Why not auction your virginity?

...Christine Gralow, who will be blogging for the NY Times. Don't forget us little folks, Christine.

Thanks to Schoolgal

...more specifically, at the Core Knowledge Blog.

"Anybody who believes that the Republicans, whoever they are, can fix the mess they created probably believes that the iceberg could have saved the Titanic."

Hillary Clinton

THEIR TARGET: The Citizens of New York

DON’T BALANCE THE BUDGET ON THE BACKS OF NEW YORKERS

Last month I attended an MTA “Capital Improvements Budget Hearing.” In light of Governor Paterson’s initial budget cuts announcement, his willingness to consider privatizing parts of New York State’s infrastructure (highways and bridges) and an increasing awareness on my part that the issue of whether Finance will control Government, or Government will control Finance may not be able to be avoided any longer, I thought it would be a good idea to start attending hearings of this sort. It may help to create worker and family solidarity and can potentially highlight issues that don’t necessarily make it into mainstream media outlets.

My immediate goal in attending this meeting was to “sneak” a discussion of the GHI and HIP proposal to privatize our health plans into the MTA’s public record and emphasize that the MTA should have a vested interest in this proposal because it will cost them money. What follows is the text of my speech.

[Please note that I am no longer an active member of the Coalition Against Privatization and that I was given three minutes and was buzzed with a red light three times before leaving the podium…therefore I paraphrased a bit at the end of my actual testimony]

*************************************************************

Good Afternoon,

My name is John Powers and I am a teacher by trade. I am also a United Federation of Teachers’ Chapter Leader and a founding member of the Coalition Against Privatization.

What I have learned in a short span of time (my activist work began only ten months ago) is that too often it is the everyday citizen who finds him/herself on this side of the table. The table I refer to is the one in front of you called, “the burden of proof.” It is we, the people, who come out and speak truth to power and not the other way around. Why do the very people who toil the hardest to make ends meet day in and day and who keep our city and state humming along, the ones who must behave as if they have not met the burden of proof regarding initiatives that will hurt their pockets and their health? Or dare I say hurt their bodies, minds and souls. Today’s hearing regarding a capital improvements program is no exception.

According to the booklet handed out upon entering, the money you are asking for [from the Federal Government] will not cover the total cost of capital improvements. So, the MTA has once again proposed fare hikes that will threaten to further destabilize working families across our great city. Soaring gas prices. Absurd rents. Soaring food prices. Woe is us. But what about you MTA? Is this the best plan that can be devised? When in doubt…when in trouble…pin it on the very people who keep you in business. Well, I think I speak not only for the Coalition Against Privatization but a great many New Yorkers when I say, “HELL NO.” Go back to the drawing table and come up with something original, new, fresh.

Perhaps you can meet with Governor Paterson who just the other day was vacationing in the Hamptons when he made an announcement that he will cut $51 million dollars to CUNY, the very institution that made my being here possible, and offered a proposal to cut $506 million dollars in health care spending, $250 million dollars in local government assistance and $132 million dollars in new programs. If you do consider to meet with him and come up with a plan that won’t cripple the families of New York, ask him for his thoughts on the HIP and GHI merger and proposal to privatize.

As you probably know from reading about New York City’s lawsuit against the merger of HIP and GHI (a company now called Emblem Health), that if this company is allowed to privatize (that is a move from “not-for-profit” status to “for-profit” status) it will cost New York City 27.5 million dollars for each 1% increase in premiums. The next highest insurance carrier in NYS is 26% higher than HIP and GHI’s current rates so if Emblem Health raises rates to just half of 26% it will mean close to a $400 million dollar charge to NYC. Guess who bear the brunt of that too? The MTA is sure to raid operating expenditures like workers’ salaries and benefits in order to see this capital improvements project through to its completion. Make sure then that you ask Governor Paterson to do something about this HIP and GHI fiasco. If you don’t, it will cost you money. Perhaps you can help our Governor to pressure Eric Dinallo, Superintendent of Insurance for NYS, to consider an independent impact study that will assess how the proposed privatization will affect the over 4 million people who are insured in New York State. It’s the least that you can do.

Before I leave you, I want to call on our labor leaders, including the MLC to start behaving like unions and not businesses. It’s a crime that I and other brothers and sisters from various trade unions are here speaking on behalf of the families of NYC and State. Our union leaders are too concerned with money and political machinery to do what their mission has always been: to protect workers and their communities.

In closing, the Coalition Against Privatization says “NO” to fare hikes

and “NO” to Emblem Health’s attempt to privatize [HIP and GHI].

The post-convention poll numbers are out and it's official - McCain/Palin ticket got a bigger convention bounce than the Obama/Biden ticket and now is either tied for the lead or ahead in the race:

CNN Poll: McCain 48%, Obama 48%
CBS News Poll: McCain 46%, Obama 44%
Post/ABC News Poll: Obama 47%, McCain 46%
Gallup Tracking Poll: McCaon 49%, Obama 44%

The reason for the shift?

The press says it's McCain's VP choice, Sarah Palin. Not only has she energized the evangelical base of the Republican Party, Gallup says independent voters are now swinging to the McCain/Palin ticket in part because of the addition of the Alaska governor while the Washington Post reports that Palin is helping attract the support of white women to McCain.

I wrote here last week that Palin was a bad choice to be VP because independents and swing voters were turned off by the extreme partisan tone of her convention speech and far-right views on abortion, contraception, and the environment.

But that was before the GOP noise machine swung into motion and created tons of 30 second ads touting Ms. Palin as an emblem of fiscal prudence, good government or, as Josh Marshall put it at TPM, "the mavericky, pork-busting reformer from Alaska."

But the reality, as has been shown in numerous news story over the past week, is that she is far from a pork-buster, a maverick or a reformer.

This morning, for example, the Washington Post reports that Palin

has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions. And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

Gee, that's not so mavericky or reform-minded. Hell, even Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-San Quentin) didn't think to try that kind of fiscal "sleight of hand" while he was sitting on his gold-plated toilet seat.

In addition, the New Republic reports that the McCain campaign's assertion that Ms. Palin fought against the "Bridge To Nowhere is a "naked lie" while Josh Marshall points out that even as the McCain campaign advertises Palin as some kind of earmark-slayer:

when she was mayor and governor, in both offices, she requested and got more earmarks than virtually any city or state in the country.

Gee, those things aren't mavericky or reform-minded either.

On the economic front, while the McCain campaign has touted Ms. Palin as a fiscally prudent, good government advocate, when she took over the mayoral office in Wasilla the city had no debt, but when she left the city had $19 million dollars worth. Much of the debt increase resulted from Palin's decision to have the city build an indoor sports complex that went way over budget and remains unfinished and in litigation. As Andrew Sullivan noted on his blog:

She is a Bush-Cheney fiscal conservative: low taxes, unprecedented new spending, utter incompetence, endemic cronyism and massive debt.

So how is it that the McCain campaign and the GOP has managed to sway voters into thinking Palin is a paragon of fiscal responsibility and reform policies?

Simple - lies, lies, lies, repeated over and over until people figure "Hell, those things they're saying about Sarah Palin must be true because they keep saying 'em."

This is a lesson that the guys running the McCain campaign learned from when they ran the Bush/Cheney campaigns or for that matter sold the Iraq war to the American people.

If you repeat something enough, it becomes "truth" no matter how bald-faced or a naked a lie it is.

Judging by the poll numbers, so far, it's working.

Why not just buy another one before they foreclose?

Lately, much has been made of the importance of being fair to Sarah Palin and her family. Apparently, rampant sexism and callousness are big problems nowadays. So let's go back to the good ol' days, and take a peek at what her esteemed partner, GOP standard bearer John McCain had to say about then teenage Chelsea Clinton:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Get it? You see how Maverick Johny not only gave that goshdarn Chelsea what for, but also managed to make indirect suggestions about her mom Hillary and Janet Reno? You see the cleverness and subtlety at work there? And teachers, can you imagine how thoroughly junior high school kids would enjoy that sort of wit?

Now when Maverick Johny apologized, his hometown paper and the AP also printed his attempt at humor. However, the New York Times and the Washington Post, and even Maureen Dowd ($) deemed his remarks too distasteful to publish. MJ added:

'I will always maintain a sense of humor. Life is too short not to.''

Ms. Dowd replies:

Life is also too short for making the President's daughter the target of a junky, misogynistic crack masquerading as humor.

It is indeed. And we don't need another shoot-from-the-hip President who acts before he thinks either. Maverick John's cynical, blatantly opportunistic choice of Ms. Palin, clearly far from the most qualifed for the job, just reinforces that.

This week's official NYC Educator film recommendation is Casi Casi, which concerns the intrigue of a student council election. Hopelessly lovesick Emilio, pictured here, is determined to lose so as to impress the young woman who opposes him. It's the first film I've ever seen about high schools in which the actors actually appear to be teenagers.

The camera work is clever, and the actors are great--really funny and really expressive.

Aside from the film, though, I noticed that all the students wear shirts like the one pictured here. Honestly, what would be so bad about having kids wear uniforms like this? They're simple, they'd help us to identify intruders, and they look comfortable. We could require kids to wear similar polo shirts, and perhaps offer a long sleeve version for cold weather. Why should charters be able to require uniforms but not us? We could sell them at cost and help families who couldn't afford them.

It appeared the uniform entailed only that shirt and dark pants. I like the idea. What about you?

...but it's better than nothing.

...is voting for Barack Obama.

...for two weeks, apparently, while this excellent VP candidate is taught what to say. Or something. Or perhaps she knows what to say. Maybe she just has to say it a different way. I mean, there are different ways to pronounce community organizer, and you can't just heap the scorn in the same tone every time.

Anyway, she certainly read the speech they wrote for her and who could ask for more? Still, that nasty sexist liberal press wants to ask her questions she hasn't even heard before? What's up with that?

And who the hell are these communities, to get organized? Thank goodness John McCain is running for President. He voted against raising the minimum wage 19 times, and he and Ms. Palin will keep those nasty working people from having too much power:

McCain Voted Against the Employee Free Choice Act but for a National ‘Right to Work’ for Less Law. McCain voted against the Employee Free Choice Act, which would level the playing field for workers trying to form unions. He voted for a national “right to work” for less law that would attempt to eliminate unions altogether. (H.R. 800, Vote 227, 6/26/07; S. 1788 Vote 188, 7/10/96)

McCain Crossed a Writers Guild Picket Line to Appear on ‘The Tonight Show.’ McCain crossed the picket line of the Writers Guild of America to appear on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.” (Think Progress, accessed 2/27/08)

McCain Voted to Allow Employers to Hire Permanent Replacements During a Strike. McCain voted against ending debate on a bill that would bar employers from hiring permanent replacements for striking workers. (S. 55, Vote 189, 7/13/94)

Against Giving Firefighters and Police a Voice on the Job. Firefighters and police risk their lives every day to protect the public, yet McCain voted to deny them the right to discuss workplace issues with their employer in 2001 and skipped a vote on the issue in 2008. (H.R. 3061, Vote 323, 11/6/01; S. 2123, 10/1/07; H.R. 980, Vote 126, 5/13/08)

McCain Voted Against Collective Bargaining Rights for TSA Screeners. McCain voted against a measure to grant Transportation Security Administration (TSA) airport screeners limited collective bargaining rights. The measure would not have allowed them to strike or negotiate for higher pay. (S. 4, Vote 64, 3/7/07)

Depend on this: Sarah Palin will be ready on day one to help Senator McCain make sure those nasty communities don't get organized, don't join unions, don't get collective bargaining, don't have job protection, don't get health care, and don't get child care either. She'll show this "nation of whiners" what's what. And she, whose job entails being ready, is absolutely ready. She's chomping at the bit. She can't wait for someone to call her at 2 AM.

Except not for two weeks.

Meanwhile, for some reason, Joe Biden is ready right now:



Update: from Andrew Sullivan :

If McCain picked her, he must believe she can be president now. If she can be president now, why the hell can't she hold a press conference?

And there's more:

Ferraro was being interviewed within four days of being announced. Dan Quayle gave an interview one day after being selected.

We are now on Day Nine for Palin and are told to expect another thirteen before she's ready.

This is a pitbull with lipstick? More like a cowering chihuahua.

Thanks to Rhoda

Related: Anne E. Kornblut, in this weekend's Washington Post, asks:

What if, back in the 1990s, Clinton had announced the pregnancy of an unmarried, teenaged daughter? Would the Republicans have declared it an off-limits family matter and declined to judge her, or would it have turned into a national scandal that hurt her chances as she decided to pursue her own career in elected office?

What if, instead of the GOP's new vice presidential candidate, Clinton had been the one to run for national office without any international experience to speak of? (After all, Clinton's rivals diminished the relevance of her eight years as first lady, saying they counted for little on her résumé.)

And what if Clinton had rejected questions about her record by calling such lines of questioning sexist? What if she had refused to name any national security decisions she had made, as a spokesman for Sen. John McCain did on Palin's behalf last week, on the grounds that the question was unfair?

(via)

Watching the Republican convention this week, if I didn't know any better I would have thought that Democrats have been in power the last eight years and "insurgent-mavericks" John McCain and Sarah Palin are running as the "true agents of change" to topple the liberal establishment in Washington and return conservative governing principals to DC.

But of course George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have been running things the past eight years in Washington, Republicans have held power in the Congress for six of the last eight years and four of the last eight years in the Senate.

So what the hell are they running against - themselves?

Turns out yes:

By the time the convention here was about to get under way, Mr. McCain almost sounded like a speaker at an Obama rally. “I promise you, if you’re sick and tired of the way Washington operates, you only need to be patient for a couple of more months,” he told supporters in O’Fallon, Mo., on Sunday. “Change is coming! Change is coming! Change is coming!”

He continued the mantra Thursday. “Let me just offer an advance warning to the old big-spending, do-nothing, me-first, country-second crowd,” Mr. McCain said. “Change is coming.”

Boasting that he had fought corruption even among Republicans, he said the party had lost its way. And he offered a sweeping promise of reform: “We need to change the way government does almost everything.”

So McCain, who has voted 90% of the time with George W. Bush the last eight years, is going to be this "agent of change" even though every idea he proposed in his speech - from more oil drilling in Alaska to Iraq war policy to the handling of the economy - is nearly identical to Bush's record of the last eight years.

Wow - meet the new boss, same as the old boss - now that's change you can believe in!!!

If you liked the last eight years of Cheney/Bush rule, you'll love the next four years of McCain/Palin rule.

Please consider signing this letter to Obama and McCain; just send your name, school and district or other organizational affiliation to [email protected]

Dear Senators Obama and McCain:

We would like to congratulate you on your nominations for President. As public school parents and other stakeholders, we want to bring to your attention the critical need to improve the opportunities of millions of children throughout the country who attend markedly inferior schools that deny them an adequate chance to succeed.

We have read your education positions and believe that the concerns we raise and the proposals we suggest would help focus and strengthen your plans for improving our nation's schools.

In recent weeks, two different statements have been released by advocates, academics and elected officials, with very different perspectives about how to improve our nation's public schools, particularly for poor and minority students. The first statement called for even more high stakes testing, merit pay for teachers, competition, and charter schools, and pointed to the teachers unions as the major obstacles in achieving success.

We would call this approach NCLB on steroids. Rather than improving our schools, more high stakes testing and merit pay based on standardized test scores will likely further punish our neediest students, diminishing their educational experience and lead to even more teacher turnover, test prep, narrowing of the curriculum, and less time and effort given to authentic learning in their schools. It will also contribute to more test score inflation, meaning that studentsʼ scores will no longer provide reliable evidence of their actual level of achievement.

The other new coalition of academics and advocates argues that although some educational programs should be supported, without major investments in health care and reducing poverty, it is wrong to ask schools alone to significantly narrow the achievement gap between ethnic and racial groups or improve outcomes for our neediest students.

Although we believe that as a society we should be doing more to expand healthcare and reduce income inequality, we also believe that this perspective significantly understates the potential for dramatic improvements, particularly in those schools that most minority and high-poverty students attend, and the need for critical reforms to enhance their chance of success.

The following are the improvements that we believe are necessary and would change the lives of literally millions of children throughout our country.

1- Safe and uncrowded schools with more counselors: Many of our students, particularly in urban areas, attend overcrowded schools in near third world conditions, contributing to a variety of disciplinary problems that make it difficult for them to learn, leading to more violence and higher dropout rates. In addition to less crowding, these schools often require many more guidance counselors; in many, there is only one counselor for six hundred or more students.

2- Smaller classes: Despite the abundant research that conclusively demonstrates that smaller classes can significantly narrow the achievement gap, poor and minority students continue to attend schools with much larger classes on average than those in wealthier districts, and thus are deprived of the individual attention they need to succeed. Small classes in all grades K-12 have been linked to more classroom engagement, more time on task, higher levels of achievement, and lower dropout rates. Moreover, in national surveys, educators throughout the country overwhelming say that reducing class size would be the most effective way to improve the quality of teaching in our public schools.

3- Adequate resources and teacher support to assure that all students receive a rich, well-rounded curriculum including the arts, physical education and project-based learning in a curriculum connected to their own lives and culture, with progress evaluated by high-quality, appropriate assessment tools that are primarily classroom-based.

4- More parental involvement: Studies show that the more involved parents are at the school level, the better the outcomes for students. And yet the top- down, corporate approach to school governance currently used in cities throughout the country such as Chicago and New York has consistently and systematically worked to eliminate the ability of parents to have a real voice in decision-making and thus to be true partners at the school and district level.

Competition, including charter schools and vouchers, has not and will not lead to a significantly better or more equitable public school system, just as it has not brought us better access to health care. In fact, the continued proliferation of charter and other schools requiring interviews and/or application processes risks creating wider disparities between the haves and have-nots; and what is often advertised as increased parental choice actually means the ability of such schools to exclude our neediest students. The last thing our nation needs is a "trickle down" educational system.

As a nation we have an overarching moral imperative to provide all our children with the same educational opportunities that our more advantaged public and private school students take for granted, including the right to attend a safe and uncrowded school with smaller class sizes, a rich, high-quality curriculum, and more parental involvement.

Until these goals have been achieved, we cannot and should not give up on the potential of schools to transform lives.

We urge you to recognize this imperative, and if elected president, do everything in your power to ensure that every child who grows up in this country has the opportunity to attend the sort of school he or she needs for a better chance to learn and succeed.

Yours,

Leonie Haimson, Executive Director, Class Size Matters

Julie Woestehoff, Executive Director, Parents United for Responsible Education, Chicago

Deborah Meier, senior scholar, NYU, former principal of K-12 public schools, MacArthur Fellow

John de Beck, Vice President, San Diego Board of Education

Neal Wrightson, Director, Children's Community School , Pasadena , CA

Diane Aoki, Parent and teacher activist, Hawaii

Peter Farruggio, PhD., Asst. professor, Univ. of Texas Pan American Edinburg , TX

George Wood, Principal, Federal Hocking Middle and High School, Stewart , Ohio

Lynne Y. Strieb, Philadelphia Teachers' Learning Cooperative

Bert Strieb, LaSalle University , Philadelphia , PA

Patricia Hamilton, Schmid School LSC Chairperson, Chicago

The Rev. Larry E. Turpin, United Church of Hyde Park , Chicago

Sabrina Craig, LSC Parent Representative, Drummond Montessori Magnet School. Chicago

Martin Halacy, Chicago Public School teacher, 32 years

Paul E. Sjordal, Naperville IL , former director of youth development, South-East Asia Center, Chicago

Sarah Vanderwicken, former local school council member, Chicago

(list in progress)

The mainstream media have been falling all over themselves to praise Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech to the RNC last night.

Mike Allen of the Politico called the speech a "grand slam." John Harris and Jim VandeHei of the Politico wrote that

in the space of one 36-minute speech by Palin, McCain proved that his choice was not a lapse into temporary (or even permanent) insanity. The speech’s political significance goes far beyond the fact that Palin showed herself capable of delivering a spirited reading of words that other people wrote.

Just as Barack Obama’s 2004 convention speech transformed his career, Palin’s speech has the potential to transform the dynamic of this race.

Wow - a grand slam, a game changer!!! Must have been a helluva speech this woman gave!!!

And it absolutely was.

Governor Palin attacked Obama as ineffectual, silly, and inexperienced at leading anything other than his little league team. She repeatedly mocked him as a "community organizer" with a tone that made Obama sound effete (apparently real men are only supposed to advocate for oil companies or the hedge fund industry, I guess.)

Although she did manage to talk a little bit about herself and her family, the overall tone of her speech was scathing (though with a smile) and derisive of her opponents. James Fallows wrote that

The speech was surprisingly negative and mocking. You can see why Rush Limbaugh has been such a fan of hers: if these words were delivered by someone older, less attractive, and male, they could have come straight from a Limbaugh radio monologue.

Now this mocking tone will certainly make the base happy (and it has - just turn on any of the cable networks today to see the smiley faces on the previously depressed Peggy Noonans and ) and her extreme positions on abortion, sex education, and gay rights will no doubt stoke formerly lukewarm evangelicals to enthusiastically come out in droves for the McCain/Palin ticket.

But it just won't work with independents, undecideds or those infamous Hillary supporters who are having trouble supporting Obama.

How do I know?

Because there were three focus groups that were held last night during the Palin speech and in all three independents and undecideds were turned off by Palin's mocking tone, sharp attacks and lack of policy specifics.

Here is the first:

In two different focus groups of Clinton-supporting Nevada women -- married and unmarried -- conducted immediately after Gov. Sarah Palin's Wednesday night speech to the Republican National Convention, a few common reactions quickly took shape.

First, women in both groups were impressed with Palin's speaking ability and poise. But they were hardly convinced that she was qualified to be vice president, or that she truly represented the "change" they were looking for, especially in light of what was deemed an overly harsh "sarcasm" pervading her address.

...

In the "married" group, when one attendee kicked off the discussion by saying "she's a good speaker, and a crowd pleaser," the rest of the room articulated their agreement. "I didn't expect to be as impressed as I was," said another respondent. But then another woman added: "Once she started mudslinging, I thought, it's the same old crap as other politicians. McCain used her to get the women's vote. And she's using McCain."

"Thank you," another woman responded. "That really upset me; there was no need for that. It was snippy."

The unmarried group also voiced similar objections to the harsh, partisan edge of Palin's remarks. "I'm not impressed with her at all as a person," one said, citing her "finger pointing" and general sarcasm after the group had generally agreed that she was a talented public speaker.

The second focus group round-up, courtesy Of Taegan Goddard:

The Detroit Free Press put together a panel of voters to listen to last night's Republican convention speeches and, much as I predicted last night, the independents were universally negative on Palin. In fact, they were more negative than the Democratic voters. The speech was clearly designed to help close the "enthusiasm gap" that has dogged the McCain campaign all summer.

Now the third focus group:

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (D) had focus groups of married and unmarried women watch Gov. Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican convention last night.

Key findings:

* While some unmarried women moved toward the Republican ticket, an equal number moved against them. There was little change among married women.
* Most women said an overly harsh "sarcasm" pervaded her speech.
* On a scale of 0 to 100, Palin improved her favorability scale roughly 10 points among both married and unmarried women.
* Palin's recitation of her experience and accomplishment failed to answer, particularly for unmarried women, whether she was ready to be vice president.

Perhaps McCain can win in 2008 by running a Rovian political campaign that appeals to the already converted, but I don't think so. In poll after poll that I have seen over the last few years, there are more self-identified Democrats than Republicans these days and the intensity of Obama supporters far exceeds the intensity of McCain supporters.

It's going to be an ugly political season (so much for McCain's promise to run a clean campaign), but I seriously doubt Governor Palin's mockery is going to win over too many swing voters, undecideds or independents.

But it sure will make the "Drill Baby Drill" crowd happy.

UPDATE: Oops - turns out GOP strategist and former McCain aide Mike Murphy agrees with my take on the Palin nomination:

Republican political consultant Mike Murphy finds himself lonely among his fellow GOPers since he doesn't think Gov. Sarah Palin was a good choice as Sen. John McCain's running mate.

"I think she'll ultimately be a polarizer. After last night's smash, Republicans are in deep love. Nothing thrills 'em like a good 'us vs. them' speech. But I'd guess that most Democrats had the opposite reaction. In a year where the Democrat generic numbers are 10+ points better than the Republican, I don't like the math of a strategy that just polarized the election along party base lines. Among the vital sliver of voters in the middle, I think Palin's rock solid social conservatism will be a turn off. And while voters may value vision over experience, Palin's inexperience is a weakness, denying McCain an argument that has been helping him against Obama."

But after last night's speech, it looks like Murphy is about the only GOPer who feels Palin isn't going to help the ticket.

Conservative stalwarts Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy inadvertently opened a window into their private ruminations. Despite the jubilant cries of the GOP faithful, Ms. Noonan, who'd just written a WSJ column praising Ms. Palin (and who wouldn't praise her, after that vituperative, bitter, insane speech), showed the world what she really thought of the newly packaged VP candidate:

Noonan, who had praised Palin in a Wall Street Journal column in the morning, said, "It's over," and added, "Most qualified? No. I think they went for this, excuse me, political bull -- about narratives ... Every time Republicans do this, because that's not where they live, and that's not what they're good at, they blow it."

That may be true, but Ms. Palin is certainly good at vetoing funding for teenage mothers. And families with special needs children will doubtless have a friend in Ms. Palin, as long as they don't need health insurance, or day care, or a raise in the minimum wage (which Maverick Johny voted against 19 times).

Mayor Mike's "reformed" schools tell public school kids they're on a waiting list. The district Family Advocate office doesn't return phone calls.

Recent surgery? Take a hike, says the DoE.