I am highly worried that the democratic party, media, and the country as a whole cold not see Sarah Palin for what she really is; subtrifuge. She was the superb choice, purposefully, publically, undervetted and underinvestigated and chosen for one purpose, and shes doing her job very well. She was put in the way of John McCain to make sure that the entire focus of the election campaigne from that day forth was all eyes on Palin. The democratic party and media dropped the ball and took off after the frisby like a dog in the park for the first time. Happy to have something so inticing to bite into they bit, and now cant let go. McCain can now say and do anything and nobody will notice, he will enjoy full unbidden anamosity for the rest of the campaigne standing at the pulpit waving and smiling out at us looking for all the world like Eisenhower come to life to lead us to glorious days again.

This week, the centerpiece of John McCain's new partnership with Sarah Palin was her alleged crusading opposition to earmarks. The "Bridge to Nowhere" was Exhibit A, but their claim of crusading opposition was far more sweeping. And Palin tried to make that argument to Charlie Gibson:

But Gibson kept reminding her that she for for the Bridge to Nowhere until Congress killed it. So how did Palin defend herself?

Some overly cautious bloggers avoid calling Republicans "liars" at all costs, just as they avoid calling for impeachment. Josh Marshall, whose outstanding investigative reporting on the U.S. Attorney scandal earned him a Polk Award, is one such blogger. So it makes a big difference when someone as measured as Marshall calls John McCain a pathological liar

Lying McCain

It's become pathological. John McCain just claimed on TV that Sarah Palin has never requested an earmark for her state -- when actually her state gets more earmarks than any other state in the country. And this year she asked for $197 million worth of them herself.

Even the AP couldn't ignore his lying -- even though they phrased it in their own anemic way. "When pressed about Palin's record of requesting and accepting such money for Alaska, McCain ignored the record and said: "Not as governor she didn't."

For the record Palin requested $197 million this year and $256 million last year. Per capita, that's $288 this year and $376 last year.

To give you some perspective, Palin herself requested at least ten times the dollar value of earmarks as most states get total every year.

Laura Rozen, another moderate blogger, agrees:

The McCain campaign has lied about the Bridge to Nowhere, Obama's tax plan, and his vice presidential pick's record on earmarks, attacked the media for not treating Sarah Palin with sufficient deference, and run a series of highly disturbing ads against Barack Obama that leave little doubt they are designed to play on racial fears and stereotypes. "Morally unfit" to be president, one commentator lambasted McCain, who had previously vowed to run an honorable campaign, and been the victim of such vicious smears himself during his unsuccessful 2000 Republican primary run against George W. Bush. If there were a referee, perhaps he could be implored to cry foul and make it stop. But, having lived through 2000 and 2004, it's also not so surprising to observers that this is the kind of campaign that McCain has chosen to run at the top of the GOP ticket. He's determined to do whatever it takes to win, and his party has used such tactics, and successfully, in the past.

Will the Corporate Media now call Palin and McCain liars?

Our 30,000 petitions to the Corporate Media produced a major victory - Sarah Palin did not repeat her lie about the "Bridge to Nowhere" when she landed in Alaska. Instead, she told a new lie, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would

"defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

Even the Pentagon Post called bullsh*t on this lie:

The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself.

But not by Sarah Palin! Click "more" for the video.

By Dave Lindorff

Sarah Palin stated again, most recently in her interview yesterday
by ABC’s Charlie Gibson, that she has foreign policy experience because
as governor of Alaska she has been in charge of that state’s National
Guard, and because Alaska is, doggone it, “right next” to Russia.

This made me feel pretty good, because it made me realize that I
have a whole lot of skills and experience which I hadn’t really
appreciated before and that I could perhaps use to get myself out of
this freelance journalism profession, which is not all that great from
a financial perspective.

In her interview with Charlie Gibson, Sarah Palin revealed some gaping holes in her knowledge of foreign affairs, including her "Moose in the Headlights" ignorance of the Bush Doctrine.

And even more revealing was her absolute certainty that she has the knowledge, experience, and credibility to be President on Day 1, based on the fact that you can see Russia from the remotest Alaska island. (And has she ever been there? Never mind.) Charlie Gibson rightly called that Hubris, and it was truly scary.

But even scarier was her near-command of neocon ideology, after just one week of coaching by McCain's neocon-in-chief, Randy Scheunemann. There was no hesitation in her delivery of neocon talking points, indicating she became a true believer under Scheunemann's tutelage.

Charlie: Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?

Palin: In what respect, Charlie?

Charlie: What do you interpret it to be?

Palin: His worldview.

Charlie: No, No, the Bush Doctrine. He enunciated it in September 2002, before the Iraq War.

Palin: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is to rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hellbent on destroying our nation.

Update 1: ROTFL! A female McCain advisor used the joke as the title of her book!

Yesterday Barack Obama mocked John McCain's message of change:

"You know, you can put lipstick on a pig," Obama said, "but it's still a pig."

The McCain campaign pounced on that old joke to create a rightwing sh*tstorm, accusing Obama of a sexist attack on Sarah Palin. Huh???

How the hell did that non-sequitur get turned into a sh*tstorm? Glenn Greenwald maps it out.

1. Jake Tapper of ABC News pulls sh*t out of his ass (how the hell does he know what any one person is thinking, let alone any group of people???)

The crowd rose and applauded, some of them no doubt thinking he may have been alluding to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's ad lib during her vice presidential nomination acceptance speech last week, "What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick."