President Nixon also believed he was above the law. What was his quote ? If the president does it, it’s not against the law” ? Nixon Doctrine ? Perhaps that belief is that it also applies to V.P.’s in training. Is it just to stall until after the election or just to keep Ms. Palin’s name in the headlines. The bubble is bursting…

Attention to details, more time getting to know how the partner ticks (what they do, not what they say), and a little less ego, also helps. Does anyone think not reading papers, that you’re given to sign, is a good idea.. ever ? Fall in love, don’t fall off the cliff. Anything that you don’t want to share with the new partner should be off the table before you make any future promises. Pre-nups will never replace honor.

Senator Biden has always been honorable and is a good pick for V.P. Senator Clinton would also be good however her agenda is a bit to much voltage for the bottom of the ticket, especially with President Clinton actively involved. Senator Biden does need to be a bit more assertive now that Ms. Palin’s bubble is starting to deflate a little.

Another “victim” is heard from… What is it with Senator McCain ? Everywhere he appears he has either his wife and/or Ms. Palin as backup. We noted today that the curious crowd was a little diminished here in Florida. Of course Ms. Palin was doing a quick (no questions asked again) stop in Colorado.. FYI… again… with the recorded message.

I’m registered as an Independent and donated to Senator Obama on the day they announced Sarah Palin as the best woman candidate that the Republicans could find. If Senator Obama could get a Republican to name a woman for the White House (any woman… so it seems) he can probably convince our neighbors to make a few changes on the global front.

Hi Kitty, Correct… and it had no name at all for a awhile… until it became apparent that a little justification was going to be required. It’s not ancient history. It is a major conflict that is still actively underway, this year… when she’s running for the second highest office. It would have been acceptable if she stated that it doesn’t really exist, which is doesn’t. I believe that if she had known any definition (or even the third possible option that has been floated) that she would have stated one of them… any of the above would have shown that she was engaged and/or knowledgeable in the issue. The thought that we might be doomed to repeat history leaps to mind.. Thanks

Yes. It’s difficult to rephrase to such an extent. Mr. Gibson is very experienced but I’m sure that even he never expected to have to “drill down” to such a basic level while trying not to appear to be patronizing. In response to the Bush Doctrine question he was able to hold it together when she said “In what respect, Charlie ?” She did confirm her experience in that she thinks we should “keep our eyes on Russia” and fortunately for us, we “can see Russia from Alaska” …. that is efficient and does save us time and gas.

The concern of many women is that a few others are so willing to follow already… just because she is a woman. One prepared speech (with many-many-many repeats although nothing added) and one interview (not all of which has been aired yet). I’m sure we’ve given more thought to accepting a dinner date than many of us have given to the qualifications of this candidate for the second highest office in this country. Manipulation is more than a slight possibility… and “liking” her isn’t enough.

They picked Mr. Gibson and he did his best to ask clear /concise questions. Unfortunately her answers continue to be just “fluff” . She will be defended to the death however, by the Republican party. It was unfair to her that the Republican party selected her for their own desperate reasons and, she let her ego get in the way when she accepted. I believe she’ll be an asset to them in future years and in other capacities, but for the present she’s just heading the “pep rally. She is a “cheerleader” that needs to be reminded that it must be “half-time” in the game..