I just heard snippets on the radio; I'm not a fan. Sadly they only played snippets, so I can't do more than comment on a few quotes. So:

She impliedly believes in the presumption of guilt for anyone who the authorities believe to be a terrorist?

I'd be interested to know, what does Sarah Palin believe the link is between the invasion of Iraq and September the 11th? I'd think it's one of these:

P.s. I found this while Googling to make sure I had those correct:

Is that a real quote or a deliberate slur?

Sorry - I deleted the list that follows since it included all the alleged reasons why she might claim there was a link, some of which are sufficiently controversial that the thread would have degenerated instantly into a tedious flamewar irrespective of the rest of the post or the fact that the list was just meant to be inclusive of all possibilities irrespective of their probability of truth.

I guess in my "was woken up early, don't need to leave for work for another 30 mins, what to do?" frame of mind I missed the lead-in sentence before the deleted list.

Well, I was sort of hoping for a temporary reprieve. I think the problem with threads in which Frank becomes involved is that at least one person (myself, once) goes much too far with the opposing rhetoric and Frank responds in kind, making everyone look like they're being wholly unreasonable.

Having had time to think further about Palin's speech, I think it could be trouble for the Republicans. McCain's appeal seems to have been that he is a pragmatist who is broadly in-line with Republican beliefs but who does what he thinks is right. After 8 years of Bush, currently the most unpopular president in history (though, of course, these things always get exaggerated towards the end of term), I think a lot of people are turned off the Republican Party machine who were otherwise planning on voting for McCain because although he's connected with it, he's not a slave to it. Conversely, Palin has given easily the most partisan, opposition baiting speech of the election so far, and risks turning people off by being the person most closely interested in politics for politicians while most loudly proclaiming that she's not like the existing Washington elite, and simultaneously trying to get people to vote Republican, not to vote McCain.

EDIT: I think she does well on the traditional "people pick the president they can imagine themselves sitting down for a beer with" scale though, so that'll be a boost.

EDIT2: can anyone beat Palin's dinosaur statement (assuming it's genuine, though I'd like to see an original source before I do) for the amount of impliedly rejected mainstream science per word?

I read that she is a creationist. That's bit troubling. A creationist a heart beat away from the presidency?

I wonder what Chris Barry thinks about that....

One thing that gets lost in the noise is the fact that congress has had a similarly, and sometimes lower approval rating than Bush for the past few years. And who controls congress? The Democrats. Does that make McCain success so far a little easier to understand? To me it does.

As opposed to George Bush, or many other previous Presidents... ? It's a non-issue. It has nothing to do with choices a President will be making.

Palin represents the conservative, right wing base extremely well. I think McCain's choice of her is excellent (for his purposes), if you ignore all of the Alaskan political scandals. She's basically the female version of Huckabee with much less governing experience.

So why did McCain choose her instead of Huckabee? First, she's a woman. Because of that, her conservative ideas aren't the first thing that people talk about. Yet, those who are very conservative will find comfort with her being on the ticket. And he's been known to like younger women. Second, he doesn't have to deal with any of the attacks Huckabee made against McCain during the primaries. Third, instead of calling her "inexperienced" like he would Obama, he just says that she is a "maverick" like he is. But there's a big difference between having a record as an independent and simply never having to make any executive decisions.

When you look into her limited record, you see not much difference from any other Alaskan Republican: kill the polar bears, drill for more oil, and to hell with the rest of the USA.

But I think the pick fails on one important principle: the Vice President is not really elected by the people and thus he or she should be somebody popular with a lot of experience in government. Palin represents a few thousand people and is virtually unknown to the rest of the country.

She has no business being President should something happen to the 90 year old McCain. If she were to have run in the primaries for President and done well, then I would think otherwise. But to just be President because one old man thought you were cute... that's not good.

I'd say McCain has at least 500 heart beats left in him yet. Ha ha ha ha ha. Ha.

I guess the real question will be what it always is: which party has chosen candidates that appear to be close enough to the edge of their party's demographic that they pull in voters from the middle? Maybe the Palin/McCain ticket hopes that Palin will hush any attacks from yellow dog Republicans while McCain hits the middle ground?

Incidentally, do either party have an official line on what happens if their candidate dies or steps down in the period between nomination and election day? And what happens if the president-elect doesn't make it to swearing in day?

EDIT: what the hell, throw in the equivalent question about the period between election day and the meeting of the electoral college.

And you hate Frank Griffin for stating opinion as fact ALL. the. f*cking. time.

Nice.

Hence forth thou shalt be known as Thomas F. Griffin.

You can be Queen here on those grounds. Queen of Australia too

http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2008/09/most_accidentally_inappropriat.php

I hear that Charles is quite unpopular. If/when he becomes the next monarch, Australia might consider becoming a republic.

Um, he doesn't?