Simply, I agree with the author. We should be judging Palin on her policies not her gender.

A female politician does not speak for women necessarily nor does a male politician necessarily speak against women.

Pity we can't get past gender and just focus on policies and what it is candidates stand for.

If you have ever spent any time in America, it is clear that Americans do think very differently as do all other cultures. Would there be any noise made about the huntin' shootin' fishin' gun totin' creationist Palin if she was a male? In the radicalised Christian US they lap this stuff up.

Just to add one further, admittedly glib comment on this. If you wanted to summarise the messages in the Republican campaign following Palin and McCain's convention speeches, you might do so as follows:
"Walk softly, speak slowly and carry a big stick" Teddy Roosevelt
"we're going to turn you loose to do what you do best" Ronald Reagan
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask rather what you can do for your country" John F Kennedy.

I'm not sure who will win this election, but it's going to be great fun from here on in.

I don't blame CJ Morgan for being frustrated. There's very little discussion here, just vein-popping boosterism. You could replace pretty much all of the pro-Palin posts with "U-S-A! U-S-A!" and they wouldn't lose any subtlety.

I particularly like the suggestion that all the female voters sophisticated enough to back Hillary Clinton are now going to say "dat Sarie Pail-in's gonna whoop tha muslim Obama like a big ol' bull moose! She got ma vote fer sure!"

Trust me, Sarah Palin doesn't pose any threat to whatever you think the Left is. Sensible people are just annoyed that the conservative commentariat is trying to present Palin as being exactly what they need her to be, rather than what she really is.

<<Bought into WW2...>>

Up until Pearl Harbour, the US plan was to wait until the dust settled in Europe, and begin trade negotiations with Grand Emperor Hitler. It was only when the US perceived a threat to its own interests that it started militarising. Nations don't act unselfishly.

<<Bought into a war in Vietnam...>>

That's just fantasy and an attempt to rewrite history. We lost in Vietnam fair and square, and the domino effect is long acknowledged to have been incorrect in theory and practice. I recommend "The Fog of War" in which the architect of the Vietnam war, Robert McNamara, explains how wrong they got it.

Continued...

...

<<Bought into Iraq...>>

Close. The US bought into Iraq, and now it's bought a fragile ceasefire. As many have noted, the US is now paying Sunnis not to shoot Coalition`soldiers.

<<Bought into Afghanistan when the rulers of that country refused to hand over the terrorist organisation...>>

Refused to hand over the Saudi leader of a Saudi organisation which organised from Saudi Arabia for Saudis to attack the WTC. Strange that we're spending billions on a war in Afghanistan but haven't invaded Saudi Arabia yet. Do you think the cosy personal relationships the Bush family has there might be relevant?

As for "largest incidents of mass murder ever", that's sheer hyperbole. Or is it safe to presume that American lives are worth more than Jewish, Cambodian or African lives, in your view?

The US is, overwhelmingly, a force of good in the world, but you can't expect us to buy the notion that its good deeds mean it can't be criticised for the vicious, cynical, outright evil things it does under the same cover of lofty moral righteousness.

Kipp “I would love to support your belief in Maggie Thatcher,”

It will be difficult for you, if your reading source is the “Sun” (and other comics).

“full front page "GOTCHA",”

Did you ever get past page 3 ?

I read the Daily Telegraph, it had a vocabulary far larger than the 300 words which stretched most Sun readers.

“after over three hundred young naval Argentineans had been killed and drowned on the Belgrano, and they were'nt even in the no go zone.”

I guess any aggressive Argentinean dictator, who ordered the bombing and destruction of British ships and sailors should ponder the precise limits of any “No Go” area.

I mentioned Admiral Belgrano because I realized you would not resist bring it up.

Sooooooooo predictable

“That truely showed up her indifference to the value of human life.”

And this little diatribe of yours completely ignores the unprovoked attacks and undeclared invasion by the Argentinean Military Machine and the killing of -

British troops on British soil.

“To add, her arrogance showed when she made Dennis an hereditory knight, a title which her son Mark now holds, who turns out to be a crook and a mercenary.”

What a venal person you are.

The Queen decides who she will honour.

The tradition of British Prime Minister is to be so honoured, in Margaret’s case, elevated to Baroness (and her partner / husband is, following tradition, elevated with her).

As to her son, do you hold the crimes in an African court (hardly the most reliable of judicial systems) against the children must fall back onto the parents or do you support the form of jurisprudence practiced in modern western democracies?

“Your belief in this woman demeans my respect for yourself!”

Who you choose to respect is up to you and of no concern to me.

I respect Margaret’s contribution to improving the quality of life of all British people who valued honesty.

Cuphandle, spraying ranting drool!

I doubt a single American know who you are and care even less.

Live and let live or they might nuke you (please).

Ruby Hamad writes:
“Let’s see. Governor Palin is against abortion in all cases except immediate threat to the mother, favours teaching creationism in the science classroom alongside evolution, wants to teach abstinence-only sex education……”
Well I agree as a libertarian my own view is strongly “pro-choice. The reality is clear; to get elected into office in America and in Australia it is necessary to play the electorate. I have no doubt that the above opinion is the strongly held but erroneous views of many who will vote for her.

Sorry abortion is a secondary issue here, the immediate struggle is to ensure the White House does not fall to lefties, feminists and/or other members of the red/green brigade.

Mrs Palin is one strong minded cookie. The republicans are correct in advocating an expansion of nuclear power generation and exploring for oil in the vast tundra of Alaska. I am sure the historical and geological evidence is strongly in support of Palin’s questioning the simplistic proposition, “climate change is man made.”
At least with John McCain and Sarah Palin, America will not be embarking on the economically destructive program of carbon trading – a costly solution to a non problem.

One other thing Sarah is tough enough to go head to head with Vladimir Putin. Perhaps one day, we will have the pleasure of seeing the pair enjoying a recreational bear hunt.