When the discussion switched to McCain and Bush, the Weekly Standard guy tried to argue that McCain is his own man, bringing up the oft-repeated canard that McCain called for Rumsfeld to resign.  Maddow stopped him cold and forced him to acknowledge that is not corect–which he did.  The WS guy next tried to argue that Obama was the real Bush clone on Iraq, and Maddow laughed that off, exposing how silly this claim is.

She is simply awesome.  For anyone who has wanted to shout (or actually has shouted) at the TV when Republicans mouth false, easily debunked talking points, Maddow will ease your pain.  I can’t wait for her show, which couldn;t be more timely or more needed.

It turned out that McCain’s “soul mate” had managed to offend or alienate just about everyone in her town of 8,000, including the police chief, head librarian, police commissioner, local (Republican) state senator, and even her mother-in-law. On her way to the convention, she had to take time to hire a lawyer to defend her against an ongoing state investigation. She was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it, she directed Ted Stevens’s PAC, she welcomed attendees at a separatist party convention earlier this year, cut funding for shelters for teen moms, never gave the war in Iraq much thought, and thinks creationism should be taught in public schools. And that’s the condensed list of scandals, gaffes, missteps, and deceptions.

As I have said, and as others have said, this isn’t really about Sarah Palin.  It’s about McCain’s utter contempt for intellectual honesty and utter disregard for the American people.  He thinks we are in the fight of our lives against terrorism, but he’s willing to gamble our security on someone with zero foreign policy experience.  For months, McCain pounded Obama’s inexperience, but his VP pick explodes that argument.  He’s supposed to be a maverick, but when Karl Rove told him he couldn’t pick Lieberman as a running mate, he caved.

After Katrina, it was impossible to take Bush seriously.  How could President “heckofajob, Brownie” be seen as anything other than a joke?  That’s what McCain is becoming.  When he tells us the legitimate questions about Palin are a “faux media scandal”, it’s impossible to take him seriously.  Even die-hard Republicans know Palin is unqualified and McCain is in deep trouble.

The traditional media is not equipped to deal with this.  Their mantra is “balance”.  When one presidential candidate self-destructs, they have to pretend that there is some upside–”wow, what a gutsy pick”– “will his gamble pay off?”  Chris Matthews just said Palin inspires Americans who want to root for the undedog.  Privately, we now know what they think–as Peggy Noonan said, “it’s over” for McCain.

McCain’s last ditch effort is to take on the media for daring to report  the facts of his breathtakingly stupid pick.  He knows they can’t fight back, and will likely bend over backwards to appear “balanced”.  The rest of us are under no obligation to take McCain seriously.  He has zero credibility–and when that’s lost, it can’t be regained.

Palin has the floor to herself tonight and I’m sure she will come off well–no one will ask her any questions and she gets to choose exactly what she wants to talk about.  But the curtain has been pulled aside and we all see McCain for what he is.  Not a maverick, not a straight talker, but someone who is willing to do exactly what Karl Rove tells him is necessary to win.

That’;s not it for today.  We also learned that Gov. Palin bravely wielded her veto pen to cut funding for a state program that gave shelter to troubled youths, including homeless teen mothers.  Is that the record of reform McCain was so taken with?  I guess compassionate conservatism went out with George W. Bush.

Oh wait, one more thing–her pastor suggested in 2004 that critics of President Bush could be banished to hell, along with anyone voting for Kerry.  Nice touch.

It’s a good thing McCain vetted Palin so thoroughly, otherwise we might be finding out some pretty crazy things about her.

It looks like this is just the tip of the iceberg.  The New York Times has an article today suggesting that McCain’s vetting of Palin was close to non-existent and noting that sensational stories are surfacing about the Alaska governor.  I think the Times is wrong to mention news of Palin’s pregnant daughter as the top item–one of the points the Times describes as “less attention-grabbing” is the real blockbuster: Palin was a member of the radical separatist Alaskan Independence Party for two years in the mid ’90s before she was a Republican.  Her relationship with AIP is ongoing:Daily Kos has a clip of Gov. Palin addressing the AIP’s convention this year.

McCain thinks it’s a big deal that Obama was once in the same room as one-time radical William Ayers.  How does he explain the fact that Palin was a member of a party that was formed with the goal of seceding from the United States and establishing Alaska as an independent entity?  What was Gov. Palin doing addressing this radical group just a few months ago?  Why in the world was she ever a member of such an extreme political party?

McCain’s campaign slogan is “Country First”.  The convention’s theme is “Putting Country First.”  The AIP’s motto, by contrast, is “Alaska First“. 

AIP has a website at www.akip.org but it looks like it has crashed.

The news about Palin’s ties to a party advocating secession from the United States has accomplished the seemingly impossible.  It makes the other Palin shockers–Troopergate, the fact that Palin was for the Bridge to nowhere before she was against it, Palin’s ties to Ted Stevens, her utter lack of qualifications–look relatively minor.  Once MSNBC and CNN stop obsessing over Palin’s pregnant daughter, they will eventually start asking questions about Palin’s ties to this radical political party.  In a sane universe, this is game over for Palin’s ill-advised candidacy.

It’s clear that the religious right loves Palin, but McCain may have to make a very hard choice: does he run for the presidency with a running mate who was a member of a political party that has advocated secession from the United States?  Like the decision to select Palin itself, McCain’s answer to this question will say far more about him than any gauzy convention claims about “the person McCain is”.

This is truly shameless and hopefully every Democratic talking head will do as well as Carville in knocking it down.  When any Republican responds to criticism of Palin by claiming this is anti-woman, the Dem should point out this is a shameless tactic, that using the gender card to deflect legitmate discussion insults everyone.

Larry King also asked Bachman, twice, whether Palin is the most qualified person McCain could have picked for his running mate,  Bachman simply woudn’t answer, even when King pointed out she hadn’t answered and asked again.  Bachman’s refusal to answer speaks volumes.  Every Republican who speaks in favor of Palin should be asked this question: is Palin the most qualified running mate McCain could have chosen?  I wonder if anyone will say yes–I don’t think so.

Now it’s the Republicans’ turn.  This evening, as CNN and MSNBC showed Cindy McCain and Laura Bush trying to rally the party faithful in Minneapolis, the networks broke in with the news that (1) Sarah Palin’s 17 year old daughter is 5 months pregnant and (2) Gov. Palin has retained counsel to help her defend against allegations that she pressured a state official to fire her sister’s ex-husband in the midst of a bitter custody dispute (yeah, it all sounds like a bad soap opera, or a poorly vetted running mate).  And, as the split screen kept reminding us, the levees in Plaqumines parish are near complete failure, even as President Bush is busy telling us that a much better job was done this time responding to the latest hurricane to batter the Gulf Coast.

Obama rightly said that Palin’s daughter should be left out of this.  Quite correct- I don’t want to see microphones shoved in her face.  But McCain and Gov. Palin have some questions to answer:  (1) if, as has been reported, McCain knew that Palin’s daughter was pregnant, why was this being kept secret?  was the plan to keep this secret until after the election (the birth wouldn’t happen until next year)?  (2) what does this say about the abstinence-only education policies and anti-contraception stances Palin and McCain have respectively taken?

As for what’s being called the “Troopergate” scandal (Palin’s ex-brother in law is a state trooper), the obvious question is why McCain selected a running mate who is under investigation for a possible ethical breach.  What happens if the investigation continues into next year?  Would that be a distraction for a theoretical Vice President Palin?

When Wolf Blitzer discussed some of these issues with McCain spokesperson Nancy Pfotenhaeur a little while ago, Pfotenhauer disingenuously tried to change the subject by claiming this was all a creation of liberal media elites in New York and Washington.  Looks like Wold may be getting fed up with this, as he pointed out that Alaska papers have been covering these issues too–Wolf should have added that 2 leading Alaska newspapers have questioned Palin’s fitness to serve as VP–as has the state Senate president, who happens to be a Republican from Palin’s hometown.  Even Palin’s mother-in-law, who isn’t sure she’ll pull the lever for Mccain-Palin, isn’t sure what Palin adds to the ticket.  So, Pfotenhauer is completely wrong–it’s not media elites questioning Palin, it’s those who know her best.

For the Republicans, their convention can’t end soon enough, and it hasn’t even gotten started.  The only question is what gaffe or breaking scandal emerges next.

The Politico briefly mentions that “serious questions remain about McCain’s pick–exactly how much he knows about her and her positions, past and present, on key issues.”  That’s the understatement of the week.  Is anyone actually planning on asking McCain some of these questions?  Here are some I’d ask McCain?

• If a Vice President Palin were called on to assume the duties of the presidency, what foreign policy experience would she draw on in dealing with situations in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, China, and elsewhere?
• How many times did you meet with Gov. Palin before you named her as your running mate?
• What makes Gov. Palin the most qualified person in the Republican party to serve as vice president? 
• What has Gov. Palin done to advance women’s rights?
• Do you, and Gov. Palin, believe that women in the United States face discrimination?  Have you discussed this with the governor, and what is your plan to combat discrimination against women?
• As a senator, what legislation have you helped enact that responds to discrimination against women?
• Does your selection of Gov. Palin give us an idea of how you would decide important issues facing you as president?

That’s just for starters.

Barack Obama deftly skewered McCain last night by pointing out that he makes “a big election about small things.”  That’s a good way to describe a campaign that runs commercials featuring Paris Hilton and Britney Spears.  It is the height of irony for McCain to have claimed that Obama will do anything to win the presidency: in fact, that ought to be the McCain campaign’s slogan: “anything to win”.  McCain has changed his position on everything from the Bush tax cuts to offshore drilling and the religious right.  Was it Howard Dean who recently observed that the McCain of 2000 wouldn’t vote for the McCain of 2008?  Whoever said it, it is on the money.

McCain has said that we are in the fight of our life against Islamic terrorism, that the stakes have never been higher, but he chose someone who is clearly not the most qualified candidate to be his running mate.  Does he really expect Americans to believe that Palin would be the best person to deal with Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, the health care crisis, and the economy, should the circumstances require?  Is Palin the person best capable of keeping the country safe, if she is required to take the reins.  Of course not–it would probably be difficult even to find many Republicans willing to argue this.  This choice is not about governing, it’s not about picking the best qualified candidate.  It’s about smoke and mirrors, somehow trying to convince women that they ought to vote for McCain because he has a woman on his ticket, no matter what her qualifications or her views, trying to place a shiny object in front of the media that will distract them from a gaffe-free, brilliantly executed Democratic national convention.  To say that McCain’s approach is condescending barely scratches the surface.

McCain’s campaign is premised on his love of country, his supposed ability to put country first.  But how could someone who really puts America first be willing to take the chance that the nation’s security will be in the hands of someone who, just two years ago, was responsible for managing a small town?

McCain’s selection of Palin is about one thing, and one thing only: a calculation that the selection will help him win an election.  I believe and hope that calculation is wrong, but the fact that McCain made this decision, the mos important decision a presidential candidate can make, so cavalierly, so crassly, tells us more about McCain than anything else we knew before.

To answer my question, I went through each congressional delegation (counting senators as well), and counted the number of Republican women who are members of Congress.  There are more than 240 Republican members of Congress, and just 26 are women.  The Democrats can beat that if you just count the delegations in two states: California and New York.  (California, with 21 almost does it singlehandedly).  Women are equal partners in the Democratic party, evidenced by their role in leadership, including the fact that the Speaker of the House is Nancy Pelosi.

This ought to be a national embarrassment.  It is certainly very telling.  The Republican party is not a party for all Americans–it is a party for the privileged few–mainly white men.  88 years after women won the right to vote, the Republican party still hasn’t found a way to make women a real part of their power structure.

Why not?  They don’t care.  That’s not what the Republican party is about.   It is most certainly not what John McCain is about.

Media elites have breathlessly gossiped over their manufactured controversy, wondering whether Hillary supporters would object that the impressive senator from New York didn’t get her due.  They should be asking how many years it will take before the Republican party can even conceive of getting to this point.  They should point out, at the Republican convention next week, that women are barely recognized by the Republican party.

Democratic primary voters can put 18 million cracks in a glass ceiling.  Republican women are still trying to break into the ground floor.  Next week, perhaps Chris Matthews will tell us what place the Republican party offers to women.

When I could tell Hillary was getting to the end, I actually felt badly–I wanted more.  She had some great lines, delivering an attack with genuine humor–noting that it’s fitting for Bush and McCain to be in the Twin Cities next week as, these days, you can’t tell the difference between the two of them.  She reminded us, with resounding rhetoric, of what the Democratic party stands for–the middle class, people left out of the corridors of power, what she calls the “invisible people” ignored by the Bush administration.  She emphasized the need for universal health care, noting that McCain does not see a crisis when 47 million Americans are uninsured, just as he fails to see the larger economic crisis we face.  She spoke of the need to end the war in Iraq and repair America’s alliances so that we can focus on problems the whole world faces, like terrorism and global warming.  She deftly connected the movement for womens’ rights with the fight for racial justice by invoking Harriet Tubman’s exhortation to never give up.

For a moment, I felt badly that we can’t see both Obama and Clinton on the ticket.  I thought of my 65 year old mother, who has, I’m sure, experienced real pain as she watched her hope for the first woman president disappear, this time.  But, for me at least, and, it seemed, the delegates in Denver, Hillary kept the focus on Obama.  She energized the faithful and uttered not a word that even hinted at discord.

So, the talking heads can keep gossiping, but Hillary showed how ridiculous their chatter is.  Hillary’s speech was as perfect as Michelle Obama’s, who she graciously praised as well.  I can’t think how Hillary could have done better.  As I mentioned, when she started wrapping up, I found myself actually wanting more, hoping she wouldn’t stop, though knowing she would.  Well done.