You're right about "Trollop" and "Dumbass", but the rest is perfectly valid criticism.

She's running on her "family values and religious" cred, wanting to ban certain books from a library and she dresses like this?

http://tinyurl.com/5gcncq

Sorry. It is perfectly appropriate to question her sincerity, authenticity and integrity. She's just another Gannon waiting to happen.

Sorry Glen,

I agree with you 95% of the time, but not this time. Palin did not help herself or McCain last night. She was mean-spirited, vicious, venal, angry, arrogant, condescending, mocking, smug, and rude. She had zero stature or credibility to make the kind of personal attacks that she did, and I think it will backfire. She forgot that she was supposed to be addressing the American public, NOT the Repub delegates. They lapped up her bile, but most people will be turned off. I read other political blogs, not just the progressive ones. The reaction from most posters (not bloggers) have been overwhelmingly negative. Almost everyone who watched Palin's speech was turned off for all the reasons I listed above. Even W had the good sense to try to pass himself as a compassionate conservative. Yeah, it was a lie and some people bought it for a while, but the point is that he at least tried to appear decent. Palin didn't bother. She thought she sounded tough, but her sneering came off as cruel. She was channeling Cheney. Someone forgot to tell her Cheney's numbers are even lower than Bush's.

P.S. Yes, Biden's reaction to her speech was idiotic.

Let's not forget Romney's wonderfully encouraging line:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said Obama "ducked and dodged" when asked recently about the threat of Islamic terrorism. "John McCain hit the nail on the head," said Romney. "Radical violent Islam is evil, and he will defeat it!"

Cindy McCain

Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000

-- omooex

I wonder if that was that yellow slicker number that she wore. It looked like a raincoat.

The yellow one. I hope she kept the receipt.

Oh look, a personal attack. Sometimes I forget how brave you anonymous interwebbers are. You're a pathetic, old, authoritarian attention whore who spends his days and nights stinking up the comment sections of blogs. You are even so sad that you consider other anonymous random people that you comment on blogs with your "friends" and that you are upset that they are disagree with you. Besides, the owner of this blog might not think highly of me, but I don't think I've EVER seen GG reply positively to anything you've ever posted in these comments. I mean, seriously, why do you even exist?

That is pathetic enough to warrant mockery, without even having to google your real name for material. You should just go ahead and get your clown makeup permanently tattooed on your face because it is impossible to perceive you any other way.

Besides, you know nothing about my "IT skills", so make up whatever you want. I know more about computing then you will ever learn from wikipedia or the internet, old man. You probably still get scared trying to program your old VHS player, and don't even know the basics, like how a compiler works. You'd better get on wikipedi and figure it out!

Tell me something, was it scary when they invented the train?

And that's not a good thing.

Hardly. I'd say that idea better suits Democrats. Higher taxes, abortion as birth control, surrender as foreign policy, deprivation as energy policy, and government as nanny? Oh yeah, that'll make people want to vote Democrat.

Amazing how you manage to squeeze six lies into just 35 words. I'd almost be impressed, except its you and we can't expect any better.

Bring it on sport, bring it on.

The last time we heard that was at the onset of the Iraqi insurgency. Look at how well that turned out for everyone.

Hardly. I'd say that idea better suits Democrats. Higher taxes, abortion as birth control, surrender as foreign policy, deprivation as energy policy, and government as nanny? Oh yeah, that'll make people want to vote Democrat.

Bring it on sport, bring it on.

-- shooter242

Your finger get positively covered with mold, old half eaten candy bars, hair, lint and other icky stuff when you fumble around deep into your AT&T Tote bag of GOP Talking Points.

And the Paki's are none too happy. American media silence so far. Convenient timing to introduce McCain the war candidate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7597529.stm

This was funny, upon the first read, but caused concern after I thought about it.

As shooter242 documented, examples of cultural tribalism are rampant among the salonistas.

Glenn, you're projecting.-- NotOrbitBoy

I suggest you fire the retros and commence re-entry, son. You've been sucking void so long you've lost the ability to read english.

Better you return to earth before you kill more brain cells.

From the AP story fact-checking Palin's speech (which, by the way, was the top story on Yahoo!'s main page this morning):

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

(My emphasis.)

The Republicans have always banked on getting votes based on their promise to cut taxes. Sure, they'll get the vote of the wealthy based on McCain's plan, but the middle class should know that they will be better off, tax-wise, under Obama's plan. Obama should repeat this over and over. People vote with their pocketbooks. (And, how much do you want to bet gas prices will be miraculously low come November 5?)

Political donations have never sat well with me because in my mind there's way too much money already being spent on politics and politicians in the USA...

The government controls trillions of dollars. Getting the right Representatives, Senators, President is certainly worth $10 per citizen per year ($3 billion per year). Otherwise we get the government that the corporations payed for.