... in Obama Nation, LOL!!!

McCain '08, easily followed by Clinton 2012.

Justice eventually comes to those who wait. I will so enjoy your defeat in November, worms. Talk to you then. :P

The Palin meme is a potent one. An equally potent one will be helpful to diffuse it or it may lose luster of it's own accord. I agree the Dems took the "high road," and the Repubs took the low one - with the greater meme being you MUST do this to prevail (terror, et al). Hillary lost because of this gambit (her "dog whistling") , but she lost to those predisposed to such high minded values, the "friends," not the "enemies". In the war on terror, in providing energy NOW, so goes Repub meme, we must take the harsh, low road and damn the torpedoes, damn the consequences, we need to TAKE ACTION, makes moves, get it done. Although such a rash stance may prove reckless to the point of disastrous it rouses the blood. Level-headedness is the counterpoint. But how do you get fired-up excited about level-headedness?? By exposing rashness and instability. This reveals the opposing excitement to be misguided, which is what the Repubs are attempting on the otherside to do, diffusing. They have a strong playbook. But they've got major weaknesses. Palin has a meme that works great for her but there's another one that suits her, a zealotry in her passion that can adeptly be parodied, her and McC two mad dogs waiting to be unleashed on the world, chomping at the bit with passion, but not wise. ALL emotion and little thought and understanding. A Hockey mom. A POW vet. That's feeding 'em back their own medicine WITHOUT taking the low road.

Glen,

I too have sat back in amazement since the first Reagan campaign and wondered why the Dems NEVER FIGHT BACK against the Repubs highly effective personality attacks. Based on the way the Dems campaign one can rightly conclude that they are in fact "out of touch." The don't seem to understand the nature of most Americans. Most Americans, when it comes to their civic duty of educating themselves about the issues are extremely lazy. The repubs understand that most Americans have a very low attention span and are easily influenced by fear, greed and lies. The Dems are like the kid who gets bullied all the time and never fights back. Eventually people begin to identify with the bully and not the victim. Americans hate losers and that has been the role that the Dems have been only too willing to play for the last 28 years. Until the Dems aknowledge the true nature of the American people and learn to play in the mud they will continue to lose elections.

And rightly so. The arrogant, snotty, condescending, elitists who "crawl over the high places of the world" (yes, it's Balzac) cannot understand Sarah Palin. But hundreds of millions of Americans do: Sarah Palin is one of us, not one of you.-- rphillips111

So you support abuse of power by officeholders, banning books from public libraries, undisguised graft, and brazen and deliberate telling of lies to the public?

In that case I'm very, very glad I'm not one of yours. Neither, I suspect, are the majority of Americans.

Incidentially, remind me how many of his competitors and opponents Senator Obama has expressly accused of outright treason? I can't think of a one. Guess that's purely your lot's schtick.

Assuming you're sincere, your screed merely punctuates Greenwald's argument, that "Palin's speech -- indeed, the entire GOP Convention -- was almost entirely bereft of substance and 'issues.' But it is that way by design."

And having "argued" that so-called attacks against Palin are vicious, you then write "we know that anything 'disrespectful' of the Chosen One is 'racist', 'off limits', almost blasphemous. I guess whether it's true doesn't count," you conclude "the arrogant, snotty, condescending, elitists ... cannot understand Sarah Palin. But hundreds of millions of Americans do: Sarah Palin is one of us, not one of you."

Good Lord. In one relatively short post you do the thing you decry and toss in the elitist talking point for good measure. And nowhere do you cite even a single issue.

No bounce

Obama received no poll bounce after his convention, just as I predicted. That's a really bad sign. Why do the dems always try to play nice? How many elections do we have to lose? Obama should be ahead in the polls by double digits, if he actually knew how to run a campaign. This Sarah Palin pick is a golden oppurtunity they are letting slip through their fingers. They should be hammering how inexperienced she is. How it reflects poorly on McCain's judgement. They aren't doing anything, which makes me sick. If Obama loses, it's because he deserves too. Only an absolute moron could lose to the repugs in this elections.

-- Conservativeslayer

I think Obama did get a bounce. It was not the 10+ points that one might have expected, after a letter-perfect convention in which every gamble, including the outdoor stadium acceptance, paid off. (And in the first of the two conventions; another "bounce" advantage).

The Obama post-convention bounce looks to have been in the neighborhood of 2 to 6 points.

You say Obama "should" be ahead by double-digits. I don't know about that, you might be right. What I would say is that there is a deep-seated opposition in America to Obama's far-left orientation and his far-left base. If Obama is to win, he'll need to move much farther right, Clinton-style. I don't think he'll do that, and I don't think he'll win. If he does move right, I expect that it will be Axelrod's strategy that pushes it.

All of the media and the Democratic machinery will be spending the next couple of months trying to destroy Sarah Palin. But I'll bet not the lot of you can "field dress" a moose, raise five kids, and govern the largest state in the union.

-- rphillips111

In land area, mostly federally owned wildeness with the smallest population of any state. Smaller than any major urban city and one of the smallest national guard contingents.