Her answer to the readiness question was absurd. It was basically, yes, I am ready, because I say I am.

In fairness, Obama *began* his answer to this kind of questions in the primary debates: I wouldn't be running if I didn't feel I was ready. But then he elaborated, with specific parts of his record and experience and made the argument about judgment. Voters can decide for themselves what they think of the quantity and quality of the record, and they can weigh his argument about the greater significance of judgment over experience and then make their own judgments about his judgment.

Palin did nothing of the kind. It was merely I am ready because I am confident I am ready. Well, SP, I guess am glad you're confident, but can please tell us exactly why we should believe that you have the preparation, experience, judgment, character, intelligence to be VP? To say you believe strongly "in the mission" and that the belief and your confidence is sufficient is patently absurd. By that standard millions of people, of both (and third) parties would be qualified.

In my religious tradition, we have another name for Sarah Palin's condition: possession by the devil.

I guess, for this person, God doesn't require that politicians he "anoints" read and understand a newspaper.

As an aside, I'm tired of hearing the equivalence between Obama's community organizing and Palin's mayorality. There's no equivalence. The equivalence is

Both went to college.

BHO: Community organizing to SP: TV fill-in sports newsreader

BO: Law school to SP: family raising

BHO: Family, teaching and practicing law, State Senate in ILL. vs. SP city council and mayor in Wasilla

BHO: US Senate v. SP:Governor of Alaska

At similar stages in their career path, Obama was organizing and Palin was reading sports news on TV.

Afterwards Obama went to law school and became law review editor.

Her religion is also known as "holy rollers" whe speak in tongues, are religious healers and change homosexuals straight through prayer. Is this what they refer to as being anointed?

And this 2008 election poll says it all.
You won't believe these results!

http://www.votenic.com

Instant Results!

This is terrifying. Are you suggesting that a substantial portion of the electorate will decide who to vote for based on this...infantile nonsense? I realized when I rejected Christianity as a 12 year old that it was myth too far for me but I had no idea that it had sunk to such depraved depths.

Wait a minute, I thought Obama was "the ONE," what with all the speechifying and all.

All of us, if we're honest, sat back a little bit and said, "Wow," when Sarah Palin spoke at the GOP convention. Some of us in shock, some of us in awe, but there wasn't much doubt that she had "it," and a fairly impressive amount of it.

Posner's correspondent calls her "anointed," which means the same thing--except that for him it's much more powerful because she's using "it" to espouse (or at least represent) the evangelical Christianity he believes in.

We're all susceptible to "it," and the fact that Barack Obama has it is a major part of his appeal. He's mocked all the time for appearing "messianic," and god knows all of us are hoping for a savior in these times.

But, even if we resonate when we hear a great speech, people like me don't believe in divine saviors. So after Palin's speech, just like we do after Obama's speeches, we sat back and decided whether she has the rest of it--the ability, experience, and judgment to do the job she's applying for.

But for evangelical Christians, the decision is over. Their faith, and the fact that she shares it, is literally all they need to know, and it is not the least bit unthinkable to them that Sarah Palin, hockey mom, might be sent from God in fulfillment of prophecy.

But "it" is a neutral quality. It's just another gift or talent humans may possess, and lots of people have it--we've all known them all our lives, in sports, music, politics, and, yes, religion. And lots of "anointed" religious leaders have had it, but they also had vices or drives that undermined them, and led their followers astray, perhaps even to their ruin.

This combination of personal charisma and religious certainty is always a powerfully seductive, and therefore potentially dangerous, combination. It inspires blind faith. That's why America tries to keep religion and politics separate.

Sarah Palin is a skilled politician, a gifted public speaker, and a Christian. She is not a hockey mom hidden away until the appointed time in accordance with God's plan. But you and I can't convince evangelicals of that. We can't convince them of anything. They already Believe.

And so we simply have to win. Independents and non-religious Republicans need to understand this.

Doesn't the Bible say something about bearing false witness?

Admittedly, it doesn't show up until #9, and I guess McCain gets a free pass on #7, too.

And #8 is "Do not steal" --- (unless it's a per diem for staying in your own home).

So... it's really "The six commandments and four suggestions", at least for "anointed ones"? I think maybe lampwick is on to something.

"Talk about a role model. Palin’s life is a prophecy to America. She doesn’t have to preach against abortion. She and her family, even with their flaws, are the embodiment of the compassionate pro-life values America desperately needs to adopt."

So let's really look at what kind of a role-model Palin is, after the pregnancy became an issue of public discourse. While Bristol Palin's pregnancy should have no bearing on her mother's candidacy, her mother's response, now that it has dominated headlines, actually should; especially because the controversy seems to strongly implicate the abortion issue, upon which she has such a concrete position. Surely three days later everyone is sick of this news; however, there is something I noticed, as I suspect others did too, that I find very telling. "Life Happens", Palin's rather saccharine euphemism, presumably for "sh-- happens", has been fully embraced by her supporters, glorifying the pregnancy of an unmarried and un-matured girl for the sake of salvaging the campaign and further proving her dedication to the pro-life position.

So why "life happens"? Yes, "life" and "sh--" both happen, but is it so admirable to discount the gravity of such a situation as a purely incidental fact of life? What message does "life happens" send to teenage girls who don't happen to belong to the family of a rich celebrity or a Vice Presidential candidate (with unlimited means for raising and supporting as many "life happens-children" as they would ever need to?) Sure they'll "grow up faster than they ever planned" also, but they will do so by taking multiple low-paying jobs and struggling to pay their bills all while trying to finish high school and give their newborn the material and emotional support necessary for proper development.

Perhaps Palin's campaign responded with this euphemism because underneath the politics, they realize that it's not all so copacetic after all. They approached news of the issue knowing that it was a total disaster, and thenceforth spun it into a claim for self-righteousness. Such is the nature of, in this case, the "cringing clown"—smiling to the outside world but, under the make-up, cringing with mortification at the tawdriness of it all. Thus, Palin has chosen to protect her interests by using her daughter as a conveniently gratifying testimonial for the pro-life position—a choice which seems grossly irresponsible, especially in a year already characterized by a slight, inexplicable increase in teen pregnancy rates.

But then again, I've never been in such a situation, so who am I to objurgate GOP followers who accept such a radical position and follow the woman they've known for just a few weeks now like lemmings to the sea?

What pk said. Every word.

It saddens me that there are so many people on the other side of the chasm, who are willing to make such grave decisions based on such little evidence. But it saddens me more that there are so many people on my own side of the chasm who don't seem to recognize a chasm at all. We're talking about an entirely different worldview here. We're talking about people for whom "faith" is absolutely not a pejorative. And frankly, if you can't even see that difference, and can't recognize the possibility that even views so opposed to your own might have some merit, then you're as lost as any other ideologue, and you're not going to help matters much.

As pk says, we're not going to convince these people of anything. And we're certainly not going to do it by appealing to the supremacy of logic over faith, any more than they would reach us with the opposite argument. But the more we're able to understand them, the better we can either work around or even with them. We don't all have to be convinced of the same things, after all. There are plenty of evangelicals who support progressive causes. Maybe it's time we stop turning religion into a punchline, recognize that for believers it is literally more important than life-or-death, and capitalize on the the effective ways to appeal to them anyway.

Barky Obama, formerly annointed. The Mandate of Heaven has officially been withdrawn. Whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make overconfident.

It's probably worth noting that for any of these evangelicals' wishes to come true, John McCain must die fairly soon. I can't imagine God is annointing secret hockey moms just so they can become largely powerless VP's.

Mona Charen wrote in a column, a little more than a week ago, a prediction that John McCain would win this election... and be a one term president. Her GOP ticket for 2012? Palin-Jindal. I think she is speaking for a lot of hard right Republicans who still have qualms about McCain even with the Palin pick. They aren't enthusiastic about McCain as their standard bearer, they are enthusiastic about Sarah Palin as the perceived heir apparent should McCain win. Perhaps even if he should lose. The trick, then, is not in trying to target Palin. It is in beating McCain NOW.

These depraved religious extremists are also well known for kidnapping and murdering innocent children, whose blood they then use for secret satanic rituals.

Per Romans 13, why is Sarah Palin rebelling against God over Troopergate?

Per 2 Thessalonians 2, why is she consorting with the Man of Lawlessness, Alaska’s AG?

Why is the Media and the Godless so scare about. If Sarah carries an Esther anointing, there is nothing to do. If Sarah is in God's side who can be against her? But seriously, this"time" is not about who are the winners of the next national election as much as it is about God's mercy inviting America once again to stop killing the unborn and stop living like He does not exist. Hasn't life taught us anything. We all reap what we sow .