McCain's VP:

So, Sarah Palin. The man who would be the oldest to embark on a first presidential term has chosen as his possible successor a person of negligible experience.

Any cook can run the state, said Lenin, who was wrong about that, too. America's gentle populists and other sentimental egalitarians postulate that wisdom is easily acquired and hence broadly diffused; therefore anyone with a good heart can deliver good government, which is whatever the public desires. "The people of Nebraska," said the archetypal populist William Jennings Bryan, "are for free silver, and I am for free silver. I will look up the arguments later."

John McCain's opponent is by far the least experienced person to receive a presidential nomination in the 75 years since the federal government became a comprehensively intrusive regulatory state and modern weaponry annihilated the protection the nation derived from time and distance. Which is why McCain's case for his candidacy could, until last Friday, be distilled into two words: Experience matters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly, experience is not sufficient to prove a person "qualified" for the presidency. But it is a necessary component of qualification.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McCain's selection of her is applied McCainism -- a visceral judgment by one who is confidently righteous. But the viscera are not the seat of wisdom.

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) -- Alaska's attorney general says state employees subpoenaed in the investigation of Gov. Sarah Palin will not testify.

In a letter to the Democratic state senator overseeing the investigation, Attorney General Talis Colberg asks that the subpoenas be withdrawn. He also says the employees will not appear before the investigator unless either the full state Senate or the entire Alaska Legislature votes to compel their testimony.

09.17.08 -- 3:17PM // link | recommend
Natural Born Crooks

Presidential candidates usually have to wait until they're elected to start obstructing investigations into their own wrong-doing. But ready on day one as he is, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting a jump on this front too. I'm not sure I've ever seen an instance of a president, let alone a presidential candidate, quite this nakedly doing everything in his power to shutdown an investigation. And look closely -- Palin herself has at this point entirely turned the obstruction over to the McCain campaign. They're even the ones who make the announcements. (I want get into the battery of lawyers plumbers up in Alaska getting all the small fry to clam up and digging up dirt on all Palin's accusers.)

Meanwhile, the claim that the Obama camp has 'tainted' the trooper-gate investigation is truly risible. This investigation was well underway and already looking bad for Palin and her husband well before John McCain picked her as his running mate. (We know: we were already covering it.) What I do not think that many people know is that this investigation up in Alaska has actually been authorized and is being run by Republicans. They make up a majority in the state senate. The committee member overseeing the investigation happens to be a Democrat. But at any moment of their choosing, they could pull him off the case, overrule his decisions, or shut the investigation down entirely.

Palin's response to this -- to the question of how Obama could have tainted the campaign which is under the control of Alaska Republicans -- is to claim that there are actually a lot of Republicans in Alaska who oppose her. And that's true. But observing that a sizable number of officeholders of your own party think you're probably a crook too does not amount to an affirmative defense. Really, it doesn't.

The fall back defense, when claims about Obama's 'taint' fall flat, is that Palin's someone who 'shakes things up'. That's what she's done in Alaska and that's what she's going to do in Washington.

But a pattern of crony hiring and politicized firings of public officials all followed up by stonewalling and obstruction of justice really would not amount to 'shaking things up' in Washington. After eight years of President Bush, that's more like steady as she goes.

--Josh Marshall

With the release of the emails containing evidence of insubordination by the guy Palin fired in the "troopergate" tempest in a teapot it would appear there is nothing of consequence here. Besides, the fired dude served at the pleasure of the Governor and she can fire him or anyone similarly situated at will.

McCain and Palin are hoping to brazen her investigation out. It's bullshit. I don't see how any Republican can support this. And I don't see how she is going to be able to answer questions about it effectively. It's too much like the Bush/Cheney situation. Her excuses are not going to hold any water under examination.

And I'm pretty sure that she is violating the law in the EXACT same way the DoJ was, by refusing to honor legal subpoenas granted by the Legislature, the Republican-ran Legislature no less. We've had 8 years of an executive branch that spits on the Legislature and feels like it can ignore the law. Who wants more of that?

Absolutely. Do you question the insubordination and the right of the Governor to fire those who serve at her pleasure?

According to news reports, the insubordination was related to going behind her back to try and undo a veto of funding she had made. Can't cite the specific law that says the Governor can fire those whom she has appointed and serve at her pleasure but that is pretty common knowledge that government chief executives have that right I think.

You got a better chance of scaring voters about her with a charge of handling snakes and speaking in tongues than make this one stick.

It is a an attempt to scare voters about Palin's temperment with a political witch hunt masquerading as an objective investigation.