Why don't we take her at her word when she says that the left wing attacks using frivolous ethics violation claims and open record act filings have paralyzed the Alaskan executive branch and have cost Alaskans an unconscionable amount of money. I find it amusing that the political left claims that she is a joke as a political force but is spending an unprecendented amount of time and attention on trying to discredit her. That speaks volumes.

You have to stop saying things like, "She cleaned Biden's clock" (referring, of course, to Palin's DISASTROUS, winking, cutesy, can't answer a question so I'll get folksy vice presidential (but more like junior high) debate.

Paglia, you will never ever get in her pants. Stop kissing her ass.

"Dehumanization is a stealthy process that ultimately destroys everyone."

Would you not say that aborting a growing fetus is also dehumanization and is thus equally a process that ultimately destroys everyone?

According to the deeply modest General Cutting, "I am a Vietnam Vet who opposed the war in College before I had a high draft number, then served with distinction and honor.

"I am also a student of politics, serving myself as an elected official for 3 terms. Have given over 1,000 speeches, many debates, both as a public speaker and paid speaker, much less in leadership positions in State and National Organizations."

If any of this is true, and let's give him/her the benefit of the doubt, it is hard to imagine what s/he actually finds so compelling about Mrs Palin's public speaking skills, her ability to think on her feet, and anything beyond winking, blinking, family trotting, and "you betcha".

Go to YouTube and see once more just how well Mrs Palin handled the wicked Katie Couric. Or watch her in church being officially certified "free of witches" by one Rev Thomas Muthee.

Or ask "The First Dude" what books he read during the seven years he was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a secessionist (and, some would argue, traitorous) organization that seeks to break up the Union.

I understand that Mrs Palin herself wrote a book on the virtues of abstinence, but it evidently didn't sell too well.

This is the dunderhead you want to be President? Is she really the best of your best?

If we really want to elect a self-styled Hockey Mom as our leader, you'd better start looking in the NHL.

Are you sure you haven't been hired by Fox News? What does that even mean? Palin has received no more or less scrutiny than any other high profile politician -- (just ask the Clintons) -- you miss the points she brings much of the scrutiny on herself with her constant lies and fudging of the truth (remember how she really did take the money for the bridge to nowhere and lots of other Federal money all the while calling herself a maverick?)-- It's Palin's supporters who will be in for an awakening as they continue to fund her self involvement tour. Last Friday was a perfect example -- she and her husband have paid back thousands of dollars and there's still the per diem question (i.e. Palin charging the state not to go to work). Her main problem seems to be lack of intellectual curiosity and inability to take responsibility for her actions. She chose to be governor - but didn't like the travel time to the capital. She wants her family out of the limelight yet continually thrusts them into it (does an infant really need to be brought to late night rallys?) And no matter who bought her many clothes she had to at least put them on her back (and did her husband actually need underwear bought by the RNC?) --

As for the media - at least Vanity Fair and other magazines do actual investigative journalism - much of the article about Palin was just fleshing out of previous reports -- of unhappiness in the McCain camp with Palin. It's unlike Fox News who creates their own truths - eg last night Bill O' Reilly tried to imply Brooke Shields was "faking it" at the Michael Jackson funderal yesterday by talking to an expert on body language -- huh? This is on a "news" show? It's like Glenn Beck calling Obama a Marxist - not only is it wrong but it's dangerous - because they purport to be a legitimate news organization. So instead of worrying about pundits and comedians nobody pays attention to why not address the fact that there's one news organization that is a propaganda machine for one side of the news - despite what Palin and everyone else says about the rest of the media.

Do we have to be subjected to the contrarian ramblings of this sour old bag? In previous generations she would have been confined in the attic, not given a public forum.

Oh, and good one, liviapeacock.

Notably, Palin's principal support is among those who never attended college. If this sounds elitist, I am currently taking classes at the local community college at $200 per course, and receiving top notch instruction. So there's no real excuse for the ignorant.

The rhetorical devices used by Obama are no accident or the result of careless speachwriting. They are absolutely his stock in trade, as has been pointed out by one of his former law professors, among others. This is nothing less than a character flaw that will be increasingly evident as people become more attuned to it through its repitition. It is akin to his unethical use of straw men to misrepresent opposing points of view. Outside the US, his adoration is dropping like a stone, as other leaders get stung by his manipulative approach. Inside the US, buyer's remorse will take a bit longer to materialize, as we hate to admit our lack of judgment.

I realize that in the '90s you established your opposition to hate crime legislature. In regards to the Matthew Shepard case, my question is why have you not acknowledged or at the least addressed that as investigated by 20/20 researchers and Ms Varga, the prosecutor for this case believed all the evidence pointed to a drug crime not a hate crime? Ms Varga even went on FOX News with Bill O'Reilly, Nov 19, 2004, to promote this idea. Several witnesses established significant information that this case went forward more on agenda than evidence that was suppressed. Suppressed until 20/20 researchers "looked at statements that had been previously sealed by the court following the convictions." Both sides of this story have not been brought out. Once again this is the 'agenda' of some who are bullying the public that if you don't agree with them you must hate homosexuals. The other side of the story has been suppressed. Suppressed. What a pitiful strategy by those with this 'agenda.'