Everything counts in large amounts.

Much is being said about the specific failings of the Republican candidate for Vice President. However what's really at issue is not the parentage of her alleged offspring, or the offspring of her offspring, or her documented abuses of power (which pale in comparison to the abuses wrought by the Bush administration).

And it's not her lack of experience; recent history has seen many dubiously qualified Vice Presidents and Vice Presidential nominees.

No, the real issue is the sheer, unmitigated hypocrisy being revealed in this nation's governing elite. And while the traditional media continues to be unable to effectively process and expose this hypocrisy, that doesn't stop America's most capable, most talented political commentator:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Sarah Palin Gender Card
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Reform

Unfortunately I can only legitimately get that clip in a non-standards-based (though admittedly common) format, so if you're reading this on an iPhone or iPod touch, let me break it down for you:

• On 29 August 2008, Karl Rove cited Sarah Palin's experience as mayor of a town of about 9,000 souls and governor of a state with a population of less than 700,000 as strong examples of her executive experience and by extension her ability to be Vice President.


• However on 10 August 2008, Karl Rove dismissed possible Democratic VP candidate Tim Kaine as not being capable to possibly lead this nation since he's merely the governor of Virginia (population 7.6 million) and former mayor of the town of Richmond (population 200,000).


• On 2 September 2008, sycophantic TV commentator Bill O'Reilly said that the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's 17-year-old unmarried daughter should be a "personal matter" and shouldn't be part of political commentary.


• However on 19 December 2007, Bill O'Reilly indignantly cited the pregnancy of 16-year-old unmarried Jamie Lynn Spears as primarily the fault of "the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her." He went on to call them "pinheads."


• On 2 September 2008, Republican operative Dick Morris said a male candidate would never have to endure the, at that point, 72 hours of scrutiny that Palin had faced, saying it was indicative of the "deep sexism that runs through our society."


• However on 5 November 2007, Dick Morris was talking about Hillary Clinton's campaign when he said "when a woman wants to be President, she shouldn't complain based on gender." He went on to say that Clinton continuously "retreats behind the apron strings" whenever she faces scrutiny of her policies and positions.


• On 5 November 2007, McCain advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer said that people who think they're helping Clinton by playing "this gender card" were in fact hurting her, and that it would be "a terrible mistake for her [Clinton] to try to play this victimology or victimization card because it's just not what we want in a President."


• However on 3 September 2008, Pfotenhauer marched dutifully in front of the TV cameras to say that the nature of the commentary about Palin and her family was "disrespectful to her as a woman," that she was concerned the media should know better than to "belittle the accomplishments of women," and that questions about Palin's ability to balance one of the world's most intense jobs with the needs of her young children to be "one of the most outrageous double standards" she'd ever seen.


• And finally, in March 2008, Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin said of Hillary Clinton: "when I hear a statement like that, coming from a woman candidate, with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, man, that doesn't do us any good. ... I mean, work harder, prove yourself to an even greater degree that you're capable, that your going to be the best candidate."

And these people wonder why so much of the nation has turned against them. As Andrew Sullivan posted today:

They are a religious and cultural identity party, primed to rally to anything their leaders say and question nothing. That's why they're so dangerous.

They can do anything and defend it — invade a country on false pretenses, grind the military into extreme danger, trash the Geneva Conventions, expand government at a record pace, threaten war with Iran and Russia — and still say with a straight face that they are the party of national security, fiscal restraint, foreign policy wisdom and military pride. It doesn't matter what they do; these people believe in this cause because it is about God and America and their own identity. And when you have a major political party constructed like that, they can do anything. And they have."

Post	Reference	More Info
"Everything counts in large amounts."	Lyric from the song Everything Counts by Depeche Mode