Frankly, I find her extremely annoying to listen to so I now turn the sound off when she comes on. Between her shrill voice, her hokey dokey accent, and her mean spirited high school level sarcasm, she sounds more like a SNL skit. She's very obnoxious, and since she is SO SO CHRISTIAN EVANGELICAL (PENTACOSTAL)...also a hypocrite. What would Jesus think of her attacking Obama's community service that helps the poor while she spends her time getting millions in earmarks for roads to nowhere? People will start to see the real redneck behind the podium.

I'm confident that Obama will win and she can go back to Alaska where we won't have to see her much longer.

Palin is a beauty queen..they know how to read a speech and smile at the same time.

Granted we need to look closely at her political record, esp. things like the disconnect between her talking the good Repub talk about less govt but in fact scoring a lot of that good federal money; but you're letting her off the personal factor too easily, Dan.

Quote: "Take for instance the sleazy slander that her Down syndrome baby boy may not actually be hers but Bristol's, despite the fact Palin's pregnancy was obvious to everyone around her." You have apparently read different reports than I have. I have read reports that her 'pregnancy' was a surprise to various people around her; various photos of her during that next time period are either of her behind her desk or covered up in some way; and that if she was 8 months pregnant on the plane home, it apparently wasn't obvious to the plane crew. (And a matching photo of her from a previous pregnancy shows she is obvious with her bulge.) A staunch 'family values' fundamentalist could easily want to cover for her unwed daughter (who was curiously out of school for some 5 months previous to the birth time; just a coincidence?); but there are questions of transparency and judgment here. And the same if she were the mother. What was she thinking of when she took a long flight home from Texas while in labor? And passing up obvious hospitals on the way to be in the hands of her gal pal GP? And so forth. There's still a story here. The people deserve to know the full story about their candidates.

And that goes for Obama, too. But that's another story. Here, we're in danger of getting a snow job by the best in the business - the Rovers. (Interesting, that they announced that the daughter was 5 months pregnant - convenient, that.) I don't want propagandic spin determining the people's voting. I want a country where things are straight and upfront, and it's a fair fight.

Maybe I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one...

Headline should read..."Palin Unqualified" it would have been acurate & saved some ink!

Dan,

It's 'inconvenient' not 'irrelevant'. Prior to reading your piece on Palin, I knew nothing about your political or philosophical leanings (I know I’ve read some of your essays, but never really categorized you), but I did read your piece in the WSJ decrying the "irrelevant" details that people are investigating during the public vetting of Sarah Palin. Your last line especially made me raise my eyebrows and get me involved enough to write this. I quote, "Standing by her daughter and counseling her to have the baby rather than an abortion is not only faithful to her own beliefs, it is also frankly none of our business."

Now that sounds like an almost centrist/liberal take on the surface - let women do what they want with their lives and bodies, because after all, it is her life and body... but, with Palin's severely conservative views on anything related to sex and women's bodies, I figured your agenda better be investigated a little to determine why you would have left out her personal and political philosophies on these subjects.

I mean, Palin has said that under no (zero) circumstances should our children (or I guess adults either?) be taught about sex - the biology/emotions of it, the fact that there are actually choices to be made whether to have it or not, and some of the options regarding those choices. No, Palin says "Just don't do it!"

And to think or even say indignantly “Her family issues (daughter Bristol’s pregnancy while in high school and unmarried) are off limits!” is so disingenuous as to almost be laughable. Palin’s “abstinence only” hard line seems to have really sunk in with those close to her, huh? I mean, what idiot really, in his/her heart, truly thinks that very large numbers of young people are not going to have sex ‘til they’re married, simply because you told them they shouldn’t? Or believes that by telling them "Just don't do it!" these young people with raging hormones and more open minds than their parents/grandparents (they have not all yet been indoctrinated with the dogma) will pause and say “Gee, thanks for the update on how I feel and what I want to do! I almost forgot I don’t want to have sex or that it’s not what you think I should do. So let’s zip up and head to church.” The fact that Palin takes this hard line, with no basis in reality, shows clearly how closed-minded and arrogant she is.

Also, on the choices women face (remember Dan, according to you, it's "frankly none of our business" what a woman decides to do with her life and body) regarding pregnancies that do occur. Palin again would offer women ZERO choices in the matter. The arrogance for one person/party/philosophy to truly believe they are smart/chosen/superior enough to decide what is right for every one of the 3+ billion women (regardless of what those women want or believe) in this world boggles my mind – and terrifies me...

Anyway Dan, getting back to your writing, I did find an article where you pound John Edwards (it's pretty deserved criticism of Edwards) for being an enormous hypocrite for having an affair while acting holier-than-thou in public. But Dan, why is Edward's personal decision to cheat on his wife not "frankly none of our business"? And while you made sure to point out the sexual transgressions of many prominent Democrats, I think I missed the section where you talked about Larry Craig's toe-tapping, "I have a wide stance" incident in the airport... I’m sure it was an oversight, ‘cause it was definitely more interesting than the others you cited (except Bill and Monica’s cigars of course).

I mean, I'm certainly not naive or un-educated, and I am a businessman; I realize you have a mortgage, bills, kids, whatever... that require money; and your decision to write whatever will stir people up (however selective and agenda-driven it may be) brings money into your pocket. But it is an insult to the intelligence of people like me who enjoy reading a variety of points of view. Of course I know we're not your target audience. But you are part of the reason a third of Americans are leaning Independent these days. We're kind of tired of and don't have much time/patience for zealots who can't seem to just discuss issues in terms of good/bad ideas, pros/cons, right/wrong, etc. without first being sure it's going to bolster your personal (or that of your paying customers) views and agenda.

I for one like good ideas, smart people, and visionary thinking; and I could not care less if it originates from or is considered conservative, liberal, red, blue, black, white, etc...

So Dan, I still actually do not have any knowledge of your usual philosophical leanings, but I imagine they are petty distantly to the right of center. You are obviously too intelligent and experienced as a writer to be unaware of your convenient informational lapses within your essays. So although you used the word “irrelevant” to describe those pesky facts about Palin’s views and life, I believe a more truthful term would have been “inconvenient.” McCain’s crew will have fun trying to reconcile all of this Palin stuff… maybe it’s as simple as “Do as I say, not as I do”