Frankly, I can't even bare to read the article. Why, one, is she given any exposure, and, two, how can you put her name and "President" in the same sentence. It's just feeding the beast, rewarding inappropriatene ss.

The press created this monster and she continues to dominate them with free publicity. I often have asked - if she didn't photograph so well, would they pay attention to her? She is the Paris Hilton of politics and any intelligent journalist should realize they are being used - and abused with her trivia, insults and ignorance. Give the public a break and grow up and stop pandering to the fringe as they are dangerous and a menace to the rest of us.

She is nothing but a money whore and wish we could ship her back and never hear from the bimbo again!!!!!

I agree with the above, i.e. "The press created this monster"
Please give us a break and treat important, intelligent, useful subjects

I don't understand why we are even talking about this person. I agree with the poster above who said this is just feeding the beast. But more than that, why waste words on her.

I agree that giving Palin so much "airspace" tends to keep her in the public eye, and that gives her more credibility. Unfortunately, that works in her favor with people who listen to 'faux' news.
We have got to get back on track to reach the people who look for truthfulness with real news,

why is hate the only response. Tolerance?: "tolerate" my love of country because I am Muslim: that is rich. and i am supposed to be grateful that you let me serve?

god save us because the hate you all live by comes exactly from you know who.

WHY, oh WHY do you give this IMBECILE any credibility? The woman has shown herself to be an uneducated rube with NO moral fiber, No sense of self and NO emotional connection to humanity, as evidenced by her dragging her disabled infant hither and yon during her campaign for V.P. without regard for the hour, weather or venue. Give it up, David and quit feeding her obsession with "lame-stream media" attention. You are guilty of feeding her habit!

Sarah Palin has made mistakes, but they are few and far between. I'm an Obama supporter and she is the only one who has a chance to defeat him.

Forget that she isn't "tough" enough to be President; she isn't SMART enough to be President.
In 1992, Bill Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar was elected. In 2000, a Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore, got the most votes. We were treated to eight years of the dumbest President we've ever had (G.W. Bush is ranked 39 of 44 for nothing), and in 2008, the backlash to his ignorance gave us Barack Obama. The memory of Dubya will be too fresh in 2012 for Palin to have a prayer.

Right on, Susie Q. I was a marketing major in college. The first thing you learn in Marketing 101 is "Perception is reality."

Sarah Palin is the show-bizzy nitwit idol of the manipulative right-wing conspiracy, which is out to reclaim the control over the country that W and his cohorts had until their finagled economy tanked. These agitators know that Americans who watch only Fox, never read a newspaper or news magazine (or anything at all), and otherwise devote their time and attention to entertainment glitz will vote on the instructions of the cabal. This "base" eagerly regurgitates slogans and otherwise falls for lies, contrived "exposes" and idiotic dress-up rallies. But they vote, and we can't forget that bald numerical detail. We can't afford to write off Sarah just because she's so stupid -- she has a base that will vote, as directed.

I don't think any of us liberal have been hiding for the past decade. I was involved with a wide variety of liberal sites even before GWB paid for the 2000 election, and a proud member of places like democraticunder ground.com, crooksandliars, bartcop, and oh-so many more sites. DU didn't open until just after the inauguration, but the WWW reverberated with the sound of the left and continues to do so for the future as well.

I'm all for the US finally having a female president; HOWEVER, Sarah Palin isn't the choice. I don't think the US will ever have a female president because the country must maintain it's "macho" image that it believes gives it global respect. It's a sad reality coming from a country that still insists that there is equality between the sexes.

What are you all afraid of? She is a governor from a small state that has spoke her mind about what the press is all about. It is funny that two weeks after her being put on the ticket, the world knew her family, record, and personal life yet the press had 2 years to look at Obama and neglected to do so. As Tom Brokaw said on Charlie Rose's show the friday before the election; "We really don't know what Obama stands for nor do we know how he will govern".

This was typical of the media, claim ignorance when it was their job to vet the person running for president. They decided on the candidate without knowing who he was. To this day regardless of the constant mistakes he has been making, they refuse to, most of the time, even report if it would show him as incompetent.

As usual, you get what you deserve. Just hope the country is strong enough to make it past his agenda.

A little history please. Ronald Reagan was no more than a shill for the fascists in this country, from his betrayal of the Screen Actor's Guild to his pimping for General Electric. I once predicted that the American public would never be stupid enough to elect 1)Richard Nixon 2) Ronald Reagan but realized by Bush that they surely might and then did. If you are counting on the great unwashed masses to preserve liberty and democracy, lot's of luck.

INdeed - why give her credibility by playing stenographer to her every stupid comment? A little less face time by that twit would do all of us a lot of good.

As a liberal/radical retired newspaper columnist, I'm a little uneasy with an off-the-record website in which "reporters" discuss such things as ways to be critical of a political candidate. Part of my problem is the blurring of the meaning of reporter -- meaning one things on a regular daily newspaper, another in opinion magazines. I was once a regular reporter, but once I became a columnist, mising my own labeled opinion with facts, I ceased calling myself a reporter. But with the mix we have today, it's little wonder that the general public seems to believe that all reporters have a political bias that's reflected in their reporting. All that said, I believe Sarah Palin is a danger, not because she's dumb -- I think she's intuitively smart in a lot of ways -- or because she's conservative, but because she has the ability to mislead the ill-informed and uniformed masses.