You said: "And the reason won't be policy related, it will be because Democrats just don't get people who don't think like they do.

So many of the posts here are anti-women and anti-poor people. So many on the left just look down on anyone below a certain income, and hate those above another artificial level.

There's nothing wrong with being a truck-stop waitress. Nothing at all. What's wrong is if there are barriers that prevent someone from doing something else. But it's that persons choice.

Yes, people will vote for the Republicans now because there is a women on the ticket. Exactly as there are blacks and others who are voting for Obama simply because of the color of his skin. This is because both represent a departure from the norm.

No matter what, come next February, the elected Executive branch of the United States Government will not consist exclusively of White Men.

We will have either a Black or a Women as part of this historic event.

But instead of embracing this, Democrats are resorting to petty name calling, saying Palin is a beauty queen, which is exactly like calling Obama just a basketball player."

I completely agree with you. You spoke the truth. Everyone else might as well just shut up because they can't get more insightful and truthful than that post. Thanks for writing this.

... you all are making the classic mistake: under-estimating your opponent.

Wait till the debate, when everyone discovers that the "beauty queen" actually has a brain. Ooooooh, you guys didn't think that was possible, did you?

"Rebecca, I only hope it was either a direct order from Walsh that you write this or that you were well-compensated."

Rebecca and Joan will be writing about Hillary until the day they die. I posit that women voted for Hillary only because she is a woman, therefore they can comfortably shift to the Palin/McCain ticket.

Then I hope that Joan and Rebecca and all the Hillary lunatics leave this website, or as an alternative, just sort of convert it from a Clinton website to a Palin website.

I am all for the lunatics to convert to Palinites because I am sure sick of HRC. At least Clinton was interesting when she was ducking sniper-fire and single-handily bringing freedom to Ireland, but now without the tensions of the primary, the HRC hoopla set forth by the repub trolls gets very old very fast.

All of her ideas are wrong.

Well at least you admit she has a brain. That's progress!

And re: "wrong" ideas:

Anybody recall the 11-state mini-referendum on gay marriage in 2004? Across the 11 states, 67% of the people voted to ban gay marriage - and no state voted less than 56.9% to ban it (and that was ... drum roll ... Oregon!!!)

And what % of the American people want to drill for more oil? 67%? Maybe more.

Doesn't look to me like the American people think "all her ideas" are wrong!

But please, don't let me stop you. Keep misunderstimating her!

I can't believe Salon is still writing this stuff. I had to stop reading Salon early on in the primaries, but for some reason I keep checking back every few months to see if anything has changed. I know now not to bother.

Only if he wanted to win. Hillary had millions of votes in the primaries. obama ignored her.

Clearly, obama doesn't have the good judgement his disciples believed he had.

I think we're coming at the tokenism argument from different sides because your defense of her pick not being tokenism; that he picked Palin when there were other more qualified female politicians out there, actually goes towards proving my arrgument that her pick was tokenism. McCain picked someone who he didn't know, who had little power or experience, but who was first and foremost a woman. Thus to me she is a token pick. If he had chosen her for her values and beliefs and credibilty as a real smart choice for second command,a nd she was also a woman, I would say his strategy was more than merely a token gesture. Anyway, it's not worth arguing about anymore. I think we can agree to disagree respectfully and move on.

So let's move on. You've mentioned a few times that Obama has "used Bill Clinton's campaign playbook." Can you extrapolate for me on that? Forgive my ignorance if I have little idea what you mean. You say he attacked Clinton's administration. Again, I don't remember that. Could you provide an example or two. It would go along way towards me understanding why you dislike Obama so much.

" Even Jesse Jackson takes exception to Obama." And this is bad why?

"He also proved he was a lot like Bill, except he had preached and preached about morality while being immoral." This statement realy has me puzzled. Did I miss a major scandal? I really have no idea what you're talking about. Calling Obama immoral is hyperbolic incendiary language. Unless, you're being coy, and you have some proof of some type of real moral transgression on Obama's part, you shred your own credibility.

"I have determined Salon will probably not be a good source for balanced research."

Finally, we something we can agree on.

I don't know of any parents of Down Syndrome babies who have not had to sign up for some sort of Medicaid/disability/SSI for their child, especially as he reaches adulthood and the parents think of their own deaths.

I'll be interested to hear Palin discuss the Republican's "small government" policies and how they are going to run up against her own needs. She will rely on all these programs in a few years as a safety net for her own child.

It could be aregued that Dems chose Obama even though there were more qualified candidates out there. Does that make him a "token"? The reasons for choosing particular candidates for President and Vice President are complex. I'm sure that Palin being a woman was one of the reasons she was chosen, just like Obama being black was a factor in many voter's minds as they voted for him. That doesn't mean that either of them didn't have to have other qualification in order to be chosen. Neither of them are "tokens", and I'm shocked that writer's are allowed to make that claim about either.