Pit bulls are trained by humans, to viciously attack for sport, where winner takes all. Only thing left is one dead dog and blood on the walls, while one person profits from it. She sounds like a typical Republican to me.

Can we end the nonsense about not being able to pick on a woman now that she has declared herself a pit bull? Can she be smeared and crushed like Hillary? I hope so. if you have no credentials and demand a fight about it, you should get one.

She thinks the story of Adam & Eve should be taught in public school SCIENCE class. She has no business in being in government at any level.

First of all and most relevant to your weak argument about Obama’s experience is that: Campaigning does not equal Governing. The Republicans have been quite good at the former, and have failed miserably at the latter. By your reasoning then, Karl Rove would be our most experienced and best Presidential candidate in modern history.

Secondly, his ability to take down your so-called “formidable heir-apparent” was based upon the prep work done by 15-20 years of lies and innuendos against the Clintons, formulated and carried out by your favorite national figures – Karl Rove, et al. Obama’s supporters trashed the Clintons using Republican logic, then added malicious innuendo questioning the Clinton’s commitment to civil rights, widespread sexism, a manipulative approach to caucuses and a thin electoral victory based upon the skewed demographics of Democratic primaries. I would give Obama’s campaign team for credit here, not Obama, though his failure to speak out against racial innuendo and sexism did benefit him. Please, how can you give Obama credit for “somehow” bringing the Clintons on-board? That was a result of the Clintons’ generosity and commitment to the Democratic Party.

The problem with his judgment versus experience is that his judgment has been nothing exceptional except by his account (a fairy tale, if you will). Besides, experience is important regardless of judgment, both because it makes one more prepared to take on greater responsibilities and because it gives voters a way to understand and trust what you will do with that responsibility.

Furthermore, the simple fact is that executive experience does matter. Harry Truman was famous for the simple sign: “The buck stops here” [on his desk]. That is executive experience. Legislatures act as a body, not as an individual to whom we must entrust ultimate decision-making. It has very little to do with campaigning, during which lies, fortunate circumstances and innuendo can make you an instant success.

I am OUTRAGED!

How DARE she say "The Bridge to Nowhere - Thanks, but No Thanks"? ... AGAIN!

We KNOW she was for it and LOBBIED for it.

We KNOW she was against it when it Congress cut it out.

We KNOW she took the $400 mil and put it into the public fund.

We KNOW she took that fund and passed out CASH, MY Tax money, to Alaskans

WE KNOW the FACTS.

How DARE she tell this story a SECOND TIME?

American families are struggling every day.

How DARE John McCain stand in back of her and smirk?

The nation has a $9 Trillion debt.

How DARE the Republicans stand up and CHEER?

ENOUGH!

I hope the Dems have the Brains and the Guts to call them on this.

She's a wolf in sheep's clothing and the wolf is at the door of every middle class American family starting this AM...this is the biggest threat since the radical right unleashed Ronald Reagan and Obama/Biden and the D's better be prepared!!

The entire Republican convention has just been one dreadful assault on the reason of Americans. These people are doing a terrible job. No democrat is going to vote for them after all we hear from them is how aweful us Democrats are. They really didn't learn anything in the last 4 years, did they. This trick to scare up votes worked in 04, but they should have learned their lesson in 06. Peggy Noonan is right. "It's over" Republicans. You are failing miserably with your old fashioned scare tactics. Palin is the worst of that freak show. Before last night, I was going to feel a little bit bad for her when she gets destroyed. Now I await it with relish.

The whole point is she is good at attacking and smiling at the same time--Salon alert!!--Sarah Palin is charming and,for the Democrats, what she might call "a world of trouble." They may yet learn to regret the savaging of Hillary Clinton.

This piece by Walsh is purely exposition by loaded words. Have you been studying with Camille Paglia? Of course, Paglia will aim her loaded words in a different direction, I'd say. And for once be a bit on target.

She gets how to activate the base.

In the 48 years since JFK took office, the Dems have won 12 years. That should let the Ultra Liberal Elitists know that they continue to spawn losers. Of the two Dems who were President, hello! both were governors, and in relative sense, while Republicans may have called them both Liberals, they were Centrists who knew something about working with hostile congresses.

The "sarcasm and sneering" comments Palin made are exactly how those folks see the truth about Obama. She's done two years of work in the State Governor's mansion; he's spent 143 days (according to John McLaughlin) of actual service in the Senate, working as a Senator. If he was a "community organizer," yes, she WAS a mayor. And from one of those myriad "small town American" cities Obama spoke of so condescendingly. It works two ways, Joan.

She has activated the base for her Party, and for the many millions of independents who, in those 48 years, have voted for Republicans. As such, has emerged on the scene and do a more than credible job in suddenly becoming a Vice Presidential candidate who appreciates the things John McCain has done ... compared to what Barack Obama claims he can and will do but hasn't done since he's been a state senator and national senator. She's made more decisions affecting lives than Obama has, in the sense of a direct connection between the office holder and constituents.

For millions, she will serve as a role model. Barack is always being touted as serving as a role model but she clearly will.

Glamorizing teen pregnancy isn't what's happening. It's interesting that has come from a liberal ... she's showing she's not ashamed of her daughter or what's happened to her daughter, and now the ULEs are crying foul! Glamorizing teen pregnancy, they say. But I see it as showing love for her daughter no matter what. And, an acceptance, publicly, that there are literally millions of such cases over these last 48 years, too. Both my sisters, who vote solid Republican, HAD to get married. One has had a daughter get pregnant. SHE will undoubtedly vote Republican, too.

Not that Democrats haven't had millions of such cases among their ranks, too.

The site of a family united around a Downs Syndrome child, as beautiful and radiant as the sun, right there, on national TV, embraces the notion that for many women, they CAN have such a baby, and go on to become a working multi-tasking government official. The fact is, the country's got over teen pregnancies in the sense that they're not shaming matters. They're mistakes, and definitely, family planning mistakes. But to disown the daughter? To abort a Downs baby because it's Down's?

Fact is, Obama has said he wants to do more to prevent teen pregnancy.

That's all well and good, but those things continue to happen. Palin shows that there can be unconditional love, and that abortions can be rejected as part of the picture.

But she is going to be the poster child for "small town Americans who cling to their guns and religion ..." and that is going to be one of the sorriest statements to cost a nominee the election ever. She's right, of course, Joan, that Obama thought he was with a safe audience, and told the truth, his truth, about how HE and MICHELLE see small town America and small town Americans.

There are a lot of such towns in America.

She with connect with voters who are now going to tune in and say: Obama's a blow hard and also, another of those Ultra Liberal Elitist candidates. Obama's roots aren't what he projects, and frankly, if he had the money to go to a plush high school in Hawaii, and go to college on both coasts, then his "humble beginnings" had already been "transcended." He projects elitism and that can't be shaken off. Every time the man speaks, he speaks with an arrogance and haughtiness that is pretty clear to the average person who isn't enamored with one of Ultra Liberalism's hallmarks: It's cool to vote Black.

Sarah Palin wouldn't have stood a chance against Senator Clinton. Now, because the Dems are such jerks, and have trashed Senator Clinton, Sarah Palin is closer to the White House than Hillary. The Dems have put all their eggs in an African-American who, again, has been shown to have direct connections to another African-American muslim and radical, as well as a Saudi go between on such matters. If that Saudi is shown to be an intelligence agent, which, of course, he had to be if he was connected to the Royal Family of Saudi ... because they all are intelligence agents of sorts ... this guy might actually BE one such agent, formally ... then Obama will have to talk about that.

There are other things which will come out to take him off message. The Liberal media will ignore it, as they've done with such things. If the dates and ages are right, then it appears to me that his associations with the Saudi and radical African-American were AFTER his trip to Indonesia, Pakistan, India and Kenya, in 1981. If that's the case, then it once again shows a pattern with him schmoozing with Muslims. The question is: what happened to cause him to want to go to Pakistan; to hang with Pakistani Muslims; to hang with Black Liberationist Muslims and Christians?

It's an inconvenient thread, and I hope John McCain asks him to explain more about that fateful night in San Francisco! He did the bragging and diagnosing that night ... now he'll be asked about it even more.

Palin won't get many Hillary converts, but she'll get some. And she'll activate a crowd that hasn't been cited much ... Republican and Independent women who are ready to go wild.