Josh continues to want to beat this horse, so to speak, and, maybe there is something there, but I suspect not and attacking her for this plays into the hands of those trying to bill their ticket as "reformers."

As can be seen from the "regular" Republicans in Alaska eager to attack her, she became Governor by succesfully taking on the party establishment to defeat an incumbent from her own party, an ally of Ted Stevens and, of course, the father of the woman he appointed to replace himself as Senator. 

When someone comes to office under these circumstances, it is reasonable for her to be wary of the people who came to state government under her predecessor.  Add suggestions of domestic violence and it is hardly unreasonable for a new Governor, who has defeated the prior Governor from her own party, to wonder what the State Police are doing as to such questions and whether ten or five day suspensions are sufficient.

Yes, she probably should have stayed out of it, and certainly not lied about it, but defending one's sister and father is really not the type of "corruption" that moves me to rage.

I tried to describe what the main focus of this nomnation should be by posting a diary at Daily Kos which I tried to entitle "Women are Shallow and Stupid" until I was convinced it caused more trouble than attracting readers which, concededly, was the goal.

In any event, the point was that as outlandishly out of touch with reality, and as shocking as it would be to actually hear someone state that as fact in the 2008, it is, in fact, a basic premise of the Republican Party of today.  They are nothing but the sum of the dirty jokes told in men's locker rooms and other gatherings of "the guys."  I have heard them all:  the Polish jokes of our time.  You wince and move on.

Who do they think they are kidding?  They are going to stand up for Hillary Clinton after the dozen years of jokes and guffaws about her, most of which end with some allusion to her sexual preference, or that of Janet Reno?  They will vindicate the rights of women by simply nominating a woman, any woman, to be vice president?  And that will work?  I hope not, but they are depending on it.

But why would that be a surprise?  As Paul Krugman has brilliantly written, today's Republican party bears no resemblance to the one he and I knew as we grew up.  

They have gone well beyond the full circle to the party of big financiers and money who fought President Roosevelt's New Deal until they were almost removed as a political party, then  pretended the New Deal was their idea.  In 1964, they started the march back to their roots:  no more Javits', Nelson and Winthrop Rockefellers, Bill Scrantons, Chuck Percys or even George Romneys would be tolerated, in this new party (somewhat put off track by the 1964 presidential election, but back in force after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 gave them control of the South).

Now, they are a party which won't allow their candidate to pick a candidate he knows, likes and trusts:  Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge (no accounting for taste) or even a rich guy he does not like, but who others in his party admire, Mitt (son of George) Romney.

I hold no brief for any of those guys, but all three could, in a pinch, credibly serve as President of the United States.

Instead, the amalgam of cranks, kooks and lunatics, whose religious beliefs must be mine or else, who are frustrated by the demise of the Soviet Union as a cause to rally against, or even declare war on, who tried to run the last Democratic president out of office by a hypocrisy that was breathtaking (they impeached him!!! but couldn't find one member of their party willing to question why their President was reading books to schoolchildren and vacationing after receiving information of a impeding attack on this country), pretends to be outraged that Senator Obama did not pick the admirable Senator Clinton as his running mate, and offers the governor of a state who has served for two years and tells us that experience makes her more qualified than Senator Obama to be president.

Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Carlie Fiorina, Meg Whitman?  All flawed, yes, but credible candidates for vice president, unless, at least in Fiorina's case, her pro choice position disqualifies her.  (Had she been the nominee she might have finally realized that Senator McCain is not on her side on that issue, just as Governor Palin might have to push her running mate around on this drilling in Anwar issue.)

That is the point.  It is not Senator McCain (who, as Senator Kerry brilliantly pointed out on Wednesday, does not even resemble the candidate of the same name who ran in 2000). It is not Governor Palin (who, as noted above, had the courage to run against the Republican establishment in Alaska and unseat a Republican Governor).  It is, as Senator Obama and President Clinton told us last week, the Republican Party which has disqualified itself from any role in the nation we are trying to rebuild from the mess they have created, as we sink into oblivion, just when the world needs us to point to the best of what humans can achieve, as we have done so many times, particularly after Presidents Roosevelt and Kennedy explained our obligations to do so.

Postscript:  Apparently more people of my sex find this "strategy" to be acceptable than do women, who are, rightfully, insulted by it.