But give me a break this article is a joke. Coming right before Tracy smacked down the woe is women brand of feminism too.

Even as she articulated -- Palin-style -- her manifestly odd desire to avoid the jet-set antics of most lame-duck governors, there seemed another reason, another five reasons, in evidence: her children.

What a load of crap. Jet set antics? What the hell are those and what lame ducks have done so? Most small state governors lead a life of obscurity, quick name me the governors of WY, ID, or ND? Why five children? Her oldest son is not in her care and if he appeared on tv tomorrow no one would have the slightest clue on who he was. Are you counter her grandchild?

But entirely clear to anyone watching the ongoing Sarah Palin circus is that her family has been almost unremittingly under siege, the butt of countless jokes since she first declared her candidacy.

So has the Kennedy family, the Carters, the Bushes, the Clintons. All have had their children attacked as much if not more and yet none of these families have quit. Not one elected official has insulted her kids yet the same can not be said about the Clinton's. In fact party official's have gone out of their way to say Palin's kids are off limit.

Male candidates, of course, have long emphasized their domestic lives as fathers.

If you can't tell the difference between what the average staged family photo and what Palin did you need to learn observation skills. No male politician at the national or large state level has every used there kids in the way Palin has. She took 3 school age kids out of school for the fall to show up at almost every stop. Outside of the big moments (acceptance speech, big primary, and the like) what male or female politician has ever done this? She put her child in the cross hairs going to the Phila hockey game where she should have known she was going to get booed.

If they weren't pointing to fatherhood as a legitimate qualification for the presidency -- contrary to popular opinion, Palin's appeal to motherhood wasn't this literal-minded, either -- they were funneling the image of themselves as a parent into a larger, quasi-metaphorical notion of national father figure.

No, she was literally saying being a mother was qualification for the job. She said so on many occasions mostly in reference to being a special needs mom. And, no I don't recall a single male or female other than Palin saying that father/motherhood was a qualification for president, they might have said they learned from that experience. But, Carter, Reagan, Bill, George W Bush, 2000 McCain, and Obama ran on a change platform. Hillary, 2008 McCain, Bush 1, Gore, and Dole ran on their resumes.

Founding fathers, anyone? Our leaders have always been family men.

Have you ever taken a history class? The big name founders pretty much all had family issues that was used as gossip in the press. They are called the founder fathers because they gave birth to a new nation. When Russians call Russia the motherland its not because the leaders or the land are family people but because the land is there homeland and they have a common bond.

To the editors of Salon please hire competent writers.

A strong maternal woman is a rare political species? You would be incredibly incorrect in your assessment.

Why was this article even written? What a load of crap....

1. When a woman chooses to carry a Down's Syndrome to full term, she assumes the moral obligation of tending to that child's special needs. These babies have weak immune systems and they do not need over-stimulation. What could be worse than carrying such an infant all over the country and using him as a campaign prop?

2. What strong, maternal mother would put her pregnant, unmarried teenager daughter on constant national display, push her into an unwise marriage for political convenience, and use her as a spokesperson for abstinence?

3. Willow would have remained incognito unless her mother had injected her name into the the David Letterman dispute.

4. It's all about Sarah. Strong maternal mothers are not narcissists.

5. Can anyone think of any woman in politics who has not been characterized as strong and maternal?

6. Strong, maternal women tend to their children AND do their homework. Palin's superficiality and lack of knowledge staggers the imagination.

SP and the GOP say they're all for "family values". SP say's she's going to do things to help "all our kids".

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

Does it mean lots of government resources will be devoted to public education, so that ALL of our public schools are brought up to world-class status?

Does it mean lots of government resources for childcare, so that parents can work to support their families?

Does it mean removing the marriage penalty from the tax structure?

Does it mean a health care system that provides AFFORDABLE world-class health care to ALL our families? Particularly preventive care. where an ounce of prevention is often worth a ton of cure?

Does it mean lots of resources for AFFORDABLE family housing, meaning homes that working families can realistically afford?

Does it mean lots of resources for family planning, so that people don't conceive kids they can't care for?

Does it mean less violence in the media, and less violence in government policy?

Does it mean more government support (in terms of policies) for good middle-class jobs?

Does it mean a government that sets the example of good financial planning by having a balanced budget? (think about who was president the last time that happened...)

Does it mean government energy and environmental policies that are sustainable long-term?

All of the above are my family values. I don't see any evidence that SP or the GOP support a single one of them.

It's easy to talk about "family values" and pop out 5 kids when your family's health care is guaranteed by the state. (Will SP's family still get health care from the state of Alaska after July 26? I think the answer is "You betcha!")