The dilemma the campaign has about how to deal with the sudden emergence of this political superstar comes down to this: it possibly can't ignore her, but going after her directly could easily backfire. If anything, the past week has shown that Palin wears a similar coat of Teflon as Obama. Just as many of Obama's opponents suddenly found themselves accused of playing the race card, many of Palin's supporters have been quick to accuse Dems of outrageous sexism in the frontal assault on Palin's record and family. And responding to each one of her volleys only gives her more prominence in the race than the Obama team would prefer. "I suspect the Obama campaign will let that process unfold without directly engaging Palin," says Thomas Mann, a presidential historian at the Brookings Institution.

Still, given her attacks on Obama Wednesday night, his campaign will have a hard time resisting the urge to respond head on. Many observers had assumed that the choice of Palin would effectively take the McCain campaign's experience argument off the table. But the Republicans have shown no such reluctance, continuing to claim that Palin's eight years as a small-town mayor and two years as Alaska Governor make her more qualified than Obama with his seven years in the Illinois Senate and three years in the U.S. Senate — or even Biden with his 35 years in the U.S. Senate.

The Obama folks, however, seem to have settled on a strategy of downplaying Palin's lack of experience in favor of attacking her bigger claim to fame — her reputation as a maverick, non-partisan reformer. The campaign is working to link her to Washington and paint her with the same label they've given McCain — more of the same, or a Bush third term. They're even talking up her political skills these days. "She couldn't have been more of a Washington politician than she was last night," Axelrod says. "She played the typical slash and burn role and I think she did it incredibly skillfully; she's very deft at throwing the bombs."

The Obama campaign has a lot less margin for error than Reagan did in 1984, and it knows that. So while it is quick to point out inaccuracies in Palin's record — her claim that she firmly opposed the so-called Bridge to Nowhere and other wasteful Washington earmarks — the campaign is primarily relying on the public and the media to press Palin. Answers may be a long time coming, though, if McCain adviser Nicolle Wallace is to be believed. She suggested on MSNBC Thursday that the media has been so unfair to Palin that it doesn't deserve a chance to interview her, and that all anyone will see of Palin will be her public speeches. The Obama campaign wasted little time in latching onto this: "I assume the American people are going to demand that she account for her own record and for John McCain's agenda," says David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager.

One place Palin won't be able to hide is during her one vice-presidential debate with Biden on October 2. The conventional wisdom has been that Biden is going to have to tread very carefully in how he engages Palin, for fear that he will be accused of being condescending and bullying towards a female politician. That concern still exists, but Palin's tough tone in her speech may make it slightly easier for Biden not to pull any punches. Indeed, it promises to be as intriguing a confrontation as any of the presidential debates.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1838959,00.html

The Daily Show is doing the work that Obama/Biden should be doing. Go to www.thedailyshow.com, then videos, then Sarah Palin - Vet This, from 09/04/08. This is exactly the responsible type of counter-attack the Democrats should be thrusting upon the country with an immediate sense of urgency. Stewart plays it for laughs, to a point - with a few exceptions, I've rarely seen anyone else in the media lately so effectively dismantle such blatant hypocrisy.

http://www.freepress.net/

I have no problem with this. I support it. But I have watched Amy Goodman's arrest so many times now I know it by heart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYjyvkR0bGQ

And when I listen to her telling "her side" of the story and compare it to the video of the incident, I can't help thinking that if a picture is worth a 1000 words, a video must be worth a few more and no matter how many words she uses, or omits using, her story and the video just don't jibe. And even she knows it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0Qqea6iQhA&eurl=http://www.freepress.net/

If you came to my town to peacefully protest, you'd be welcomed. Come to my town, with mothers and children here, packing a molotov cocktail, I'd shoot you myself. I don't give a rat's ass what your politics are. She was guilty of being Queen for a Day and none of the locals had decided to coronate her.

That's the phone number for Congressman Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia. Republican, of course:

According to The Hill newspaper, a Washington publication, Westmoreland said, "Just from what little I've seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity."

Westmoreland spokesman Brian Robinson said the congressman was using the Webster's dictionary meaning of the word and was unaware of additional racial context.

Link: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/51762.html

Yeah, right. A guy from Georgia isn't going to know the racist overtones of "uppity".

I just called and said Westmoreland should resign from Congress and apologize to the American people. Please add your voice.

"Play nice" is not an instruction generally given to politicians, Chris Matthews is much more on point when he calls politics "Hardball."

Both the right and the left are attacking on issues that have nothing to do with average people's lives, like how many houses Cindy and John McCain have or what Michelle Obama wrote in a college paper, if Sarah Palin should stay home with her kids and if Joe Biden plagiarized a term paper.

Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain need to specifically spell out their proposals.

After the primaries and conventions, I am honestly sick of hearing about their lives. If I want to know more about their personal histories, I can buy their books.

I am far more concerned with what they plan to do about the plunging economy, the health care crisis and Social Security.

And please don't tell me I can read their positions on their websites, there are millions of voters who won't take the time to do that.

I happen to think Sen. Obama has the superior plan on most of the things Americans are worried about but he needs to get that across to voters and not worry so much about "smears."

Those who mistakenly think he's Muslim will not change their minds nor will calling those who oppose him racists upset most of them in the least, unlike what happened in the primary.

Often people say Americans are just too dumb and that's why we get leaders like George W. Bush. But the candidates appear to agree we're too stupid to understand anything of substance so we get montages of flags and amber waves of grain and feel-good slogans.

Obama says it's "the change we need" and McCain says "change is coming." So now that we've all agreed things are going to change, TELL US HOW!!