Let me preface this by saying that I am an Obama supporter, and there is much that I dislike and find downright alarming about Palin and her candidacy (and also her defenders, see Larimore's deeply flawed defense of her town's policy of billing the insurance companies of rape victims.)

But some of these posts descend into a level of nit-picking Palin that seems absurd to me, and personal. So she talked about Alaska as the heartland. That's par for the course politics, and hardly a flub of any great significance. So why the visceral reaction? Not only does it seem to be just an excuse to attack Palin, it's a flawed one. You don't have to be from the heartland to see what is happening there and be concerned. Just like you don't have to be a woman to understand and care about women's rights; and you don't have to be a minority to care about racism; and you don't have to be poor to care about poverty. There is such a thing as compassion or empathy, combined with intelligence that allows us all to see what is happening to our fellow humans, and care about it, and act on it. That's what our best leaders have, an ability to see clearly a broad range of issues - not just those that they have experienced personally - and understand why they are problems, why they are happening, and what we should do about them. I don't really care about having someone who has the same experience (or sex) as I do and who will therefore have the same visceral reaction to things (because I do recognize that actually experiencing something is different than just seeing it). I care much more about having someone who is intelligent enough and compassionate enough and thoughtful enough to see and understand and handle the broad range of experiences and problems that are this country.

Complaining that Sarah Palin isn't actually from the heartland is lame. Sure, her faux-folksiness is deeply annoying and offensive to those of us who see it as faux, and the heartland claim is part of that. But I sure hope that most voters will focus on whether her responses reveal a lack of depth and ability, and not on whether she's enough like them or from a place enough like theirs to vote for her.

So how about letting go of some of the petty excuses for attacks (she is more "grating" when she has the same position as Biden?) that descend into identity politics and personal attacks. There are plenty of grounds on which to criticize Palin without scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Why the visceral reaction? I think it's because the entire Sarah saga has been insulting to everyone. She started out with her pitbull comments - all tough and full of snide jabs - then lapsed into a verbal coma in the Couric and Gibson interviews. Last night she was perky and full of memorized lines but completely devoid of any substance. She puncuated her rambling comments with winks and "you betcha's" and her beauty contestant grin. This is not "folksy" - this is ridiculous. We all deserve better than this. There are so many people out there who would serve our country better - but she was chosen as a McCain publicity stunt - another insult to everyone's intelligence.

What's really interesting to me is that McCain supposedly chose her to gain the Hillary votes and it couldn't have backfired more. McCain was already going down but Sarah has made sure he won't win. For that, and only that, I can appreciate her.

What does that include? Is it just about tolerance, or does it include:

Attacking her for her vacuous talking point?

Attacking her for "flirting" with her audience?

Attacking her for seeming faux-folksiness?

I know, it's sort of dumb request on my part, but... I don't know. The attacks on the flirtiness and the faux folksiness, as much as those things annoy me, have just started to feel catty and to play to worst stereotypes of the way women attack each other.

Her vacuous talking points, however, are exactly what she should be attacked on, in my opinion.

I think that comments on her flirting ARE in line because she is being offered as a Hillary alternative (that was EXACTLY how she was presented at her debut). I can't remember Hillary, shimming, and winking in a debate. The combination of that with vacuousness sets a precedent for behavior in the future. It's worthy of discussion. I ask the question again, is this what it takes to get on the presidential ticket and what does this say about our society?

BTW, love the nick