There's a lot of bluster and useless words wasted on this election so I would simply like to thank the author for a series of questions that, while a bit under-handed at times, are still worth asking and more importantly worth answering. An informed public more and more needs to hear officials actually answering questions. Thank you.

J. Bodner

Cumberland, BC

OMFG! The sneers that Sarah Palin elicits from feminists are just delicious. The "sisterhood" is determined to drown Ms. Palin, and will just die if she were to break that glass ceiling! I adore a good girl fight, and these liberal media feminists are pulling hair, spitting and proving what Chris Rock knows to be true: "You would think women would rule the world. But they don't. You know why? Because women hate women! Women. HATE. Women..."

I'm gonna embrace my XX chromosomes and join the bitchfest. As soon as the Republicans put a woman on the ticket that supports (gasp) republican views, all of Park Slopes' crunchy liberal feminist journalists slithered out of the woodwork ready to attack Palin. The feminist movement is now so ridiculously bitchy! So what if she's a woman? She's not like us! Get her! Thankfully, liberal feminists are as tough as the teacher's pet. Judith Warner, JoAnn Wypijewski, Katha Pollitt, and Cintra Wilson have all dug their unmanicured finger nails into Palin for the pettiest of petty.

The enlightened Katha Pollitt showed her support for the VP woman by tsk-tsking her for using her son Trig as a "campaign prop" and snorted that living with the Palins would be like a sitcom called "Leave it to Jesus." Can you feel the feminist bond?

The "objective analyst" Cintra Wilson hurled insults as sharp as butter knives: "Women, even if they are vice president, can always look pretty, worship their husbands in the fear of God and never, ever resist invasions from unwanted sperm."

The mature and level journalist Judith Warner wrote: "Thanks to the level of general esteem that greeted her ascent to the podium, it seems we've all got to celebrate the fact that America's Hottest Governor (Princess of the Fur Rendezvous 1983, Miss Wasilla 1984) could speak at all." Girls always get so catty about women who are successful and pretty.

JoAnn Wypijewski argues that she knows what's really going on in Palin's vagina and McCain's marriage by accusing McCain of sexism because he fiddled with his wedding band while eyeing Palin's breasts. Wypijewski went on to argue that Palin is symptomatic of Christians encouraging women by "promoting a particular image of married womanhood as sex machine, urged, as Dagmar Herzog notes in an interesting new book, Sex in Crisis, to 'keep their legs shaved and vaginas douched at all times. Just in case.' "

OMG, this girl fight just turned into a mud-wrestling mess! All that I can say about this feminist "analysis" of Sarah Palin is, thank God Palin came along when she did! I am a liberal Democrat who is thrilled with this new feminist image! The reason that girls in their 20s don't call themselves "feminists" is exactly because of this FemiNazi hijacking of the term. Girls of the Sex and the City generation don't identify with the asexual, granola-eating, Birkenstock-wearing brand of feminism. There is a culture of sexual, meat-eating, makeup-loving feminists that will body slam the (in the words of Camille Paglia) "prissy, victim-mongering, philistine feminist establishment." So who are these neo feminists who resemble Palin more closely then Hillary? In order to study them in their natural environment one should be keenly aware of their traits. To help observe them here are their top 10 signs:

1) A local nail salon, (you get extra credit if you find ones with dark polish)
2) Lining their inner lids with Urban Decay's "zero" pencil at Sephora
3) Reading UsWeekly while on the train
4) They order skinny lattes at Starbucks
5) Keep an eye out for them in the meat aisle of your local grocery store
6) If she texts, yes you found one...
7) She wears perfume
8) Watching/discussing reality TV
9) LOVES her boyfriend/husband unapologetically and completely
10) Laughs at Colbert's "The Word" segment featuring: Femistapo

Conversely, here are 10 signs that you are dealing with the Femistapo:
1) She considers a "basecoat" a manicure
2) Her beauty regimen involves bar soap only
3) She reads Ms. magazine
4) She orders decaf at Starbucks
5) Keep an eye out for them wherever your grocery store sells turkey bacon
6) She actually talks on her phone (extra points if she has a blue tooth headset)
7) She smells of patchouli
8) She brags about not owning a TV
9) Proudly refuses to cook
10) Manages to use the word "sexist" when describing art and jokes

Now that we have identified the important characteristics of the two feminist types, let's get back to Sarah Palin. Palin was selected because she's pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She's fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption. She also has about the same amount of political experience as Obama (ten years total, pretty evenly split between state and federal level).

Sarah Palin's now legendary speech at the Republican national convention included a tribute to her husband. Judith Warner declared that Palin was "subordinate to a great man." Never mind her husband had her back that night, her words of love meant she's a "subordinate."

WTF? Where feminazis see a religious, "pro-life," moose-killing, inexperienced neglectful mother, I see something different. I see a spiritual, self-sufficient, involved, ambitious mother (who runs marathons to boot) and uses her extended family to enable her career. I'm pro-choice. But unlike the legion of feminazis, I can admire someone with different political beliefs.

The reason Palin is such a leap for woman everywhere is because she more closely represents modern American women. Some women do go to prestigious colleges, hold prestigious jobs, have prestigious kids and have prestigious husbands. (I admire Hillary too.) Others go to state schools, have military families, still have sex with their husbands and still manage to succeed on high levels. I dare to say that though Hillary is a Democrat, and espouses leftist views, she lives like a duchess and people know her because of her husband. Sarah worked her way through school and made her name by herself.

Christina Stroz

Brooklyn, NY

Thanks for the great essay, though. Believe it or not, many of us in Alaska are totally aghast at the idea of our governor going breast to breast with Putin and Kim Jong Il.

Anyone interested in a time-share in Iceland?

Brooke Heppinstall

Palmer, AK

This is exactly why you're bound to be so disappointed the day after Obama loses the election. Aside from the humorous spin and jokes involved, this list betrays exactly the sort of snobbish elitism that the Democratic upper class is so steeped in. You probably have no idea that there's anything beyond indignation at how Obama has been treated unfairly in this.

Being a Yale man, you think everyone of worth should think like a Yale man, so the idea that someone might have moved from college to college w/o graduating, or might not have bothered voting until he was 25, might actually purposely give birth to a disabled child, or might have held a series of relatively unimpressive jobs, somehow makes them unworthy of serious presidential consideration. None of your friends did that. And after all, shouldn't the elite run the country? Shouldn't the proud intellectual heritage of Cardozo, Story, Marshall (both of 'em), etc. be the ones we should trust with the tough decisions? Maybe the answer is yes. Certainly the Ivy Leaguers would have it no other way.

What you fail to give serious consideration to, and why you will be surprised, is that the vast majority of Americans didn't do well in college, if they went at all. They've held, and been fired from, lots of crappy jobs you would never stoop to take. They don't bother voting, because they don't really follow politics and don't see the point anyway. They don't know anybody who went to a top-ranked college, much less the Ivy League (except maybe their doctor). They like stupid movies that you would never allow your children to see, and have three books in their house, one of which might be a Bible, but is even more likely a joke book. These people have nothing in common with (you or) Obama and don't see him as one of them in any way.

Then Palin comes on the scene and here's someone most Americans can relate to, both liberal and conservative, whether they agree with her politics or not. You can call her family a bunch of rednecks all you want, but you are only showing your own perpetual snobbery, and I feel 100 percent that come election day there are going to be far more people than you think who will vote for someone like them, rather than for someone who is not.

Obama is not going to win because he's a smart Ivy Leaguer, he's going to lose for that very fact. Nobody automatically likes smart Ivy Leaguers, except other smart Ivy Leaguers. The rest of us just feel sad that they spend all of their time reading and mulling over how other people don't do the right thing all the time. And they are generally no fun in bars, because only the worst of them know any jokes. And when they start calling the rest of us stupid because we don't think like them...

Robert Exton

San Fransisco , CA

I am 60 years old and have never been more frightened for my country and its ideals. This is probably the most regrettable presidential campaign in my lifetime, for its shallowness.

Does anyone know what Palin's education credentials are, and more importantly, what her attitude toward learning is?

In this pseudo-Christian country, the public doesn't really grasp what these Pentecostals believe in and what their outlook is. Obviously, honesty isn't one of their tenets, but hypocrisy must be. They are anti-intellectual, anti-reason, and proud of it. The supernatural explanation has priority over the rational. These End Timers have the attitude (like James Watt, Reagan's Interior Secretary--remember him? Or John Ashcroft draping a cloth over the bare-breasted statue?) "Jesus is coming--let's rape the earth of its resources and wildlife, since we'll be lifted up and Raptured any day now, and all the wicked perople, like tree huggers and PETA, will be left behind to suffer unspeakable torments." This is scary stuff, but I don't hear any honesty in the news media about it. They are afraid that it will hurt their market share and advertising revenue, no doubt. Or her supporters won't go to Disney World or the movies, which the media giants own. And since God speaks directly to them (like Bush and Iraq--remember him?)and they act through the Holy Spirit, they are never wrong, but everyone else will burn in hell forever. Personally, I say let the Rapture come and get those people out of here, and we who remain will restore the earth to the place of peace and beauty that it is meant to be.

As far as war with Russia goes, they welcome it, since there is a biblical prophecy about what they take to be Russia, coming down from the north to attack Israel. This is dangerous, but they believe they are doing the right thing, and who's going to talk them out of it, with a mind-set like theirs?

McCain "chose" Sarah Palin? Wrong. It was Karl Rove, the master politicaal puppeteer. Could there have been a more shameless and cynical move? McCain sold his soul back in those days when his campaign was going nowhere. This is part of the Faustian bargain he made--look at the phenomenal recovery he's made. He is without honor, but it works, and that's what counts. I do believe that with Sarah Palin on the ticket, he will win the election.

Stephen Van Woert

Altamont, NY

The National Organization for Women has endorsed Obama for President: http://www.canow.org/canoworg/2008/09/now-jumps-in- on.html

Elena Perez
California National Organization for Women

Sacramento, CA

Thank you, Katha Pollitt. Your questions are precise, inescapably pertinent, and revealing even without the answers (or especially without them!).

Sunita Prasad

Brooklyn, NY

How can John McCain keep claiming the tenor of the campaign will change if Obama agrees to Town Hall meetings? Does he not have enough honor and trust in the American people to run a campaign just on the issues? Is he not maverick enough to run a campaign free of the same tactics that were used against him in 2000?

That is what I want to know.

Will Deyamport

Hattiesburg, MS

Sara Palin is a puppet of the neocons (more aptly, the neo-fascist thugs). She is nothing but Bush in heels. Just like Bush, she is depending on her so-called likeability, her "spunk," the ability to discharge verbal zingers on cue and to use her homeliness as a political weapon. Like Bush, she is able to fool the voters by hiding her incompetence and her unsuitability for the job of Vice President, and perhaps of President, given McCain’s age and health. Many voters are unwilling to consider what is known about the state of the country and the world, continue to disregard the potential impact of the problems that we face and are oblivious to another four years of the Bush’s failed policies if the Republicans win. Neocons created Bush, and they are at it again. And just like Bush, the same people will run the country if McCain/Palin wins. I think this is partly a consequence of the failures of the spineless Democrats, who connived with the criminals such as Richard Perle, Paul Wolfwitz, Doug Fieth, Ronald Rumsfeld, Dick Chaney, et al., and enabled the war in Iraq, to prosecute these neo-fascists for war crimes, probably fearing that their own collaboration would be exposed. Even the well-meaning but cowardly Democrats completely failed to comprehend the political benefits of an open trial of these thugs! We are in for a tough time if the criminals and their roles in this election are not exposed and discredited. If McCain/Palin wins, it would embolden them to an unimaginable extent.

M. Siddique

Chevy Chase, MD

After being pronounced "supremely under-qualified," along with Ms. Pollitt's other condescending, snide comments, why should Governor Palin answer any question of Ms. Pollitt's? As a matter of fact, Palin is ultimately answerable only to the American people come November and not to any media, especially not The Nation.

Charles Jackson

Atlanta, GA

Coming from someone who finds the possibility of Sarah Palin in the White House deeply disturbing, you would sound much more intelligent and be more persuasive if you could analyze her objectively and stick to the facts. It is unfair to say that she has suggested that God approves of the war in Iraq. If you look at her statement in its entirety, this is clear. The tone of the entire article sounds like an attempt to slander Palin out of rage with unsubstantiated charges and below-the-belt implications with no reasoning to show where its coming from. Not to actually think or look into anything deeper than the surface level. How does anyone take this seriously? She tries to make Palin look like she hates women and polar bears but is a rapist sympathizer; Palin is dead-bent on causing as much pain and suffering as possible! While Palin's ignorance may be undeniable, you should still give her positions a fair report. You don't need to make things up in order to portray Palin as incompetent, the truth shall set you free!

Matthew Cooper

Los Angeles, CA

Hey, G.W. Bush's main claim to foreign policy experience was living near Mexico. That worked out pretty well, didn't it? What's the problem here?

All this high-minded talk about issues and competence is entirely beside the point. That's not what Palin is about. Her calling is more primordial. She has come to save the Traditional Tribe of Old White Guys in their dark hour of direst need by infusing new energy into its collective rotting corpse.

The burst of energy Palin released is nothing less than the apotheosis of the Evangelical Mother Goddess liberated from the prison of eons of repression. All that feminine energy bound up beneath the respectable Republican girdles and mascara has now been set loose to reinvigorate the Free World. It hardly matters whether the lady knows what the "Bush doctrine" is about.

To be sure, the unlikely initial manifestation of this newly emerged Goddess consciousness is riddled with absurdities. But over time more useful forms will surely evolve. The big question is whether the planet can survive long enough for this nasty stuff to work itself out. For now the important fact is that, finally, the lid is off the pot and the psychic pressures that have been driving these people crazy can begin to equalize.

Stafford Smith

Seattle, WA

You ask of Sarah Palin, What is the EU and how does it work?

I live in it and I'd love to know the answer to both questions.

Thomas Gibbs

Port Talbot, UK

As another resident of "those pesky states between the mountains," in fact the same great state that Mr. Hanson [see below] hails from, I don't find the questions Pollitt raised to be "insulting." I want to know their answers. "Liberal snobs" don't get to decide what is or is not science. Scientists use the scientific process, and their findings are peer-edited and reviewed. I can't speak to whether or not scientists are "liberal snobs." My understanding is that they are devoted professionals with years of education and training. As a resident of Missouri, this is an issue that became particularly important when our neighboring state of Kansas recently attempted to integrate the teaching of intelligent design into its curriculum--a scary prospect to those who ascribe to the scientific method and to those who hold to the doctrine of separation of church and state.

Mr. Hanson writes that "faith is offensive because it doesn't fit into the Platonic Republic ruled by liberal elitist philosopher kings so desired by the snobs." As a person raised in "faith," I would posit that "faith" is offensive because it often sees only its own ends and aims. Certainly Palin and all other politicians are entitled to their faith. The concern with faith in American politics is the extent to which our elected representatives base their practices and policies on the interests of their "faith," rather than using the broad American spectrum of beliefs and faiths, or lack thereof, as their litmus test for what Americans consider to be valuable in a multi-faith society. Consider Pollitt's question to Palin: "Approximately how old is the earth? Five thousand years? 10,000? 5 billion?" Palin's answer to this question and other scientifically based questions reveals how this candidate will approach policies that affect human beings' place on this planet. How old one considers the earth to be directly relates to how we understand biological processes on this planet, which relates to how we handle climate change on this planet. And how we handle climate change on this planet directly affects all of the inhabitants here, not just those of "faith." Perhaps this is a more pressing issue for those without "faith," as we see this planet as our home for all the foreseeable future.

I agree with Mr. Hanson, there are two Americas. However, I see these two Americas inhabited by those who have power and those who do not. I see hard-working Americans: Americans without healthcare, Americans unable to save for their retirement and certainly unable to rely on Social Security as a safety net, Americans who are defaulting on student loans because they do not earn enough to pay back their loans, Americans who have no hope because they feel that the system is stacked against them. The other America is a corporate world where CEOs are rewarded for keeping stock prices up even while the company is collapsing. The other America is a place where health care is denied because a cost-benefits analysis carries more weight than human compassion. The other American is more concerned with corporate profits than equal pay for equal work--the only answer I can come up with when our Senate refused to extend the timeline for bringing action against employers who won't pay women an equal wage. The other America says "pull yourself up by your bootstraps," even when every avenue to advancement is blocked because a body can only work so many hours in a week.

I don't know anything about "these snobs sipping over-priced wine in New England" that Mr. Hanson refers to. I'd like to know Governor Palin's stance on many of the questions raised by Pollitt, but I have a feeling her answer wouldn't make a difference to me. I'm going to vote for Barack Obama because his tax plan seems to lay more of the tax burden on the other America--the America who cares more about profit than people. Maybe that America is drinking over-priced wine. I wouldn't know.

Polly Hawk

Saint Joseph, MO

Perhaps Rachal Maddow summed up the questions best for us all: Who is "competent" to be President? In the competency test, Palin fails. Her answers to the proposed questions would only enbolden the already stoked extreme right. Honest analysis of those answers would only inflame the already pumped left. What the centrists--I am one--want to know is how Palin's view of governing impacts us. She is only one mole away from the presidency if elected. I appreciate this article. I would like more depth, however. Please continue the good work but also, please, look for some more depth, just like you want to see from Palin.

R.L. Bridges

Denver, CO

Forty-seven million Americans lack health insurance. John Goodman, who has advised McCain on healthcare, has proposed redefining them as covered because, he says, anyone can get care at an ER. Do you agree with him?

I was one of those 47 million ininsured when I rolled my car three times at 65 mph.

I was cut from the wreckage--and the Democratic administration of Columbus, Ohio, immediately sent me a $900 ambulance bill.

$800 for the ER trauma team (paid in cash).
$2500 for radiology (X-rays/MRI) (paid cash).
$4,100 for my surgeon (paid cash).
$950 for the anaesthesiologist (paid cash).
$3,900 for "rehab therapy" (paid cash).
$38,450 for forty-eight hrs in a hospital bed with an antibiotic IV (negotiated down to $11,500--and I paid cash!)

Explain to me why this one-time outlay of $50k means I would have been better off paying $5k/yr for the last twenty years?

Scott F. Fletcher

Altoona , PA

There's one additional question that could be asked of Sarah Palin: does she think that rape victims are responsible for the crime committed against them? Here's a fully sourced account via the conservative Boston Herald, of all places, putting Palin completely outside of the feminist camp and showing a total lack of compassion.

Eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaska Legislature to pass a bill--signed into law by [Governor] Knowles--that banned the practice statewide. "There was one town in Alaska that was charging victims for this, and that was Wasilla," Knowles said. A May 23, 2000, article in Wasilla's newspaper, The Frontiersman, noted that Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies regularly pay for such exams, which cost between $300 and $1,200 apiece. "(But) the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests," the newspaper reported. It also quoted Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon objecting to the law. Fannon was appointed to his position by Palin after her dismissal of the previous police chief. He said it would cost Wasilla $5,000 to $14,000 a year if the city had to foot the bill for rape exams.

...And this in the town that receives the highest per-capita federal earmarks (pork) in Alaska! The cruel policy is way beyond even her opposition to abortion under any circumstances, which pollitt has noted.

I know a victim of rape, and as I read her the story this morning, her reaction was visceral. Her body leaned forward, her eyes widened, and her jaw dropped open.

I am passing the story on to my e-mail list, and she'll pass it on, too.

peter desmond

Cambridge, MA

As a reader who enjoys deriding Katha Pollitt from time to time, I applaud her efforts to show us what Sarah Palin looks like before the lipstick goes on. It's bad enough that a former third-rate Navy pilot thinks he has what it takes to run the free world. That the aforementioned would attempt pander to those who would have a woman President at any cost would be risible if the stakes weren't so high.

If anything, some of Pollitt's questions were incomplete. I'd ask Palin if she's prepared to have every religion's creation story debated in science class (any fool can see Palin wouldn't). If not, then perhaps Palin can explain what's so damn special about the Christian creation myth that it alone deserves to square off against Darwin in the public square.

Douglas Presler

Minneapolis, MN

The female issue that is being kept "under the rug"--as usual--is the fact that all females of our species undergo the emotional upheaval of the change of life, i.e., menopause. We all have to deal with this. If we just let the process unroll, we suffer emotional and physical upheavals for at least several years and sometimes longer. If we decide to forgo those upheavals, we must use supplemental estrogen. Sarah Palin is aging; this is obvious from both her mid-40s age and the birth of a Down Syndrome baby. Obviously she has not used supplemental estrogen to prevent births. It is a very legitimate question to ask if she intends to use it for menopausal symptoms. If she does not, for at least a few years during her potential presidency she will be functioning at a lesser level. It is also legitimate to ask if/how she plans to avoid the birth of another Down Syndrome baby--possibly during a presidency--or at least on "our payroll" as Vice President.

Alice Wahl

Silver Spring, MD

I think there are many women who have tried to have it all--career, marriage, children--in no particular order and have worked hard to balance all of that. Then along comes a woman who can have her fifth child who is handicapped in her 40s and delay the birth so she can give a speech and fly from Texas to Alaska. Many of us would consider that irresponsible, yet she is embraced by supporters who vilified other accomplished women.

We worked hard for FMLA so we could have time with family in the event of an illness. We educate our daughters (and sons) to make good choices about becoming sexually active and to not be reckless about it. We want our daughters to be able to support themselves before they consider motherhood, but this woman celebrates a tragic teenage pregnancy.

Palin comes along after we have seen Hillary, who represents getting to the top with intelligence, hard work and playing by the rules, get knocked out of the race. Of course, we all know Sarah Palin is no presidential candidate, but we seem to expect so little of our leaders. They no longer have to be statesmen (or stateswomen) committed to doing the right thing for our country. I fear we will pay for our own reckless choices as an electorate. Ms. Pollitt's column expressed views I have heard over the last week from my friends and colleague, none of whom watch The View or care much about watching Barbara Walters cheapen her illustrious career with confessions about her sexual exploits. This is a presidential election. Let us hope that we can get back to the real issues of the election and select the best candidate to lead our country.

Kathy Benedetto

Johnson City, TN

All the other letters attack Obama and do nothing to prove any of Pollitt's points wrong. Also, none of them say that Palin is qualified, which means they agree with Pollitt, but I guess they just hate this guy Obama so much based on what they saw on Fox News that they'd vote for her. Have any of you ever met Obama? Do you really know anything about him? When you make this "I like to get to know a candidate personally to make my decisions" argument, I must say you sound very stupid. How on earth can you get to know someone personally through media coverage or speeches? You can't. That's why I'm going to vote on issues instead of whether or not someone eats mooseburgers. That's why this whole culture war the McCain camp is going to start is going to work, because you don't want a President who's bad at bowling. Please, let McCain steal the election, let him promise more tax cuts for the rich and hardly any for the people who actually need it. Let him get away with lying about Obama's tax plan till half the country believes it. Vote for someone who has no plan on healthcare and wants to overturn Roe. v. Wade. Please elect someone who has switched his position on the Bush tax cuts so many times, at one point calling them irresponsible, and now champions them as if he has all along. Let him get away with it. You'll get the President you deserve.

Sean Hellman

Denton, TX

I've had it. I like to stay informed about the issues of the day and I like to hear from all sides, or at least that's how it used to be. After reading Katha Pollitt's... (what would you call it? tantrum? missive?) I'm done with this national food fight we call public discourse. It seems that instead of making salient points about the election and the candidates and making a coherent argument, we all want to be clever and biting. Columnists want to be stand-up comedians, they want to come up with a real zinger and have their cleverness spread throughout the blogs and the cable universe. However, there's a difference between clever and intelligent. Dave Chappelle is clever, but I don't look to him for political analysis and commentary. So, I'm done. They say when the world throws lemons, make lemonade. So, what do you do when the world throws rotten tomatoes? What do make when someone hurls insults and half-baked rumors and ad hominem attack? You make tracks. For the exit.

Regi Davis

Los Angeles, CA

I have an idea I want to share with everyone. It's a better riposte to the farcical claim that Palin has experience in foreign affairs "because Alaska is next to Russia" (an assertion which a sane world would sweep aside with gales of derisive laughter).

Instead of asking Palin, as Ms. Pollitt suggests, when last she spoke with Putin, journos should ask her this: If residing in the state geographically closest to Russia confers foreign affairs experience and/or knowledge, does it then follow that the entire population of Alaska meets this qualification to be Vice President?

Here's a follow-up: Are residents of Nome sharper on foreign affairs than residents of Juneau?

Daniel Fleisher

Baltimore, MD

It is clear once again what is fatally flawed in American politics. The questions themselves were insulting and elitist-sounding when read by a resident in one of those pesky states between the mountains. Since when do liberal snobs get to decide what is or is not science? Since when is a repeal of a poorly decided Supreme Court case, a repeal that would make the regulation of abortion a matter of state law, the same thing as forcing women to have a baby? The sit-com crack ("Leave it to Jesus") was so offensive it made me laugh. I guess this author agrees with the Congressman who likened Palin to Pontius Pilate. If the liberals want to connect with people of faith (a significant voting block), this is most certainly not the way to do it. Oh, yeah! Faith is offensive because it doesn't fit into the Platonic Republic ruled by liberal elitist philosopher kings so desired by the snobs sipping over-priced wine in New England. John Edwards was right, after all: there are two Americas. There is the elitist America that wants hard-working Americans to pay for bloated and ultimately failed government programs; and then there is the America of personal responsibility, de-centralized power and opportunity (or what there is left of it). Why don't you start over and come up with some real questions that don't assume answers to points very much in controversy? Then we can talk.

James Hanson

Sedalia, MO

I came away from Pollitt's article with a worse feeling. The image of a working mom President is very powerful. A strong woman for tough times.

I have to admit that there is something very sexy about pretty lady shooting an M-16.

Keep us informed, Katha!

dave seffner

Moore City, FL