So, I thought Barack Obama didn't have the experience to be president? But Sarah Palin, who's been the governor of the second least populous state in the Union for a year and a half, does?
Pandering hypocrite much?
Chuck Todd inadvertently nails the GOP:
They really wanted to pick a woman, and there were no obvious choices.
I'm increasingly coming to the belief that, were I a Hillary supporter, this pick would infuriate me, not make me more likely to vote McCain. This pick is obviously an attempt to mop up the PUMA vote by saying, "You wanted a woman for president? Here ya go! Here's one for Vice President! That's close enough, right?"
But here's the thing: Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have nothing in common... except their gender. They have no policy positions in common and no common experiences. Hillary Clinton is a former First Lady and current US Senator who everyone (even Republicans) admit is an expert on health care and a hard core policy wonk. She went toe to toe with a bunch of deeply intelligent, powerful men in an endless litany of debates and kicked the s**t out of every last one of them. Clinton voters chose her over Obama because they wanted a sober, realistic, keenly intelligent, strong woman committed to universal health care with a great Democratic president at her side, not an anti-Roe pro-ANWR drilling creationist homophobe who only 2 years ago was the part-time mayor of a city of 7,000 people.
And here's McCain saying, "All you were really looking for is a woman, right? Here, take this one!"