If this article is an example of the caliber of analytical thought found in our nation's best and brightest, then no wonder this country is in the mess it's in... and may God help us.
Stangler's dilemna can be summed up thus: Although I disagree with most of Obama's policies and positions, and agree with most of McCain's, McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his VP is so indefensible on the merits and such an egregious example of political pandering that it virtually compels me (and all intelligent people) towards Obama.
The sheer idiocy of such a statement astounds me.
First, despite all of the criticisms directed against Palin by the chattering classes, the woman is an elected governor of a state with approval ratings above 80%, and has a clear track record of confronting and cleaning up corruption in government even when she encounters it in her own party. Can any of these things be said about Obama, much less Joe "J-O-B-S is my favorite three-letter word" Biden?
If McCain's selection of Palin reflects badly on him (and I disagree), then what does Obama's selection of the gaffe-ridden incompetent Biden say about him? Biden is a man who has been wrong about almost every major foreign policy issue in the past two decades, from opposing the first Gulf War to suggesting giving Iran $200 million after 9/11 in order to get "Arabs" to like us to opposing the surge and proposing the breakup of Iraq into three separate countries in violation of the country's sovereignity. Yet Obama selected Biden specifically for his 'foreign policy expertise.'
Don't even get me started on the character issue. Biden had to drop out of the '88 presidential campaign because he lied about his background and his record. Here's a man who bragged about his IQ, his college "scholarship" (that he never received), his award as the outstanding Poli Sci student (that he never received), etc., and he still lies as evidenced by the astounding number of whoppers he uttered during the Biden-Palen VP debate. If the choice for VP is between a confirmed liar with a track record of bad judgment or an inexperienced governor with a decade of executive experience and who has risen to every challenge and succeeded against the odds, I'll take Palin any time.
Similarly, we have a charismatic candidate with an impressive resume and a solid record of accomplishment... and then there's Barack Obama. What has this man actually done? Yes, he worked with Bill Ayers and the Annenburg Challenge, spending over $150 million(!) on Chicago schools... and are the schools any better? Not according to the people who have to send their children to them, or standardized test results, etc. This is the sum total of Obama's executive experience: $150 million spent with nothing to show for it. Contrast that with the much-maligned Sarah Palin, who runs a state with a budget surplus, who negotiated additional royalties on oil from the oil companies and gave that cash back to the residents of her state. Or with John McCain, who capped his Navy career by commanding the largest squadron in the Navy, receiving an excellent fitness report (and the Navy isn't a forgiving grader... just ask John Kerry).