When the Republican Party sent a team to Alaska to do a second independent background on Palin, it looked like a confirmation of possible "issues".

Once word of that was announced, the media saw smoke. More researchers were sent to look for the fire.

Alaska was, is, and probably always will be the hotbed of public corruption in America. That is just normal. That is Alaska.

The point is that the GOP cannot have another Spiro Agnew in the VP slot.

Sarah Palin's record in Alaska is that she ran against and beat the Spiro Agnews in her own state.

How can you look at what went on and see not Frank Murkowski or Ted Stevens as Alaska's "Spiro Agnews" but rather you do see Sarah Palin as such?

Just pull the "D" lever in November and quit trying to convince us you are doing any real reading here or are familiar with the relevant history.

I have noticed that google searches that include "Wasilla" are starting to have more archived stories from the Anchorage Paper. I looked on one of those "archived" stories and the publish date was September 3, 2008, but there was a disclaimer that the story was originally published in 2001.

I think the Anchorage Paper is uploading every story in their file that includes Sarah Palin as fast as they can.

Speaking of Google, I'm not to impressed with the new weighting for searches for Palin. Lots of KOS memes are floating to the top as the search engine seems to be giving extra weight to the more recent posts.

When the announcement was made that Sarah "you go girl" Palin was McCains choice I quickly googled her name and found 6497 entries .

As of 2 minutes ago there were 14,400,000.

Yeah, I guess Alaska is so corrupt. Not nearly as clean as the City of Chicago political operation. Nor as straightforward as the State of Arkansas political establishment. I wish the Republicans had thought this through and gone to those so well thought of political locales like the dems have,

There was always New Mexico for Obama. With the beard Richardson looks like he might have gone the mountains and hunted something...maybe.

Oh Walsingham, you assume too much. If a person expresses reservations about Palin, you believe them to be a Democrat. The fact is that not all of us were on board with her at the convention. She is a tough act to sell. I know - I raise money.

The idea is to win an election. This one is not going to be a walk in the park. Obama waves his hand and tens of millions of dollars roll in. This is not the old days for the GOP. We are having to squeeze dollars from those who used to hand out blank checks.

At any rate, we are having to make do with what we have. We are fighting this one uphill. Be a realist Walsingham. If you want to see McCain in the Oval Office, quit biting at the heels of the people who are working in the campaign. Get positive, sell the platform.

So how much money have you raised with your "I have reservations about Sarah Palin" pitch?

And don't think I don't know that not everyone there was on board with Palin. I've seen Washington politics up close myself. A lot of people there....especially political careerists...have spent years jockeying for position by signing on with the campaigns of hopeful winners and all of a sudden here comes someone out of nowhere to bump them all back down a rung.

You have to try and filter out how much of these reservations come from the simple reality that Palin is not who they had hitched their respective wagons to.

Get positive?

Someone else help me out here.....who is it that is being positive here and who is the big wet rag buzz kill?

I for one am looking forward to having a cougar as Vice President.