Most people hold positions on specific issues that stay true to their core, certain bedrock, unflinching principles.  

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin demonstrated one of her allegedly bedrock, unflinching principles a long, long time ago - well, um, almost seven months ago - when she refused to endorse Arizona's senior Senator for President:

Some Alaska Republicans are conflicted over McCain, including Gov. Sarah Palin. They like his maverick reputation and military background but not his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

"She said she'd like to support McCain but felt she couldn't at this particular time because of his stand on ANWR," said the governor's spokeswoman, Sharon Leighow.

And what is McCain's stand on ANWR?

First: the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. McCain has always been against oil drilling and exploration in ANWR.

So, as recently as less than seven months ago, Sarah Palin refused to even endorse McCain because of a position of McCain's that, in a relatively rare occurrence, has not changed.  That's how strongly principled she was (note the past tense) in support of drilling in ANWR.

But now she's willing to sell out her principle in the name of political opportunism, certainly going well beyond just endorsing McCain.

Maybe McCain is planning to trade in his old position for a newer model, which would also appease the "Drill Here, Drill Now!" crowd.  Of course, that would be yet another major league flip-flop on John McCain's end.

In short, until McCain is willing to flip-flop on ANWR, Palin will have to backpedal on her earlier refusal to support McCain over ANWR, lest she face accusations of political spinelessness, to go along with the thin resume, far-right-wing extremism, abuse of power scandal, and financial mismanagement.

This year John McCain is reprising the Republican Party's quadrennial effort of trying to woo Jewish voters, a group that overwhelmingly supports the Democratic Party and which is currently backing Barack Obama by a 2-to-1 margin (though I'd suspect that estimation is a little low). But if the GOP were truly serious about this outreach, would they really have put someone who appears to be a disciple of Pat Buchanan -- Sarah Palin -- on their ticket for November.

The Nation's Chris Hayes scored a big scoop this morning, unearthing a report from 1999 of Palin's support of then-Independent Presidential candidate Buchanan. And per Ben Smith, Buchanan said today on MSNBC that Palin was "brigader [for his campaign] back in 1996." Take a look:

As Smith notes, Buchanan's statements and actions over the years have earned him his own page on the Anti-Defamation League's website, highlighting statements ranging from "Capitol Hill is Israeli occupied territory" from 1990 and "If you want to know ethnicity and power in the United States Senate, 13 members of the Senate are Jewish folks who are from 2 percent of the population. That is where real power is at..." from just last year.

And yet from multiple sources, both contemporaneous and more recent from those intimately involved, Palin appears to have been a long-time supporter of Buchanan. This is the way McCain and the Republicans expect to court Jewish voters (as well as the roughly 90 to 95 percent of Americans who are to the left of Buchanan)?

Thought that the investigation into the alleged improprieties of the presumptive Republican Vice Presidential nominee wouldn't come back to bite John McCain, that it doesn't matter whether a presidential campaign fully vets its number two pick? Think again. The Washington Post does some great reporting and gets ahold of the man Palin had fired -- allegedly for failing to fire her one-time brother-in-law --who had not previously spoken to the national press.

[Walter] Monegan, 57, a respected former chief of the Anchorage Police Department [who was fired in June as Alaska Public Safety Commissioner], said in an interview with The Washington Post's James V. Grimaldi on Friday that the governor repeatedly brought up the topic of her ex-brother-in-law, Michael Wooten, after Monegan became the state's commissioner of public safety in December 2006. Palin's husband, Todd, met with Monegan and presented a dossier of information about Wooten, who was going through a bitter custody battle with Palin's sister, Molly. Monegan also said Sarah Palin sent him e-mails on the subject, but Monegan declined to disclose them, saying he planned to give them to a legislative investigator looking into the matter.

Palin initially denied that she or anyone in her administration had ever pressured Monegan to fire the trooper, but this summer acknowledged more than a half a dozen contacts over the matter, including one phone call from a Palin administration official to a state police lieutenant. The call was recorded and was released by Palin's office this month. Todd Palin told a television reporter in Alaska that he did meet with Monegan, but said he was just "informing" Monegan about the issue, not exerting pressure.

"She never directly asked me to fire him," Monegan said.

But he said Todd Palin told him Wooten "shouldn't be a trooper. I've tried to explain to him, you can't head hunt like this. What you need to do is back off, because if the trooper does make a mistake, and it is a terminable offense, it can look like political interference.

"I think he's emotionally committed in trying to see that his former brother-in-law is punished."

Many have pointed out that there is an ongoing investigation into Palin's potential abuse of power -- an investigation, by the way, which is expected to culminate in a public report during the first couple of days in November -- and at least from the allegations being made by Monegan, it sounds like there may be some "there" there. As noted in The Post piece quoted above, Palin has already been forced to walk back from some of her earliest denials -- never a great sign in these types of investigations. So while I still believe that the coming verdict in the trial of Ted Stevens could be a major problem for Palin, and thus for John McCain, it looks like it's not the only corruption issue that could hamper the GOP ticket. I guess it is important to run a thorough vet after all...

The first time I saw McCain's campaign use the slogan "Country First," I assumed it was simply another cliche Republican attempt to claim the mantle of patriotism and passively indict Democrats as America-haters.

And while I'm sure the patriotism implication is real, I'm starting to think there's a second strategy at play behind the slogan. The Republican brand is in the gutter. Party ID leans Dem by a lopsided margin. GOP candidates won't go near St. Paul this week. Bush's approval is in the tank.

We know McCain can't run just as a Republican on Republican principles; he has to re-claim his "maverick" brand and fuzz the contrast between himself and Obama as much as possible. Picking Palin, a woman who will (falsely) claim reformer credentials, helps that fuzz. And with a rather dynamic personal story, Palin reinforces the media focus on personality-over-policy that McCain desperately wants. A "celebrity" she is not.

There will be more indications of this McCain makeover. If you need any more evidence of McCain's fuzzing his party identity and policy deficit, re-watch Palin's appropriation of Hillary Clinton's groundbreaking campaign legacy from this morning: party and policy differences be damned...Palin's a woman too!

So a heads-up: the "Country First" slogan on McCain's podium this morning may start carrying the unwritten subtext "before party."

If John McCain believes that he can wipe away his large deficit among female voters by appealing to disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters through the pick of Sarah Palin, he might have to think again. Take a look at Palin talking about the "perceived whine" emanating from Clinton:

Ben Smith writes that "Palin clearly sympathizes with Clinton but also says that Clinton does herself and other women a disservice with the 'perceived whine' about tougher media coverage." This isn't exactly the kind of empathetic talk that the McCain campaign is trying to put forward at this juncture. While in reality the number of "PUMAs" is greatly overstated -- I believe there were just three dozen of them who managed to march on Denver this past week -- those Clinton supporters who are at least a bit reluctant to support Barack Obama at this juncture aren't likely to jump ship just because the extreme right, anti-abortion politician added to the Republican ticket who also happened to hit Hillary Clinton for whining is a woman.

Sure, as you can see from the rec list, the idea that John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate would boost his support among hordes of Clinton's disaffected female supporters is a miscalculation at best. CNN ran a piece that featured a very funny montage of woman after woman, all former Clinton supporters, answering the question of whether they're likely to support McCain now that Palin is on the ticket by just saying "No" "No" "No" "No" "No"...

CNN also interviewed one woman who was incredulous:

Well, first we were just laughing. Does he really think that's going to work?

The piece went on to contrast Palin and Clinton even further, citing the fact that Palin is anti-abortion rights, a member of the NRA and, well, is a Republican. As Van Jones puts it:

"Someone should stand up and say: 'I know Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton is a friend of mine. And Sarah Palin is no Hillary Rodham Clinton.'"

But the larger damage done to McCain's candidacy by his pick of Palin may not be among Hillary Clinton supporters at all, but instead among moderate Republican women turned off by Hillary, inspired by Barack but leaning toward McCain. Could the condescension and the pandering inherent in the Palin pick tip them ever so slightly toward Barack Obama? If this e-mail from a friend of my mother -- a life-long Republican who is disillusioned with Bush and the party but still has residual goodwill toward McCain from 2000 -- is any indication, the resounding answer is yes.

Does McCain think he will bring women over just because he has chosen a female for VP? That has to be his reasoning behind his choice since she is under investigation in her state for alleged misconduct in requesting a commissioner fire her brother-in-law and she has very little to recommend her for the position.  (oh, wait, her husband is in the oil business!) As a female, I am insulted that ol' John McCain thinks all females vote based on gender. (yes, I know some do, however, I believe that most of us are more thoughtful). I may have to take a couple of sips of Obama cool aid. [...]

Well, I was really undecided until this lady came on. Now, I am definitely leaning toward the Dems. I am bitterly disappointed in McCain. I have been a supporter of his for a very long time; however, the McCain I supported in the past seems to have been taken over by the Bushes. It makes me very sad.

I suspect my mom's friend is not alone.

I'd like to show you something that helped cost the Democrats a presidential election. This is Michael Dukakis in a debate with George H. W. Bush, Sr.:

This is what NOW's Kim Gandy reports as being Sarah Palin's position on abortion:

In a gubernatorial debate, Palin stated emphatically that her opposition to abortion was so great, so total, that even if her teenage daughter was impregnated by a rapist, she would "choose life" -- meaning apparently that she would not permit her daughter to have an abortion.

Charming. I bet the McCain campaign is hoping she'll avoid mentioning this while trying to connect to the average, American parent.

Palin's speech today was clearly meant to echo feminist themes, a favorite tactic of an organization she belongs to, Feminists for Life, as she prepares to campaign for an anti-woman agenda. She was obviously pandering to Clinton supporters in a speech that will get a lot more prime time air than anything else between now and the vice presidential debate, while her position on reproductive justice is just more of the same Republican paternalism. If you want proof, all you need to know is that the grand old men of the Republican Party are thrilled today.

McCain clearly wanted to look mavericky with this Hail Mary of his. A choice that validates the desirability of a ticked that has someone young and energetic on it, trying to copy it by embodying Republican straw man fantasies of what affirmative action means. A choice that responds to the credible selection of Joe Biden with a candidate who offers an echo of his story. A choice that pays cosmetic homage to people's desire for change, without offering anything different from the usual Republican platform.

Palin's just another in a long line of female Republicans given point to attack women's rights, minority Republicans set in opposition to racial justice policies, and Republicans of humble origin going after government policies and programs that they themselves used to get out of poverty.

For Palin, you can add ... The daughter of a science teacher who supports teaching creationism in schools. Someone from a state being hit hard by climate disruption who doesn't believe that humans cause global warming. Someone who claims to stand up to oil companies, but is instead a wholly-owned subsidiary of Big Oil. Someone who claims to fight corruption today but conveniently forgets McCain's membership in the Keating Five. The mother of a special needs child that supports a presidential who voted against funding special education.

McCain Opposed Efforts to Increase Funding for Special Education and Education and Health Programs. McCain voted against allowing an amendment to increase funding for special education and against $7.1 billion for education and health programs. (S.Amdt. 2292 to H.R. 3010, Vote 273, 10/26/05; S.Amdt. 3048 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 58, 3/16/06)

And Palin supports this guy? You could call it hypocrisy, a politically convenient stance. However, I'm going to take a cue from Barack Obama's speech last night and guess that she's sincere, but just doesn't get it.

Palin doesn't get that the federal government can help people. She doesn't get that not all of us live in a state that pays every citizen a yearly dividend from the oil industry. She doesn't get that even most Republicans would be deeply appalled by removing the rape exception from already restrictive federal and state abortion laws - because most people, even anti-choice people, would think about the young women in their family and shudder at the idea that they should be made to carry a rapist's child against their will.

Palin, in short, is a typical Republican politician. But hardly anyone had heard of her before today. So she's exciting and new. Or something.

Which is typical McCain, who's been trying to bolt a Maserati shell over a Model T policy chassis ever since he learned that it would be Obama, not Clinton, who faced him in the general election. Typical, too, would be the press never calling him on it.

More mirage than substance. More me-too. More hypocrisy. More cognitive dissonance. More people who couldn't walk a straight line while stone cold sober.

I'd be bored if I wasn't so nauseated.

Update [2008-8-29 18:43:22 by Natasha Chart]: Minor correction, and check out Palin's willingness to breach state law for mining interests. Yeah, that just oozes maverick Republicanism. Why not just nominate Ted Stevens and be done with it. Oh right. People have heard too much about Stevens to allow McCain to pull a fast one on the voters.

If today is John McCain's birthday, why did he give us a present?

I strongly disagree with the idea that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is a game-changer for the Republicans.

Hillary Clinton gave a strong endorsement of Barack Obama on Tuesday and will be out campaigning for him this fall. I'm supposed to believe that women who preferred Hillary in the Democratic primaries will flock to McCain, with his horrible record on women's issues, because a conservative woman is his running mate?

I get the rationale for picking Palin, as laid out here by Chris Bowers and in a different way by Iowa blogger Douglas Burns.

But McCain is staking his campaign on persuading Americans that Obama is "not ready to lead." I cannot see how it helps McCain to choose a running mate who is younger and less experienced than Obama. Palin has served less than two years as governor and before that was mayor of a town with fewer than 10,000 residents.

At 72 years old, McCain would be the oldest president ever elected. He is also a cancer survivor. Can the Republicans make the case that Palin is ready to lead this country should the need arise?

Supposedly the GOP base will be thrilled to see the anti-choice Palin on the ticket. I read some "mommy blogs" written by religious conservatives and will be checking them in the next few days to see how they react to this pick. (These bloggers tended to favor either Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul.)

I assume they will be relieved that McCain did not choose the detested Mitt Romney. However, I am not convinced these rank and file members of the religious right will celebrate Palin's selection. They believe women should be homemakers who homeschool their children, and they think feminism and the trend toward working outside the home is undermining "Biblical womanhood."

No matter how enthusiastically the Republican pundits welcome Palin, I suspect that many social conservatives will feel she should be at home, taking care of her special-needs infant and schooling her older children.

The business wing of the Republican base tended to support Romney in the primaries. Mitt himself is reportedly furious at the way McCain strung him along. Look for the knives to come out if anything goes wrong with Palin--for instance, if she gets tainted by the trial of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens.

I'm skeptical that Palin will neutralize Joe Biden (supposedly because he can't afford to be seen as a bully). Biden has two jobs: to alleviate concerns about Obama's lack of experience, and to be an attack dog. The first task will be easier with Palin as his counterpart. As for the second, Biden can ignore Palin most of the time and focus his fire on McCain during the only vice-presidential debate.

Choosing Palin looks like a Hail Mary pass from a candidate who knows he will lose unless he shakes things up in a big way. I'm feeling much more optimistic about Obama's chances than I did five days ago.