Did John McCain just repeat George McGovern's fatal mistake? How long will she Palin stay on the ticket? Will McCain recover any better than McGovern?

Wouldn't it be great to have McCain do as poorly as McGovern in November.

Update: Commenters here aren't following the news. Palin: A Scandal We Can Believe In. More here.

Palin is under investigation in Alaska for abuse of power in Alaska. (Added: Not a federal investigation.)

John McCain is about to introduce Sarah Palin in Dayton, Ohio. First impressions are important. Palin is on the spot.

I'll live blog it below the fold.

By Big Tent Democrat

Steve M makes a point worth repeating:

[S]ome of the more piggish individuals on the Democratic side need to step back and take their cues from Hillary about how to handle [Palin] with class and respect. If Democrats are openly derisive regarding Palin's experience, it becomes chapter 2 of the "fairytale." Women will not like seeing her mocked any more than blacks liked seeing Obama get knocked around for his lack of experience.

I would add that Obama does not need to be arguing how important experience is. Let me also add that when Tim Kaine, who has exactly the same experience as Palin, was treated by the Media and the Dems as a serious and acceptable potential pick, it opens up charges of a double standard.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

My first reaction to John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin for VP: He just gave the election to Barack Obama.

McCain is 72 years old. The likelihood that his VP pick will be President during his four year term is a serious consideration.

A first term Governor from Alaska with only a year in the job? McCain now has no "ready to lead" argument to use against Obama. It was his best one. He may be ready to lead, but given his age, we have to consider whether his veep pick is.

More...

As I wrote below, there are good reasons for McCain to pick Sarah Palin, the first term Governor of Alaska. Now, Palin is as experienced as Tim Kaine, who was considered an acceptable VP alternative to many. Which was ridiculous. Tim Kaine was unacceptable.

McCain is also signaling an ideological contest, Palin is very conservative. Perhaps Obama's speech and not choosing Hillary Clinton as his running mate last night spurred this choice.

That said, Palin is a very risky pick and undermines many of McCain's lines of attacks - the experience argument. But the dynamics of this election are such that McCain needed something to shake up the race. This certainly does that. The discussion of Obama's speech have ended for the moment.

Believe it or not, if not taking the Romney path and hoping for some campaign event to change the math, I think Palin is McCain's best bet. It is a gamble, but when you are going to lose if you do not gamble, you might as well take the shot. I think McCain is taking a clear eyed gamble.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Update [2008-8-29 10:16:17 by Big Tent Democrat]: According to NBC, John Harwood is reporting that McCain has picked Sarah Palin as his VP.

If not Mitt Romney, then the Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin, makes the most sense for McCain in my opinion.

First and foremost, it would stop Obama's Media train in its tracks today. I have no idea what skeletons, if any, Palin has. Indeed, I know nothing about her really. But as a Media story, picking a woman would be huge.

Second, it revives the Hillary melodramas. And at this point, Obama does not need that.

We'll all know at 12.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

So says NBC. Hinting at Lieberman as possibly the VP pick. Puhleaaze McCain, pick Lieberman. Please, please, please. for two reasons. Number one, it would guarantee that Obama will win in a landslide.

Almost as importantly, it would pit Obama's new Politics of Contrast against David Broder's Unity '08 Dream Ticket. And we can smash, once and for all, the Beltway's grip on political discourse in this country.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

In my first post for Talk Left in the summer of 2006, I wrote:

How did FDR do it and can Democrats defend FDR liberalism today? Maybe not by calling it FDR liberalism but they surely can and do when they have the courage of their convictions. The most prominent of these instances was the fight to save Social Security Faced with Media hostility, Republican demagogy and flat out lies, Democrats rallied to the FDR liberalism banner and crushed the Republican attempts to roll back the clock. FDR would have been proud of Democrats in that fight. No triangulation. Good old fashioned political populism won the day.

And that is FDR's lesson for Obama. Politics is not a battle for the middle. It is a battle for defining the terms of the political debate. It is a battle to be able to say what is the middle. . . The lesson of Hofstadter is to embrace liberal governance and understand populist politics. It may sound cynical, but you must get through the door to govern. Lincoln knew this. FDR knew this. Hofstadter knew this. I hope Obama can learn this.

Last night, Barack Obama demonstrated he has learned that lesson. No more Post Partisan Unity Schtick. Last night was the Politics of Contrast. And it was Hillary Clinton's supporters, the Clinton Wing of the Democratic Party, that helped teach him. Remarkably, Barack Obama ran to the base rhetorically in the general election. More . . .

What if they gave a convention and nobody watched? Sasha Abramsky tried to find a bar in Clovis, New Mexico that was willing to show Barack Obama's speech. No dice.

In a town with numerous restaurants and bars, not a single one was showing the speech. Some had no televisions; others did have TVs, but they were tuned to one or another sports channel and the owners and bar-tenders were damned if they were going to change channel for the convention.

But, he argues, maybe it doesn't matter. [more ...]

Barack Obama must have done something right. The Wall Street Journal is approaching hysteria. Obama, we are told, "has by far the most liberal program of any Democratic nominee since George McGovern in 1972." It describes Obama's proposals as being "from the Great Society." That news will be reassuring to Democrats who considered him too centrist.

Democrats who think Obama may be too willing to compromise should be equally reassured by the WSJ's perspective.

Mr. Obama's concessions are nearly all rhetorical, a nod that Ronald Reagan had some good ideas or that the free market does some things well. But his policy instincts and political program always seem to turn left.

Too quick to negotiate with enemies, too slow to make war. A liberal advocate of big government and income redistribution. Is this the kind of change we want?, the WSJ skeptically asks. If that's what Barack Obama will give us, I skeptically answer, the answer is an unequivocal yes.

The people already in Invesco Field were just treated to Will.I.Am (of the Black Eyed Peas) and John Legend, backed by a sizable choir, singing "Yes We Can," based on a Barack Obama speech, with the words of the speech echoing in the background, as in the video above. Whether you like Obama or not, it was pretty cool to watch.

Bill Kristol lying about Bill Clinton:

Clinton was too inexperienced to be commander-in-chief in 1992. . . . He was handed an enviable situation in foreign policy . . . Over the rest of the decade, Clinton managed to allow further erosion in the position of American strength he inherited. Clinton didn’t, as he now claims, lead us “to a new era of peace.” He inherited a hard-won peace, failed to lead, and part of his legacy is 9/11.

Heh. The Left blogs are now back in the business of defending Bill Clinton, so you can see the refutation of this nonsense in other venues. But Kristol's use of the word "inherited" brought the famous Onion headline Bush: "Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Over", to mind. More. . .