NBC: Popular Alaska governor to be first female Republican VP nominee

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain has chosen Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, NBC News has learned.

She would be the first woman ever to serve on a Republican presidential ticket. The pro-life Palin would also be the first Alaskan ever to appear on a national ticket.

Palin, 44, was elected Alaska's first woman governor in 2006. The state’s voters had grown weary of career politician Gov. Frank Murkowski, whom she defeated in the GOP primary.

Read it all.

Filed under:

103 Comments
Posted August 29, 2008 at 10:41 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. azusa wrote:

Her brother Michael is bringing out a new book: ‘Pole to Poll’.

(Actually, he was going to bring it out if Pawlenty had been chosen.)

August 29, 10:56 am | [comment link]
2. St. Cuervo wrote:

I approve

August 29, 10:57 am | [comment link]
3. Christopher Johnson wrote:

Outstanding selection.

August 29, 11:09 am | [comment link]
4. Mark Johnson wrote:

So much for the McCain camp’s argument about the need for experience!

August 29, 11:11 am | [comment link]
5. Chris wrote:

AP is on it too:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080829/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_veepstakes

It’s a beautiful day to be an American!!!!

August 29, 11:11 am | [comment link]
6. Chris wrote:

#4 - can you imagine the blowback Obama would get if he complained about her inexperience?  And come on, she’s running a state, Obama has an office of a couple dozen people at best.  And he’s looking to be President, not VP.

Really, I can’t imagine a better pick!

August 29, 11:14 am | [comment link]
7. Mark Johnson wrote:

#6 - She’s running as VP with someone who would be the oldest elected President ever if he wins.  Experience matters more on the Republican VP side than ever.  Two years as governor of a low populated state and city council experience prior to that?  That’s not enough to deal with such a complicated world.  Sure she’ll be better than Cheney, but she’s not the best that McCain could have picked.  Obviously, he’s desperate.  The “bridge to nowhere” comes back to the Governor’s office!

August 29, 11:22 am | [comment link]
8. Mike L wrote:

It’s clear to me now, I’m voting no. Let’s not have one because either choice is just so pathetic.

August 29, 11:23 am | [comment link]
9. teatime wrote:

I just read her bio. What a wonderful, amazing woman! So committed to doing the right thing that she exposed corruption within her own party! Excellent choice! McCain has just secured my vote!

August 29, 11:28 am | [comment link]
10. Milton wrote:

No, Mark Johnson, it’s you who sounds desperate.  Brilliant choice!  Good points above on Palin’s admin experience vs. Obama’s.  Not only does she give moderate disaffected female Clinton supporters an alternative, but in 8 yrs. Palin could be the first female U.S. President!  McCain may have just won the election.

August 29, 11:28 am | [comment link]
11. St. Cuervo wrote:

#7—Don’t you know Palin opposed the “bridge to nowhere”?

August 29, 11:35 am | [comment link]
12. phil swain wrote:

From the FEVER SWAMP- Mark Johnson argues that Palin lacks experience, but she’ll be better than Cheney, whose only previous administrative experience was White House Chief of Staff and Sec. of Defense.

August 29, 11:37 am | [comment link]
13. State of Limbo wrote:

Based upon what I have read so far regarding Mrs. Palin, I am impressed.  I am hoping to catch the formal announcement at noon ET today.

August 29, 11:44 am | [comment link]
14. Sarah1 wrote:

I won’t be voting for McCain but it’s a pleasure to respond to this nonsensical statement: “So much for the McCain camp’s argument about the need for experience!”

Wow—McCain’s selection for VP took away his experience?  Added to his opponent’s experience?

Who’d ha thunk that could happen!  ; > )

August 29, 11:52 am | [comment link]
15. Christopher Johnson wrote:

She’s got more executive experience, more experience actually running a government, than the president she’ll be serving under.  And certainly more than that empty suit from the Chicago machine and Joe “Plagiarism” Biden.  This pick must really have rattled the lefties.

August 29, 11:58 am | [comment link]
16. Steven in Falls Church wrote:

Palin at least has a bit of foreign policy experience that Obama lacks.  On the way home from her trip to the Middle East she stopped over in Germany and bothered to visit wounded U.S. troops.  Obama, if you will recall, thought fawning German leftists and taking time to shoot hoops were more important.

August 29, 11:59 am | [comment link]
17. Hakkatan wrote:

Mark Johnson argues that Palin lacks experience, but she’ll be better than Cheney, whose only previous administrative experience was White House Chief of Staff and Sec. of Defense.

Cheney’s problem was not a lack of experience, but lack of character.

August 29, 12:00 pm | [comment link]
18. William P. Sulik wrote:

Y’all act like you’ve never seen a female pilot from a sparsely populated area before.

tongue wink

Seriously though, I think this is a very good choice - and could bring over quite a few Hillary voters.

It’s a much better choice than Biden.

August 29, 12:08 pm | [comment link]
19. Chris Molter wrote:

Not only a pilot, but a hunter, basketball player, sports journalist, pageant winner, mother not only of 5 kids, but one US Army Infantryman and a new baby with Down’s. 

Now THAT’S some woman!

August 29, 12:13 pm | [comment link]
20. Philip Snyder wrote:

Mark #7 - so, the VP’s experience on the Republican side is more important than the President’s experience on the Democratic side?  That just doesn’t make sense.  Besides, she has more executive experience than anyone else on any ticket.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

August 29, 12:38 pm | [comment link]
21. The_Archer_of_the_Forest wrote:

When I first heard this rumor, now fact, this morning, I admit I was somewhat baffled.  About the only thing I knew about Palin was that she was Governor of Alaska and had been investigated for some improper firing of her brother-in-law (or some such bizarre thing). I had gone to bed late last night assuming that Pawlenty was the pick, seeing as he cancelled all his appearances in Minnesota today and was running really high on intrade.com as of late last night.

Now that I have had the morning to think it over, I am leaning the other way. Now that I think about it, this is probably the best pick for McCain of the serious names that were on the table. Romney just turned off too many of the base, Liebermann was, well, a Democrat and a pipe dream. Pawlenty had little experience, although getting elected as Governor of the Hubert Humphreyland is no small feat for a Republican.

I agree that pulling a candidate who can potentially appeal to both Women and the Conservative right base was a pretty masterful stroke. Of course, the keyword in that sentence being “potentially.” I am going to see how this flies in the long haul, and it will be a few days before post-Democratic convention and McCain VP announcement polls start coming in.

The VP debate will be very telling. This could be an interesting race afterall.

August 29, 12:40 pm | [comment link]
22. Nevin wrote:

This pick has already ensured enthusiastic support for McCain from the mainstream conservative movement that was hanging in the balance.  A very wise choice.  Having lost the primaries to McCain due to inability to coalese around any candidate conservatives needed to get something here.  Lieberman would have sunk him.  This does the opposite.

August 29, 12:46 pm | [comment link]
23. Kendall Harmon wrote:

Well I just watched her speak, and was struck by the down to earth themes she elucidated.

I have also marveled at how the talking heads have not been able to handle this choice….

August 29, 12:50 pm | [comment link]
24. Kendall Harmon wrote:

PS—a Hockey mom and a point guard.  You have to love that.

August 29, 12:51 pm | [comment link]
25. libraryjim wrote:

He’s a pickin’ and I’m a grinnin’! grin

August 29, 12:53 pm | [comment link]
26. The_Archer_of_the_Forest wrote:

I have also marveled at how the talking heads have not been able to handle this choice….

I tend to agree. They were falling all over themselves last night about how how great a speech Obama gave and how this was a once in a lifetime opportunity for minorities, as if the Democratic Party was the only party capable of running a minority of any sort.

August 29, 12:53 pm | [comment link]
27. Joe Barista wrote:

Her speech just now put Obama out of business…she is a real find…Commander and Chief of the Alaska National Guard…very appealing to the disaffected Hillary supporters.

August 29, 1:00 pm | [comment link]
28. libraryjim wrote:

I can just see the ad:

“Hey, Hillary Supporters:
Here’s your chance to put a
woman in the White House!”

August 29, 1:30 pm | [comment link]
29. Alta Californian wrote:

I think you are all missing Mark’s point.  When the Republicans attack Obama for being a fresh face with no experience, the Dems will be able to say “Oh? McCain didn’t think that was a problem with Sarah Palin.”  She has a little more executive experience, but it is still going to blunt McCain’s most effective line of attack.  They won’t attack her for lack of experience, they won’t be able to.  But they will be able to use her as a shield.  Whether that works or not may be in dispute, but they will try.  She has also said nice things about Obama, which the Dems will be able to run in commercials.

Steven, he had plenty of face time with soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan (YouTube and Sen. Hagel can confirm that), and decided to cancel the Berlin visit when it became too political. And how do you know the political affiliation of all those Germans?  Why not take a page from Gov. Palin and lay off the partisan hackery.

Ultimately I think Palin was a good choice.  She will appeal to Hillary’s voters, and Independents, and social conservatives.  Biden is now going to have a much, much harder time in the debate.  And either way this election will be historic (all presidential elections are historic, but this one particularly significant), either the first black president or the first woman vice president.

August 29, 1:31 pm | [comment link]
30. David Fischler wrote:

Just saw her speech. I think she’s an extremely smart choice. It’s true that she neutralizes the experience argument to some extent, but only if the Obama campaign doesn’t bring her lack of it up—doing so, as they did in their first response, only re-emphasizes his lack of any kind of executive experience.

Otherwise, she’s got an interesting personal story, will give permission for lots of Hillary supporters to take out their frustrations by voting for McCain, will solidify the GOP base, get lots of evangelicals and pro-lifers excited, and will probably cause Joe Biden to reign in his attack-dog tendencies for fear of looking disparaging of women. Politically, a very astute move.

August 29, 1:36 pm | [comment link]
31. David Fischler wrote:

Re #29: Actually, I don’t think the experience issue was going to be McCain’s most effective attack anyway. I think painting Obama as was too far left for America was always going to be Plan A.

August 29, 1:39 pm | [comment link]
32. Br. Michael wrote:

Well of course, the politicals will flip flop on the issue of experience.  What else would you expect them to do?  No one has ever accused them of anything other than expediency.  I think she is a good choice.

August 29, 1:41 pm | [comment link]
33. Cennydd wrote:

This lady has CLASS!

August 29, 1:43 pm | [comment link]
34. Chris wrote:

Again #29, you are missing the crucial distinction between President and VP.  Obama needs to have more experience IMO because he is at the top of the ticket, for the VP (regardless of party) the experience issue is MUCH less important.  The Dems have it entirely backwards with Biden at the bottom of the ticket.  And whatever nice things she said about Obama are about to obliterated her campaigning from now on.  The woman’s a hunter after all!

Believe me, the Obama and DNC strategists are not happy with these developments.  They have no angle of attack with her.  One word about her inexperience and it’s right back in their face 10 fold about Obama having LESS experience.

What I saw at noon made me more enthusiastic about the Republican party at any time since 1980.

August 29, 1:45 pm | [comment link]
35. Mike L wrote:

Wow, I’m shocked anyone thinks any significant change in who becomes president is made by the veep pick. Those already in support of McCain will say “whoopie, what a great choice”. Those already in support of Obama will say “Alaska? Big deal”. Those on the fence may be intrigued at first but in a week or 2 no-one will care and it will get back to McCain vs Obama.

August 29, 1:56 pm | [comment link]
36. William P. Sulik wrote:

She was on the Albert Mohler Radio Program this past May - I’m getting ready to listen to the podcast now.

Here’s the link to the download and transcripts:

http://tinyurl.com/6j4c7u

August 29, 2:09 pm | [comment link]
37. DonGander wrote:

Governor Palin is not the best example for my granddaughters.

Don

August 29, 2:12 pm | [comment link]
38. Words Matter wrote:

I have also marveled at how the talking heads have not been able to handle this choice….

Always a good sign…

I’m intrigued, having said for years that the first woman president will be a Republican.  And (barring an Obama win this fall), odds are good the first black president will be a Republican as well.

August 29, 2:24 pm | [comment link]
39. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Mike, you are overlooking the level of dissatisfaction among the conservative base with McCain. Ann Coulter has a website with an appealing title Get Drunk and Vote 4 McCain. A few comments on that website at her selection:

Wow I feel is giddy as … as a democrat! Just think of a true conservative ticket in just 4 more years! Palin-Romney, Palin-Hunter, Palin-Jindal!!!!!
It may be 9 in the morning in my time zone, but Cheers everyone!

Boy McAmnesty just might get my vote - I love Palin - too bad the ticket isn’t reversed - The GOP would see a 50 (not 57) state sweep!

And doesn’t this mean if McCain/Palin win - this will be the first time both P & VP are parents of serving overseas (in a war) troops? Talk about a pro-American political couple.

Four cocktails?

Try four glasses of milk!

Excellent choice. During her speech I shed a few tears….OF JOY!!!!

When the top of the ticket has problems with the party base the VP choice can be very important. Biden hasn’t solved Obama’s problem with his base. Palin has really helped Mccain with his. Keeping your base committed to voting is the first priority of any candidate. Widening the base is the second. This choice acheives the first and works toward the second.

I think I’ll be voting sober this year. grin

It’s already made my day seeing the sad faces of my hard left Democrat friends here in Maine trying to convince me (themselves really) that this will be a problem in the South as those good ole boys would hate to vote for a woman more than for a black. Ha. Ha. Ha. If you’re counting on bigotry (and isn’t that sweetly ironic to hear from these northern liberals) racism has always been a bigger force than sexism in the South, especially when the woman in question isn’t a bra buring, man hating feminist, but a man loving, gun toting mother of five with a son in the military. Ha! Standing next to Mccain she makes him look virile, or just damn lucky, like she’s a trophy wife. And rednecks would never have a problem with that. wink

Liberals just don’t understand us Neanderthals. We like real woman. We liked Thatcher over Bush Sr. because she wanted him to be more of a man, “Don’t go weak in the knees, George”, not less of one. I’m just enjoying this so much watching the liberals trying to deal with this. Mccain has made his base very happy. And that is going to pay off for him in the fall.

August 29, 2:29 pm | [comment link]
40. Judith L wrote:

As Governor Palin was speaking, I caught glimpses of her daughter holding the baby born in April.  A Down Syndrome child.  I couldn’t stop the tears thinking of all the babies who have been slaughtered in this country because a test said Down Syndrome.  I pray that the Palin’s example will save the lives of many, many babies.

August 29, 2:29 pm | [comment link]
41. DonGander wrote:

She is looking for votes because she is a woman. I am greatly saddened by that.

I could hardly make it through.

Don

August 29, 2:36 pm | [comment link]
42. Carolina Anglican wrote:

41. Yes, a woman who had incredible achievements.  I can only imagine that you must be an Obama supporter. Otherwise, there is no reason to be sad whatsoever.  She has actually DONE what Obama pretends to do.  I can’t think of a better role model for my daughter in the world of politics.

I would love for you to cite one example of what does not make her a great role model.

August 29, 2:40 pm | [comment link]
43. stevejax wrote:

Don #37—how is she not the “best example” for your granddaughters”? Seriously, what does that statement mean?
Don #41—unlike Hillary!?  Dude—you should really get you sadness-meter (sadometer??) looked at!!

August 29, 2:43 pm | [comment link]
44. Billy wrote:

#39, you are correct about the South ... Gov Palin will not be a problem; just the opposite.  And in most precincts in the South, Sen Obama’s race won’t be a problem - it’s his and Sen Biden’s tax and spend politics and their allegiance to the UN and fear of offending other countries with strong, independent stands.  Most Southerners, like most Westerners, like individualism, not the collectivism of liberalism.  They don’t want to rely on the government ... just the opposite - they want the government to get out of their lives, except to maintain order, build roads, and have a strong military.  So BO and JB don’t fit their idea of leaders.  McCain, and now especially Gov. Palin, do.

August 29, 2:44 pm | [comment link]
45. William P. Sulik wrote:

#35, Mike - normally, I’d agree with you, however here you had a hotly contested race between an inexperienced, but charismatic contender, who ultimately prevailed and the very skilled wife of a popular president.  There were a number of games played along the way by Mr. Obama which left a bad taste in the mouth of the Hillary supporter.  Choosing a sharp, skilled young Governor (who has more executive and administrative experience than both politicians on the Democratic ticket combined - and that’s not saying a lot, since she’s only been Gov. for 2 years) highlights the experience problems the Dems have, balances the GOP ticket age/youth and male/female.

McCain’s probably only going to serve one term, if elected - this highlights his VP choice.  He will pick up some Hillary supporters who will like the idea of breaking the glass ceiling. 

Biden (D-MBNA) was a disappointing choice who seems to have been selected just so he could be a pit-bull and attack McCain.  I think he will alienate people.  He undercuts all Barack stands for, whereas Palin truly complements McCain.  This is one of the few times, the VP nominee can have an impact.  (Please note I didn’t say make the difference, but if you get enough straws, you eventually break the camel’s back).

August 29, 2:44 pm | [comment link]
46. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Don, should she stay at home barefoot? Because she’s already done the pregnant thing pretty well.

August 29, 2:45 pm | [comment link]
47. Carolina Anglican wrote:

Don must be watching CNN or MSNBC and their sadness and bitterness is wearing off on him.  He should listen to RUSH for a few minutes and cheer up with the rest of us.  Of course, he may still be sufffering from hearing Obama tell us all what a terrible mess we in the USA are in and unless he is elected we might as well go eat worms.

August 29, 2:46 pm | [comment link]
48. Milton wrote:

Don Gander, you are simply going to get more specific if you expect us to have any earthly idea of what depresses you so about Palin being the VP nominee.  Her path to the Alaska governor’s mansion doesn’t sound like she got sympathy votes because of her gender.  ‘Splain, please.

August 29, 2:49 pm | [comment link]
49. Milton wrote:

#26, Archer, you commented:

...They were falling all over themselves last night about how how great a speech Obama gave and how this was a once in a lifetime opportunity for minorities, as if the Democratic Party was the only party capable of running a minority of any sort.

But Palin isn’t a member of a minority group.  Last I was aware, there are roughly as many women in the world as men! smile

August 29, 2:51 pm | [comment link]
50. TWilson wrote:

The Obama camp already has started the “no experience” attack, deriding her as a former mayor of a town of 9,000. Of course, it came from BHO’s spokesperson.. perhaps the candidate has grown leary of attacking women. I also love the juxtaposition of pro-choice RC Biden and clearly pro-life Palin.

August 29, 2:59 pm | [comment link]
51. Billy wrote:

#49, in the U.S., women are considered legally to be a protected minority by Federal and most states’ laws (as compared to homosexuals who enjoy no such protection under Federal law and in only a few states, though one would never know this, based on the news media’s coverage and the stance of TEC).  That is why you hear employers advertise that they do not discriminate based on “race, gender, creed, etc,” usually ending with “national origin.”

August 29, 3:00 pm | [comment link]
52. Observer from RCC wrote:

McCain is looking to re-create the Reagan base.  It may not be possible ... but he has a much better chance now.  Most importantly, he has created huge enthusiasm in his own party ...which was sorely lacking.  I am writing a check for the first time.

August 29, 3:07 pm | [comment link]
53. DonGander wrote:

An explanation can not be brief. Fundamentally, Government exists for the benefit of women and children and those who are unable to defend themselves. To have a woman as a soldier, pastor, or in secular governance is the abuse of those who we are obligated to defend.

Familiarise yourself with the concepts presented by G. K. Chesterton.

I would need to share with you how a close female relative followed current thinking into the military and and was predictably destroyed therein.

God made women. It is His right and duty to state what actions of ours glorifies Himself. If God does not care, then I am wrong, but I am convined that He does care. Therefore, I, too, must care.

Don

August 29, 3:08 pm | [comment link]
54. Nevin wrote:

I would need to share with you how a close female relative followed current thinking into the military and and was predictably destroyed therein.

And I would need to share with you how my wife went into the military, served for a decade, and was not “destroyed”.  She’s proud of her service- and the fact that she is now a stay at home mom with three kids.

August 29, 3:19 pm | [comment link]
55. St. Cuervo wrote:

#53 left me speechless

August 29, 3:20 pm | [comment link]
56. Milton wrote:

Well, Don, I guess Barak sinned and abused Deborah, a judge of ancient Israel, when he told her he would not ride into battle unless she went with him.  Not to mention Aquilla, who abused his wife Priscilla by deceiving her into pastoral ministry alongside him.

#51 Billy, I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek, knowing that for legal purposes regarding affirmative action that women are a protected minority.  But my larger point is that, given equal treatment and equal opportunity and equal pay rewarding the same qualifications, we should strive towards seeing everyone as individual cases without regard to race, gender, creed, or national origin, except where male-female biology dictates otherwise and not requiring religious employers to hire advocates or practicioners of actions that violate their religious conscience, or other similar cases.

August 29, 3:21 pm | [comment link]
57. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Don, are you, like John Knox, Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women? Very Presbyterian. I, however, am an Anglican.

August 29, 3:27 pm | [comment link]
58. athan-asi-us wrote:

As a former Alaskan and member of the Good Ol’ Boys Network there long ago, I am thoroughly delighted with McCains choice of running mate.  I think it is a brilliant move on his part.  Sarah has the potential of being the new Margaret Thatcher of American politics.  She has proven that she has the guts and fortitude to stand up to vested interests when they are in the wrong. Here is a person who would open up ANWAR for oil production tomorrow much to the distress of the Gores and Carters of the country. She sure beats the Marxist Socialists abortionists(Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Hillary,Gore etc) as a choice for our future.

August 29, 3:32 pm | [comment link]
59. To the Left wrote:

Governor Palin, changes the politics not one whit.  She is anti-choice, anti-environment, anti-science, and meagerly qualified.  The only thing she brings to the ticket is her gender. It reminds of the Clarence Thomas nomination.  Pick an ideologically compatible, but unqualified, minority and expect political opposition to be hamstrung.  That won’t happen again.

August 29, 3:42 pm | [comment link]
60. David Fischler wrote:

Re #59

It’s true she’s in favor of drilling in ANWR, but McCain is against it—in fact, I think the GOP platform will explicitly forgo it. But that doesn’t mean she can’t try to change his mind over the next four years.

August 29, 3:43 pm | [comment link]
61. David Fischler wrote:

Re #60

She’s anti-science? Really? Do you have anything to back that up other than mindless prejudice against evangelicals?

Oh, and when you say she’s “anti-choice,” you really should leave the euphemisms aside. You mean she’s against the destruction of human life in the womb, as well as the newly born following abortion outside of it, right?

August 29, 3:46 pm | [comment link]
62. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Don, I admit that I share with you the same dislike for our culture’s sexual egalitarianism. But you take the world as it is and do the best you can. There is no way that we are going to change the nature of sexual politics that much in our lifetime. So, in the meantime, a morally conservative woman in office is an improvement over a weak man. If women are going to be encouraged to seek secular leadership I would rather them have Sarah as a role model than Hillary.

August 29, 3:47 pm | [comment link]
63. Carol R wrote:

And for those of us who don’t want the American public to forget or downplay Obama’s refusal to promote care for aborted babies born alive, that baby that was shown on stage is a gift from God.  The likes of Biden and Obama and Pelosi would’ve certainly advised the good Gov. to abort.  Afterall, she already has four others.  What a shining example of a right to life.  I think for many reasons she’s a great pick.

August 29, 3:48 pm | [comment link]
64. Milton wrote:

To the Left, thank you for your ringing endorsement (in the eyes of most of us, after translating your disorted rhetorical filtering of reality) of Sarah Palin as Rep. VP nominee!

August 29, 3:51 pm | [comment link]
65. Billy wrote:

#60, if you think by saying the politics haven’t been changed to make it so, I think you are mistaken.  Even if she is all the negative adjectives you portray her to be, the politics have been drastically changed by her selection.  The conservative base of the Repubs has been shored up and may even be energized, when it was flagging.  The swing vote soccer moms of the world have just found a champion.  Those who like John McCain for his “maverick” ways, have found another ally to support - this lady is a true reformer, also - ask the Alaska Good Ole Boys Network.  Those who work for and live with disabled persons have found their champion.  The idea that the Repubs are out of touch with American families’ problems just went out the window.  Yours, #60, is only wishful thinking.  And Obama and the Dems have not a clue what to say right now, other than the experience thing, which backfires on them everytime they say it.

August 29, 3:53 pm | [comment link]
66. athan-asi-us wrote:

I was about ready to do a write-in vote for Paris Hilton (just kidding) due to my frustration with both parties.  The choice of Sarah Palan has infused me with a complete new attitude and energy.  I am preparing to rejoin the Republican party, make a contribution and support the ticket.  I am older than McCain if that gives you any idea of where I was coming from previously.

August 29, 4:07 pm | [comment link]
67. Christopher Johnson wrote:

Two things, #60.  She has more experience at actually running a government than the head of the other party’s ticket.  And last I checked, women are not the minority.  Unless only left-leaning women count as women.  As for your anti-science charge, I’d back that up if I were you.  That is, unless bearing false witness is okay on your side of the street if it advances your cause.

August 29, 4:15 pm | [comment link]
68. Carol R wrote:

Clarence Thomas unqualified??  So Thomas was unqualified to be a justice but BHO IS qualified to be Prez. . . .  Uh-huh.

August 29, 4:24 pm | [comment link]
69. Grandmother wrote:

I’m not so sure she’s in “big trouble” in her state.  She has over 80% approval, almost unheard of anywhere.  Her people know her better than anyone, so they’d all have to be corrupt to approve her.

Great choice, fantastic role model, conservative, environmentally aware, and show some “sense” when it comes to current events.

Grannie Gloria in SC

August 29, 4:26 pm | [comment link]
70. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Chris, apparently she is so anti-science as to think that knowledge of Intelligent Design ought to allowed in the classroom. What a stupid fascist airhead. hmmm

August 29, 4:31 pm | [comment link]
71. magnolia wrote:

‘Not only does she give moderate disaffected female Clinton supporters an alternative…’
can someone tell me which specific issues she is a moderate on? truthfully i haven’t read much about her, but so far all i have heard here are the extremes of the conservative platform.

August 29, 5:31 pm | [comment link]
72. stevejax wrote:

magnolia—I consider the extremes of the conservative platform fairly moderate smile

August 29, 5:48 pm | [comment link]
73. Sarah1 wrote:

Oh Chris Hathaway.

All this time you’ve been trying to explain to people—especially The Elves—that you are a moderate.

http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/15783/#272021

How they all misjudged you.

You are a moderate.

; > )

August 29, 5:50 pm | [comment link]
74. eaten_by_chipmunks wrote:

Stuff like this just goes to show how much American politics proves to be nothing more than an elaborate and manipulative game, the will to power on a grandiose scale exercised over a general population thought (and trained) to be too stupid to notice the obvious.  In addition, I can’t help but read McCain’s choosing a woman to be the complete opposite of the kind of liberated egalitarianism this move is supposed resemble.  Palin’s femaleness is being exploited in aspirations of male power just as much here as it has been historically for the countless members of her sex in millennia prior.  One doesn’t have to be a feminist to pick up on that.  And yet how many folks are just going to eat this up?  “McCain chooses the anti-Hillary! Yay!!  He’s so enlightened!  Look out now, Obama!!”  Gee whiz.

August 29, 6:17 pm | [comment link]
75. Gretta wrote:

I must admit that when I heard about McCain’s choice, my first reaction was that he had lost his mind.  I don’t think she helps the ticket at all. Her lack of experience is troubling. It would be less troubling if McCain was 10-20 years younger, but given his age and health problems I’m very uncomfortable with her inexperience.

Furthermore, I don’t think she’s going to appeal to Hillary Clinton voters unless the only reason they were Hillary supporters is that she is female. These candidates agree on practically nothing else. If the voting decision goes anything beyond simply voting by gender, I can’t see how a Hillary supporter would find Sarah an attractive alternative.

Finally, as much as I admire her for having her very special child, at some point it is going to dawn on folks that this woman has a THREE MONTH OLD special needs child. I realize that this is probably dreadfully NOT politically correct, but where is this child going to be while she is campaigning? She will either have to bring this child with her all over the country while she campaigns, or she leaves the child at home for most of the next two months while she’s all over the lower 48.  How is carting this baby across the country for the next few months good for this child - much less leaving him without his mother for that long?  I have a one year old. It is hard enough balancing normal work and a baby, much less meeting the needs of a child that would typically have more need of her than normal. And her schedule over the next few months is profoundly taxing to grownups. How can this be good for a baby?  Does this decision make anyone else slightly uncomfortable?

August 29, 6:27 pm | [comment link]
76. Clueless wrote:

#53 Odd.  Now I agree with Don that women should not be priests.  (The experiment does not appear to have borne good fruit).  However Deborah was a Judge of Israel.  Esther saved the remnant (at risk of life, since to enter the Kings room without permission was punishable by death).  Mary is considered first among the disciples.

England’s greatest ruler is usually considered Elizabeth I.  Victoria comes in for high marks too…There have been a number of effective women around the world Golda Meir, Thatcher, Indira Gandhi…

The fruit of secular women rulers seems as good as those of secular men…

Personally I think the choice is brilliant.  I was going to go throw away my vote on Ron Paul, but now I will definately vote for McCain.

A moose-hunting, sled dogging, butt-kicking, pro- life member of the NRA with 5 kids including an infant with Downs?  Amen! 

ONLY IN THE USA !  Ain’t no other country can put up a field like we can.  Is this a great country or what!

August 29, 6:37 pm | [comment link]
77. Carol R wrote:

Gretta,
Then you must be highly troubled by the prospect of Obama since he has even LESS experience and he wants to be Prez.

August 29, 6:38 pm | [comment link]
78. Clueless wrote:

Why can’t she bring her 3 month old with her?  After all, I imagine she breast feeds.  By all means bring her.  What else would she do?  I imagine she will bring the brood and home school.  That’s what I would do.

Can you spell “Photo Op”?

August 29, 6:39 pm | [comment link]
79. Clueless wrote:

PS.  My democrat male collegue is going to vote Republican for the first time.  He thinks she’s “totally HOT”!

August 29, 6:40 pm | [comment link]
80. athan-asi-us wrote:

Gretta:  With your line of logic, she should resign the governorship of the State which is not exactly a lay-around, pick your teeth job.

August 29, 6:59 pm | [comment link]
81. Gretta wrote:

Clueless: Why can’t she bring the baby with her? Well, she could. But how great is that for the baby? Constant flying on airplanes, not great for little baby’s ears, at least according to my kid’s doctor. Occasional rides are ok, but day after day for two months?  There’d be no way to have any schedule constancy or consistency for the child. It would seem to me to be impossible for the child to have normal nap times or bed times. I just can’t see how this is good for her child.

And I presume that you mean that she would bring a tutor for her kids - not that she would be homeschooling them herself (not that I have a problem with this, I’m just clarifying).

August 29, 7:00 pm | [comment link]
82. David Fischler wrote:

Re #75

Sure, McCain is using her gender in a bid to help himself get elected. But consider if he’s successful: after four years (eight if he goes for re-election, which I think is doubtful), she becomes the presumptive GOP nominee for president. And you can’t even say that’s it’s a matter of sexist follow-the-husband type elevation, since almost every VP (well, except Dan Quayle) gets the same presumption (Gore, Bush I, Mondale) At that point, I think it would be fair to say that her election as VP was a blow for gender equality.

August 29, 7:02 pm | [comment link]
83. Gretta wrote:

Athan…
I don’t see the two as comparable. As governor, she is not constantly flying all over the country, much less traveling for two months straight. She can go home at night and have a reasonably “normal” family life.  But with this campaign she is going to be all over the lower 48 not just for a few days at a time, but consistently for the next two months. She has a very young, very special child that needs her. I just don’t see how you can do both well. I realize that my view isn’t very PC, but that’s still how I feel.

August 29, 7:06 pm | [comment link]
84. Old Soldier wrote:

Gretta,
Mega Dittos.  That said Boadicea had daughters and still manage to do a full time job against the Roman Legions.  Incidendly, Gretta is or should be spelled Grethe.

August 29, 7:27 pm | [comment link]
85. Old Soldier wrote:

Incidently.  ooops

August 29, 7:28 pm | [comment link]
86. Clueless wrote:

#82

Flying can cause pain in babies’ ears, and it can temporarily reduce hearing, but it is not a cause of permanent hearing loss.  The pain comes from stretching of the eardrum caused by pressure changes. During take off, the air inside the airplane gets thinner and ear space expands along with the air in the rest of the cabin. As it expands, the air is easily forced through the eustachian tube, a floppy tube that connects the middle ear to the back of the throat. The eustachian tube automatically opens from the pressure.

During landing, however, the air becomes thicker, and needs to go back down the eustation tube. 

As long as there is no active, complete obstruction of the eustachian tube, (as from an ear infection) the extra air leaves the middle ear with a pop but usually not much pain.

During descent, as the air pressure rises, the middle ear space needs extra air to re-equilibrate the pressure.  However, during descent, the eustachian tube does NOT open spontaneously. A tiny muscle pulls open the eustachian tube only during swallowing, yawning, or crying. In children, this mechanism is less efficient than in adults.

So ways to deal with this are:
1.  Get any ear infection treated before takeoff.
2.  Make sure the kid has something to swallow (bottle) on take off and landing.
3.  Afrin nasal spray helps if it is okay with the kids doc.  (A dose of tylenol before take off is also good).
4.  There are pressure-regulating ear plugs (need to be worn the entire flight), and not taken off that help (available at WalMart)
Have the kid wear ear plugs the ENTIRE flight, beginning before take off, so his auditory pressure doesn’t change
5.  Quantus has folks breathe through tissue paper soaked in Eucalyptus oil (I imagine baby oil placed on Q-tips, and gently wiped round the inside of the nostril would be okay). It clears out the nose.

But given airport delays, she will probably be either going by ground, or will be flying private planes, not the jumbo jets that fly where the air is thin.  Nobody has trouble with the low flying planes.

August 29, 7:36 pm | [comment link]
87. Clueless wrote:

When my youngest came home (adopted at age 8 months), we had her in a Snugli attached to our body for months.  She cried inconsolably whenever she was put down, but was as happy as a clam as long as she was being held.  Went to meetings, rode bikes, worked, did everything.  She’s 11 now, and seems to have turned out all right.

Routines, schootines.  And nap time is for Momma after she finishes skinning the moose, and feeding the sled dogs.  What did the Eskimos do about “nap times” and routines?

August 29, 7:42 pm | [comment link]
88. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Sarah, I am NOT a moderate. But everything’s relative grin

August 29, 7:53 pm | [comment link]
89. athan-asi-us wrote:

Gretta:
You are evidently not aware of the tremendous support network that exists in this country for the treatment and care of Downs syndrome children. John Roberts of one of the Networks made the same observations that you have alluded to and they have been totally discredited by professional experts in the Downs field. She has addressed the issue publicly. Forget it.

August 29, 7:57 pm | [comment link]
90. athan-asi-us wrote:

Gretta:
Again you display your lack of knowledge.  As Governor of a State, that if overlaid on the South 48, would stretch from California to Maine, she spends an inordinate amount of time flying to the various Native villages and outposts and between Juneau and Anchorage & Fairbanks in the pursuit of her duties and constituency.  She probably had all five of her children on an airplane! (Ha) Some of the Native women do you know.

August 29, 8:09 pm | [comment link]
91. Clueless wrote:

I had two “special needs kids” both adopted.  One said to be mentally retarded and ADHD, and the other (the one above) said to be autistic.  I looked after then, with my sister and we both worked two jobs to pay for therapies and both worked long hours as docs, and we still managed to raise them somehow. 

My oldest is a Freshman in college, living in the dorm, and hopefully studying.  She skipped senior year of high school.

The younger is in 5th grade, is the most incredibly social child in her school and gets straight As.

It will not be easier for Palin, but I figure that someone who manages to run Alaska in between shooting moose, and raising 5 kids will be up to the job.  After all, we are told that Biden is a hero for taking a hour train home to Wilmington every night in order to parent his sons.  (And that was good too).

August 29, 8:13 pm | [comment link]
92. athan-asi-us wrote:

Wonderful Clueless! Nothing is impossible for someone with the wits and dedication that I perceive in Sarah Palin.  Look at the faith and dedication of the early Apostles and Disciples in taking the Word out to the pagan masses of the Roman/Greek world. Look at what they accomplished under pain of death. Hopefully, Sarah won’t have to face that hurdle.

August 29, 8:24 pm | [comment link]
93. recchip wrote:

As much as I am against women pretending to be priests, I am very much in favor of woman running SECULAR governments.  Let’s look at the following examples:

Elizabeth I (The greatest Queen of the Lords Chosen nation-GRIN)
Victoria-The Queen who presided over the Greatest Empire in History.
Margaret Thatcher-The Greatest PM of the 20th Century (well, at least a tie with Winston Churchill).
Golda Maier, Indira Ghandi, etc.

August 29, 10:46 pm | [comment link]
94. Gretta wrote:

Clueless, thanks for the info about flying, I wasn’t sure if you were a pilot or an ENT, but that is good to know. And it sounds like you have raised two very successful children. I hope I am able to pull off the same success.

Athanasius, Yes, I know that Alaska is a big state, but I still presume that she takes overnight trips and can get back home in reasonable time. But I can’t imagine that she was often gone 7 days a week - particularly after the birth of her child. Even governors of big states have office time. Sarah is going to be on the road every day for the next two months, and likely her travels will not have her near Alaska.

Clueless, since you are a doc (and I mean this with the utmost sincerity) if she simply puts the baby in the snuggli and keeps trucking, wouldn’t you worry that she will expose that child to every virus going around this country? She will be shaking the hands of folks from CA to Vermont. We just got our two young children back in preschool, where every child in there is sick because they are returning with all the sicknesses they are bringing back from wherever they were this summer. This child is only three months old. I defer to your knowledge on this, but again, that would seem to me to be somewhat problematic.

Also, I’m speaking from recent experience of trying to work while caring for an infant.  Within this past year I’ve tried to work with a baby in a snuggli, which works only if the child is happy being there. I’ve tried to work with a child in a port-a-crib, in my lap, and on the floor, with limited amounts of success. Babies don’t stop crying/screaming/babbling because you happen to need to have an important discussion with a client. They need diapers changed just when you are trying to work in a writing project. I’m not saying it is impossible (because obviously it can be done), but I also know that oftentimes something has to give. It would not be such a problem for me if her child was no longer a baby. Even a 2 or 3 year old would not be as much a problem. I just do not like the idea of her taking on this responsibility when she has an infant who needs her time and attention now. 

And actually Athanasius, I am very aware about Down’s Syndrome, the resources available, and the challenges it causes families because I have very close family members who have struggled with raising a downs syndrome child/adult for most of my life. It is very much a part of my lived experience, and has been both an inspiration and a heartache for my family. Sarah is only three months into raising this child, and I think with all due respect that she may underestimate how much this fact will affect her life and her time.

August 29, 11:11 pm | [comment link]
95. physician without health wrote:

I am late to this thread.  The one thing I will say is that now we will have either an African American president or a female VP.  What a momentous occasion!

August 30, 12:23 am | [comment link]
96. Chris Hathaway wrote:

Hopper, are you aware that the money coming into the US Treasury increased under Bush? I wonder how that fits into your political calculas.

Don’t get me wrong. I am infurriated at his wild spending. But I don’t know of any Democrats or liberals criticizing the amount he has spent except for military spending, which is a fraction of the total. It seems that the opposition was happy with the amount spent but they wanted it spent differently.

As for the Budget surplus: Didn’t that happen under a Republican Congress? I don’t remember the Democrats on their own ever balancing the budget. Also, was the surplus ever anything more than a projected surplus? That is, was there any year when tax revenues into the treasury surpassed expenditures for the same year?

August 30, 8:21 am | [comment link]
97. MJD_NV wrote:

The Dems now have a ticket with a front-runner so afraid of his own ability to lead, he picks an old war horse from the pack in order to bolster his confidence. The “candidate for change” takes us back to the past.

The Reps now have a ticket with a front-runner so confident in his ability to lead, he has chosen a young rising star to mentor.  The Master chooses his Padawan and shows us the future.

August 30, 8:49 am | [comment link]
98. libraryjim wrote:

Civics 101:
The President is not responsible for budgetary spending, either surpluses or deficits.  He can request and recommend a budget or funding (as for a war for supplies and equipment for the troops, for example), and he can sign bills into law, but it is CONGRESS who actually writes budgets, spending plans, etc.  A President can veto, or not sign a bill, but Congress can also over-ride those decisions. 

Economic issues are the results of Congress, not the Executive Branch.

That said, unfortunately, when the Republicans gained control of both houses and the White House, they went a bit power mad and spent like crazy.  And, yes, Bush never vetoed any bill sent to his desk.  And then the war resulting from 9/11 came up.  A very unfortunate series of actions and events.

Jim E.

August 30, 9:22 am | [comment link]
99. Clueless wrote:

Clueless, since you are a doc (and I mean this with the utmost sincerity) if she simply puts the baby in the snuggli and keeps trucking, wouldn’t you worry that she will expose that child to every virus going around this country?

Adults in political meetings are less likely to be ill then kids in preschool, so from the viral point of view, kids are less likely to get sick at Mommy’s place of work than in Day Care with 15 other children with runny noses. 

In terms of trying to work with an infant in a snugli, yes it is indeed difficult.  Bin there, and dun that.  The aroma that seeps into your clothes after a while, (not to mention car/home etc) also presents less than that professional air that most of us aspire to.  However, it can be done, though few who do it will ever be on the “power track”.  (But then who cares?)  We were fortunate that our child was extremely quiet (completely nonverbal and unable to sit up when she came home at 8 months).  She howled whenever we put her down but was quite content to sit quietly if held.

So it worked out.  I imagine that Palin has given the matter some thought, and has worked out a satisfactory solution.

August 30, 6:23 pm | [comment link]
100. Clueless wrote:

#87 I just realized that baby oil is mineral based and would not be absorbed.  So if you wish to use my suggestion above, olive oil should be used, and again just a tiny wipe .  One does not wish to generate an oil pneumoniosis.

August 30, 6:30 pm | [comment link]
101. libraryjim wrote:

Hopper,
As history has shown (and the statistics are available) when taxes are cut, revenue goes up into the treasury.  When taxes are raised, revenue goes down. 

Thus higher taxes do not necessarily pay for increased spending.  It just gives Congress an excuse to spend more under the illusion that they are getting more revenue (when they actually are NOT).

August 30, 6:41 pm | [comment link]
102. athan-asi-us wrote:

Indian mothers strapped their baby to a backboard and carried them around while they gathered berries, skinned and scraped deerhide (or moose/caribou hide), and moved from campsite to campsite. I can see Sarah doing that while she negotiates international treaties and breaks ties in the Senate. The babies grow up to have a straight back.

August 30, 7:09 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): Naomi Schafer Riley—Defend the Orphan: An Age-Old Christian Lesson Gets a New Lease on Life

Previous entry (below): NBC, FOX and CNN all reporting it is Palin for VP

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)