I cannot stand Sarah Palin! D

Thank you so much for the BP! This woman literally scares the crap out of me and I'm not afraid to admit it! Like you, Hillary was not my first choice during the primaries but I also would have supported her wholeheartedly if she'd have been the nominee. Actually, from the very beginning my first choice had been Joe Biden so with him as the V.P. candidate I'm doubly pleased because I've been watching his career for years and, unbelievable as it may seem, while one V.P. candidate is a woman and the other is a man the man has been on our side more for decades than the token woman! I'm not in the least bit impressed by Palin's cocky arrogance and I'd say that if she were a man, you can trust me on that one. I don't agree with her, I don't trust her and I don't like her one bit. Annie

Yes! I refuse to vote for a woman just because she's a woman, and I'm glad to hear others saying the same thing. I've said it elsewhere here and I'll say it again - Hillary Clinton wasn't my first choice on the Democratic ticket, but once he was eliminated, I'd have been pleased to see her in office. Sarah Palin does not stand for a single thing that I believe, and every single thing that I've seen from her mouth - not reported in the papers but from her mouth - has made me like her less and less. She's not plucky, she's mean-spirited. She's not a maverick, she's a loose cannon. She gives a whole new meaning to the term 'cocky'. I've been watching the supposed polls with horror since her acceptance speech at the RNC and waiting for the backlash from the gagged press.

This may surprise you, but according to the Rasmussen polls men stated that they are ready for a female president more than women by a score of 89% to 81%. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/woman_president_clinton_vs_palin_52_to_41

Amen.

Half of what you've said is a lie. You really should broaden your reading beyond the Huffington Post and Daily Kos. No books were banned. http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp [i]She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term. [/i] http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html Press erred in saying Palin slashed funds for pregnant teens http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/96252.php

I have not questioned her experience, anyway I believe that experience only takes you so far. What I am questioning is her judgement and her knowledge: judgement when she says in her recent interview that she is prepared, if need be, to go to war over NATO membership for Georgia/Ukraine and knowledge when she doesn't even know what the Bush doctrine is, the central foreign policy adopted by George Bush folliwing 9/11. McCain talks about putting coutry first: if he had put country first, he would have selected the best and most experienced person amongst Republican ranks to serve as his VP. Instead he selects Palin. Palin may have her strengths and may have done some good things in Alaska, but I cannot see how anyone, particularly after this recent interview, can say that she is the best person he could have chosen to be his VP. Instead, and lets be brutally frank here, he chose her because he wanted to appeal to disillusioned Dem women (the PUMAs) and also because she would help galvanise the republican religious base, which he needs to campaign for him and provide the funding, etc. So let's be clear, what McCain did was to put Republican party and his career first and country last by chosing as his VP a person whose views are diametrically opposed to his own one a number of issues and who could, quite realistically, become president should McCain be elected and then incapacitated. I think it's despicable - it is clear that he chose Palin as his VP for purely political gain.

Maybe he chose someone with several views different than his own because he wanted more than a yes man. Have you thought about that. I like Mitt Romney, but frankly, as a VP I'm afraid that he'd be all too willing to go along with everything McCain said without ever questioning him or offering a differing point of view. Obviously part of his choice was because he knew she would help him win. That's always part of VP selection. If you don't win, you have no chance of doing any good for your country as president. That doesn't mean she wasn't qualified. The "Bush Doctrine" question in that interview was just stupid. It's not a terribly specific term as it generally refers to everything Bush has done and everything he stands for. If the guy wanted to know how she felt about preemptive strikes, which apparently is what he was going for, he should have asked her that question specifically. It was a weak question that nobody would have known precisely what he was asking. People who hated Bush would have given a blanket "NO" without asking for clarification because they simply hate Bush.