back to talking about obama/mccain, the sooner we see obama's lead return.

Sonnanstine and the Rays pitching staff got quite a few ball and strike calls their way as well. All in all, it was a poorly officiated game on both sides.

Next week's series in whatever-city-the-Rays-play-in should be a hum-dinger.

Rangel is currently under investigation here in New York for some pretty shady real estate shenanigans.

you're absolutely right. as someone who was employed for several years as part of an organization that addresses the cross-border pollution in the US-Mexico border zone, an organization funded largely by a $5 million earmark supported by Domenici, i'll be the first obama supporter to say earmarks aren't a) all bad, or b) really that significant. hell, 2007 earmarks cost the government something like $16 billion. or you know, one and a half months in iraq.

Even when they're faced with their own lies, they won't admit them. Simply.....Rovian.

agreed. she has difficulty with the language like another inexperienced western governor i know.

you need to get your little haikus/limericks down on paper....i smell a book in there somewhere.

A good article by Herbert, indeed. But you're missing a crucial point: the basis for his article was a study done by -- gasp! -- liberal elite universities like Columbia and Harvard! Clearly they are just trying to impose their socialist values on the rest of us.

that ad wouldn't need to be 2 minutes long:

[camera fades in on Obama]

NARRATOR: Some people are wondering why Obama didn't pick Clinton.....

OBAMA: Because it would mean certain defeat.

[fade out]

Help me, Jesus!

Help me, Jewish God!

Help me.....Sarah Palin!

He knows what he's talking about. Even WSJ cannot deny this for long.

How anyone could look at these two candidates and equate their grasp of economic issues is stunning.

If "compassionate conservative" is any guide, one can never have enough "enough."

McCain is daring the Obama campaign to release a Keating 5 ad.....

She's monumentally unqualified. She's Bush in a skirt. She would be a nightmare should she be elected.

NOW MOVE ON.

The interwebs will be cleansed of all criticism during Palin's second term in 2014.