(FYI- BACKGROUND- I am a twice-wounded, permanently disabled Vietnam veteran) Ms. Palen's ABC interview aired last evening revealed her manifest unsuitability - or at least unreadiness - for the position of president-in-waiting. While the interview revealed many deficiencies in Gov. Palen's factual knowledge. The critical question, Is national sovereignty inviolable? According to Ms. Palen, it's relative, depending upon her bias. She accuses the Russian Republic of preemptively attacking Georgia and condemns them for it, even suggesting it might mean war between the US and the Russian Republic, she unabashedly justifies uninvited U.S. forces incursions into Pakistan and a possible preemptive Israeli strike against Iran. "CHANGE?" Think. Does Palen's relativism represent actual, substantive change from that of Geo. W. Bush's? Her propensity to apply double standards - excuse Israeli self-interested aggression, while condemning Russian self-interested aggression - clearly shows us that the U.S. will remain a polarizing force in the world, with all the tragic, negative consequences such behavior - "realpolitik" vs. policies based upon universal principles of justice and fairness - has caused- the same behavior and consequences that have dogged Mankind for millennia. No: 1. Ms. Palen is manifestly too ignorant and inexperienced to be VP or Pres., and certainly 2. doesn't hold views that represent the kind of change citizens have expressed their preference for.

Posted by George J. Robinson, 9:03 a.m. Friday, September 12 2008 Permalink

Throughout the primaries, I rejected the sweeping generality that Hillary had the white women/mature women/working women all in her corner (simply b/c she's a female) and that I favored Obama from the start. I can't believe that in the general election it's still necessary to say Palen does NOT have all white women/mature working/(in my case, former) soccer moms all behind her. Not only would I not consider her on the basis of gender, but I could NEVER consider her on the basis of her stated positions on certain issues and what's beginning to be revealed about how little she knows about most issues. "Still a mature mama for Obama" :^>

Posted by Evelyn C., 10:08 a.m. Friday, September 12 2008 Permalink

I am amazed at anyone who thinks that Palin is either getting the scrutiny she should or that she is in anyway more scrutinized than other VP candidates. She only appeared on the scene two weeks ago, was kept from the press and critical voters up until last night, and every day that gets wasted on the appropriateness of the questions, rather than her answers, gets Karl Rove closer to another victory. Dan Quayle, Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, Geraldine Ferraro, anyone else in the position of Ms. Palin was much more thoroughly vetted by the PUBLIC than she is now. Let's see how well she can make the argument for the policies she espouses, how she justifies some of the actions she is accused of taking (including the inappropriate firing of public officials in Alaska), and how much support she can garner for her sincerely held beliefs. If ntohing else, I do believe she means what she says. And if the American public wants to vote for her based on her beliefs, then we get what we deserve.

Posted by Sal from Manhattan, 3:08 p.m. Friday, September 12 2008 Permalink