Palin may turn out to be a smart choice—buzz-generating and bolstering McCain's claim to change—but the first hurdle is getting over the fact that she's not very well-known.

Buzz-generating, certainly. But how, exactly, does this woman, whose political ideology echoes the farthest-rightward positions of Bush and Cheney on (apparently) every major policy issue, bolster McCain’s claim to change?

Unless, of course, the change he has in mind is the kind that we—the vast majority of Americans, who so desperately want it—decidedly cannot believe in. And dearly hope never to have to try to.

Change in gender is not interchangeable with change in public policy.

You are obviously confused. It's not McCain that is espousing the "Change We Can Believe In" campaign slogan. That's Obama.

As for being unknown, Obama was virtually unknown until the lefters decided to groom him for the Presidency.

@J_M:

So then McCain wants no change? As Savant points out, this VP choice doesn't exactly scream: "I'm open to new avenues" does it?

If anything, McCain's choice makes clear he only knows how to work with a certain mindset; a mindset, I may point out, we've had for the last 8 years.

Further, I would argue that there's a difference between being "unknown" 2 years before the election (Obama), and being "unknown" with 60 days to go (Palin).

I believe Palin was a mistake and Romney was the way to go. Romney brought an undisputable economic weight to an otherwise clueless candidate, but instead McCain opted for the gender card on a candidate from the smallest of the redest states who's even younger than his opponent.

Chosing Palin was either some kind of political genius (a la Karl Rove) or a monster f*ck up. Only time will tell.