So...Sarah Palin.
The right has taken their identity crisis to a whole new level this week. The top of their ticket, whose position there was result presumably of a lack of control by the party base, is a boring old man with a fake record of iconoclasm but a real record of toeing the party line. He flubs lines, speaks terribly, rattles sabers he does not have, preempts even the current wildly stupid president's bluster at Russia, and is on record that he does not understand the issue that over 80% of Americans say is the most important this year: the economy.
What is a poor self-important philandering millionaire to do?
So often during these past months we have seen Barack Obama accused of what is tantamount to treason. McCain has exclaimed many times, sometimes managing to not trip over the words, that Obama would rather lose a war than an election. Leaving aside this hateful claim, what else can we say about the choice of Sarah Palin than that McCain would rather have an incompetent next-in-line for president than lose an election?
Palin has been governor of a state with fewer people than a California congressional district for the same amount of time that Obama has been "organizing" his massive presidential campaign. During that time, plus the time as mayor of Wasila, she has managed to nearly inspire a recall effort, run a city into debt, continue Alaska's record of being the state with the most government handouts per capita, try to ban books, fire public servants for political reasons, take money from VECO, deny global warming, promote creationism in schools, and promote abstinence only sex-ed.
The woman clearly gets up early in the morning.
A choice of VP, a person who takes over in times of crisis, needs to be made with the utmost sobriety. Does it rise to the level of treason, then, that McCain has appointed the political equivalent of Paris Hilton? Perhaps not, but it certainly gets closer than suggesting withdrawal of troops might be a good idea when the situation looks grim.