While it appears the sport of Palin bashing remains quite popular, I'm really of the opinion it should be given a rest. At this point I think it unlikely that anyone will change their opinions about her abilities and competency for being VP (with a strong possibility of being President).

I did come across this blog post I found interesting: 'Alaska Women Reject Palin' Rally is HUGE:

Never, have I seen anything like it in my 17 and a half years living in Anchorage. The organizers had someone walk the rally with a counter, and they clicked off well over 1400 people (not including the 90 counter-demonstrators). This was the biggest political rally ever, in the history of the state. I was absolutely stunned. The second most amazing thing is how many people honked and gave the thumbs up as they drove by. And even those that didn’t honk looked wide-eyed and awe-struck at the huge crowd that was growing by the minute. This just doesn’t happen here.

I like hearing personal stories like this. Such observations don't paint the whole picture but they do provide impressionistic color, bits of a mosaic. Particularly interesting is that this rally was in her home state.

Aside: I was going to write a piece comparing the most recent positions of Obama and McCain but stalled out on the research. One progressive magazine I saw recently spoke of the strong rightward drift of Obama's positions since the time when he became the nominee apparent back in the Spring of 2008. It's always been clear that, despite Obama's rhetoric of change, there are many things he will NOT change or will change only superficially.

In that vein, I think Obama is probably a Bill Clinton-type centrist. Lest you forget, Clinton wasn't a boon friend to civil liberties or working-to-middle class people. He was a friend to business and, it could be argued, left much of Reagan's legacy in place after taking office as well as forcing more people into deep poverty through some of his programs.

Aside aside: The following is a poor argument but it is something that has run through my mind on occasion. The US Presidency has almost become dynastic in the last twenty years: 4 years of GHW Bush as President; 8 years of Bill Clinton; 8 years of GWBush. For 20 years, a Bush or a Clinton has been in the Presidency. Sometimes I wonder if this played a part in the rejection/failure of Hillary to become the Dem's nominee. Sexism, personal antipathy, historical baggage, etc. played parts as well but I don't recall anyone speaking to the dynastic aspect. 24-28 years of two families to control the Presidency seems exceptionally antidemocratic. Yes, I know, we should look at qualifications, not familial connections but still...

Labels: Clintons, dynasty, Presidential race 2008, Sarah Palin, voting