bleedorange

Yes to all four of your questions. Do you think it would be wise to ignore the first woman to run a nearly successful campaign for president when describing the achievements of women in politics? Or while making a case to "shatter the glass ceiling," would it be better to disgrace her name? It has always sounded to me that she is appropriately giving credit where credit is due. Hillary's candidacy was historic and is rightly being acknowledged. That being said, none of that sounds like an effort to obtain votes from Hillary supporters. It's unrealistic. There are more female votes out

A large part of the base consists of that, sure, which is one reason she was chosen. From a political perspective, a candidate needs that portion of the electorate energized about voting. I also think she was chosen to appeal to the women voters in the swing states in the Rust Belt and West. I also think she definitely shares in McCain's views on fiscal responsibility. But I would agree that the one worrisome economic issue is her tax on the oil companies in Alaska. It has brought in money to the state, but has stymied future development and production. I think her views on energy pol

Yeah, he's without a teleprompter.

I think there are a myriad number of reasons why she was chosen. She has certainly excited the Republican base, which I'm sure was one of them.

You keep saying this, but I'm not sure why you are so confident that it is true.

Despite popular opinion on this board, not all conservatives or Republicans believe in a black-and-white solution to this issue. Besides, it shouldn't even come into play in a federal election. I disagree with you on the reasons she was chosen, but if that perception keeps being played up and that Palin was chosen to get "Hillary voters" (which couldn't be further from the truth), then perhaps the perception will become stronger and more widely believed than the real reasons. The only way to determine it is to see how Palin comes off tonight and during the campaign. I think it's too e

Easily the best post of the last 22 pages.

All I have to do is read the Obama home page to learn how liberal he is on the issues. That's enough for me to be extremely worried about an Obama presidency.

Yes, because the best way to get the answers to those questions is to ask the policemen stationed on the front line of protection, and the video undoubtedly starts right at the moment she arrived at that location.

You gotta hand it to her for her ability to manipulate. Freedom of the press doesn't involve antagonizing riot police and there are plenty of other proper methods to go about asking the questions she wanted to ask and the right people in charge to ask. But she got her video of her being arrested and the ability to say how outrageous it all was.

Come on now. How is that possible? She's just a woman.

Then what were the risks? Why did the doctor okay the flight home?

Actually, it doesn't appear she endangered anything for political reasons. Being from Alaska, it seems like that was important to her. She probably also felt really comfortable with her doctor (I know my wife and countless other friends who wanted to make sure they had their doctor instead of a sub). She consulted with her doctor and the doctor concluded it was safe for them to travel. And, guess what, it was. She made it to the hospital and gave birth without any complications. Unless you know her medical history and the details of that pregnancy, I don't think anyone can claim it was

Maybe not the advice you're looking for, but I would recommend laying on every mattress you come across and seeing what's comfortable to you. The expensive ones aren't always the best, although if you like soft mattresses (like I do), the more expensive ones seem to be better. I'm really not sure about the box spring. My guess would be to get a new one since those would wear out some, too. But I really don't know. We have a Stearns & Foster mattress, which is a little higher than most, but it is quite easily the best mattress I've ever had.

No kidding. It's a really close resemblance.

That's right, I forgot. If you say something enough times, it eventually becomes true.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Bush isn't running this year. The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution limits a President to just two terms.

Unfortunately, I feel the same way about Texas.

No it will be much worse for Palin since she's pro-life and will get it from all fronts: the women-hating side and wrong-kind-of-woman side.

With a wife and mother-in-law working in separate, male-dominated fields, it still never ceases to amaze me the crap they have to go through and put up with. Hopefully, when my daughter is old enough, it will be a thing of the past, but I see no imminent change in thinking in the near future. The reaction to Palin and the tear-down of Clinton unfortunately bear that out.

We see things differently about her qualifications then and I'm not sure what's so terrible about "[a] woman with these positions." What positions? Pro-life? Is that the main one? Do women only count if they are pro-choice? Has she been a crusader for this issue? The only thing I could find was her desire for a parental consent law that didn't pass, and then she refused to call a special session that would waste money for additional debate. She's a woman who rose up fast and became a well-respected and liked governor. The brand of change McCain wants to bring to Washington is less spe

Actually, no, I didn't. I figured since you thought it was important enough to share her complex response to McCain's interesting and thoughtful choice of a running mate, I could comment on my disappointment that the only thing that was looked at or noticed was her gender.