... how quickly they cave when someone gives a performance.

Palin read a speech. One speech. Written by someone else. From a teleprompter. All the Right has to do is claim she was tough and ruthless and the liberals line up to agree with them.

That is why the Right tends to do better at the presidential game -- they create their own reality. (That's also why they tend to screw up the actual governance -- they think they can treat international affairs or the economy as if they were the impressionable public -- the famous "reality-based, we create our own reality" comment demonstrates this nicely -- how's that going for you Bush administration?) They create it and the Democrats line up to kowtow to it.

Lithwick does the same thing here. She assumes that because Palin can read a mean-spirited speech well, that's just in her nature. Is there ANY evidence of that whatsoever? She's still using teleprompters now. Sure, they are going to push her heavily in the debate prep, but when it all comes down to it, there's only so much she can learn in the next month. She's nickel and dime -- the only reason she's earning dividends now is because the Right is claiming she's not nickel and dime and the liberals line right up to agree with them.

Oh, and Obama is capable of speaking without a teleprompter? Think not... Someone asked him a direct, pointed question (as opposed to the hundreds of softballs lobbed at him) and the response went something like this:

"Uh, um, ah, er... ahem... you know, uh I mean... That, that's above my pay grade..."

Obama has been on the stump for 18 months. He has appeared in over 18 unscripted debates. He has given possibly thousands of interviews. All in all, he has performed quite well in all instances. Sure, like anyone else in such a position, he has stumbled once or twice, but that is to be expected given the constant scrutiny he is under.

As a matter of fact, there is evidence that she is mean-spirited and vengeful. There was talk in Wasilla of her unfairly muscling her way onto the basketball team in high school, she tried to get the town librarian fired when she wouldn't censor books that Sarah "holier-than-thou" Palin thought were "inappropriate," she is under an ethics investigation for abusing her power as governor; shall I go on?

See, I can agree that there may be an over-reaction to her and all the nonsense she brings with her but I can see why it happens for two reasons:

1. While we'd all like to believe that the American people couldn't possibly be hoodwinked again by some slick-talking newbie who has no more experience than half the mayors and governors in the country and certainly less worldliness than many of them, it has happened and the fear is that it will happen again. American's, for some strange reason, have this love of anti-intellectual, "down-home" folksy types even if they don't know what that exactly means or even if the person they love is obviously the wrong person for the job. It's like an abusive relationship.

2. If they just dismiss Palin, that would also be seen as a sexist move. I can hear it now: Democratic supporter "Oh, we can deal with her. She's no real threat." Repub, "Oh yeah! That is a very sexist thing to say! You're saying that because she's a woman she can't do the job or she's not a worthy opponent? Shows how enlightened you are!" It's classic projection and Repubs are masters; it's the "I'm rubber, you're glue" approach to politics and too many people are duped by it.

Modern Repubs are great at winning elections by turning the tables but are terrible at governing. If Biden can stick to that point and not be seen as condescending or overbearing, he should be fine.