McCain has defended his running mate’s qualifications, citing her command of the Alaska National Guard and Alaska’s proximity to Russia.

Pressed about what insights into recent Russian actions she gained by living in Alaska, Palin told Gibson, “They’re our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.”

I live next to the ocean, so I must be qualified to be a Marine Biologist.

McCain —

Q: Can you honestly say you feel confident having someone who hasn’t traveled outside the United States until last year, dealing with an insurgent Russia…

MCCAIN: Sure…Alaska is right next to Russia. She understands that.

Oh my.

And be sure to vote for the Republican who used to remind other Republicans that Republicans are often dead wrong. That’s the Republican Republicans want in office.

Maverick. Bwahahahahah!!!!!!!

And Sarah Barracuda :

bar·ra·cu·da : \ˌber-ə-ˈkü-də, ˌba-rə-\

1 : any of a genus (Sphyraena of the family Sphyraenidae) of elongate predaceous often large bony fishes of warm seas that includes food and sport fishes as well as some forms frequently causing ciguatera poisoning
2 : one that uses aggressive, selfish, and sometimes unethical methods to obtain a goal especially in business

You guys have bumper stickers for Sarah Barracuda… bwahahaha!!!!!!!

“Maverick”

As the Republic details, when the going got tough, McCain got in line. When it mattered most in the closest votes, Senator McCain since 1999 sided with his GOP colleagues. As it turns out, McCain “almost never thwarted his party’s objectives”:

The presumptive Republican nominee arguably cast the decisive vote 14 times since 1999 to ensure Republicans got their way, and he had five other close cases where his vote may have made a difference, Senate records show. By comparison, McCain effectively handed Democrats a win on roll-call votes four times in the same period. On one of those occasions, Republicans could still have won if Vice President Dick Cheney had cast a tie-breaking vote.

That voting record is just another feather in John McCain’s conservative cap. Congressional Quarterly gave McCain a 90% score for “party unity,” making him an even more reliable GOP water-carrier than fellow Arizonan John Kyl, the #2 ranking Republican in the Senate. The Washington Post similarly gave him a score of 88.3%, tying him with South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham ahead of 29 other Senate Republicans. It is for good reason that Keith Poole, a political scientist at the University of California-San Diego, concluded:

“He is a conservative who votes conservative on most issues. By no means is he a liberal or even a moderate.”
The Arizona Republic also unearthed more evidence for McCain’s iron law of right-wing pandering. That is, McCain’s closeness to the GOP party line is directly proportional to the proximity of Republican presidential primaries:

During the 10 years The Republic examined, McCain crossed over to vote with Democrats 19 times in 82 close votes. He did so just once in the four years he was running for president: 1999, 2000, 2007 and 2008. All 12 of the close votes he missed happened in those years, too.
Even so, in 59 of the 82 close votes, Republicans got what they wanted regardless of McCain’s position. In those 59 cases, McCain broke with his party 16 times.

Senator McCain has made reforms in Washington, and is considered one of the most effective legislators in the Senate. He’s been a champion against corruption and waste, and he could do that much more effectively as President as being an effective 1 of 100, still doesn’t come close to being President.

Maybe the article sounds like splitting hairs, but a reform ticket is fitting for Senator McCain, and I’m glad to see him finally push that angle. I’m not trying to argue that Obama doesn’t have concrete positions, but that the idea of change often is frequently put forward as ‘I’m not Bush’, which really isn’t a statement about what he is.

If he wanted to “fix” things, he could have started any of the last 26 years. Instead, he went ahead and put lobbyists in high positions in his campaign.

As for Obama’s “change” that you dismiss as just a word. I think he has pretty much laid it out. You just need to look. Start with his website.

“Change” on foreign policy. No longer shoot/sabre-rattle first… negotiate first.
“Change” in tax policy. Trickle-down has never worked. No more tax cuts to the wealthy in hopes that a few jobs come out of it. Give tax cuts to those that will spend the money forcing jobs to be added in order to meet demand.
“Change” in economic policy. No more borrowing to pay for tax cuts.
“Change” in evergy policy. “Drill baby drill” is nothing but a slogan, it isn’t a policy. It is a small part of the solution, not THE solution.

Change and Reform are pretty damn close to being the same thing. Do we really need to parse definitions to figure out exactly how they differ?

I don’t care what word you use. McCain has had 26 yrs to do something and failed to do anything. He claims to be a “maverick” (I am so tired of that word), but what exactly was he so “maverick-y” on? Immigration? Gee… didn’t hear much of that at the GOP convention. What makes him so “maverick-y” in general? When you vote party-line so often, can you actually be considered a “maverick”?