To avoid misunderstanding William’s comment, it should be understood that William is speaking ironically here and does NOT support McCain/Palin.

Also, William actually said “brilliant” choice (or move), not “genius” choice. The full context of William’s cited comment can be found on the “Feministe” blog in comment #40 (dated 08/30/2008 at 10:23 a.m.) in the thread to the post entitled “John McCain Thinks Women Are Stupid.”

The phrase “genius choice” was instead used by commenter “J. Dagger Lee” in comment #45 (dated 08/29/2008 at 4:35 p.m.) in the thread to the “Feministe” post entitled “Crap” (regarding the Palin nomination). JDL’s comment, like William’s, is meant to be understood ironically and NOT as support for McCain/Palin.

I apologize for not clarifying William’s comment in my initial post and also for carelessly misquoting him.

N5P7Q: Your’s is as good an explanation as any I’ve heard, although of course there can be more than one rationale for McCain’s pick. I’ve been trying to break down the VP selections into broad categories. (1) People McCain might have preferred as his running mate but couldn’t have, eg, Joe Liebermann and Lindsey Graham; (2) people McCain should have preferred as his running mate but didn’t, eg, Mitt Romney; (3) people McCain might have preferred as his running mate but they themselves didn’t want the job, eg, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson; (4) people McCain wouldn’t even consider having as a running mate but they themselves would have loved the job, eg, Sam Brownback.

I think the freakiness of the Palin choice shows that a good number of nationally known Republicans with solid resumes passed on the job offer.

This would be consistent with GOP strategy since 1968. Republicans like Rush Limbaugh have continuously made Obama’s race an issue in the election and Limbaugh is one of the few non-religious Republicans who have been explosively enthusiastic about Palin as VP (contrary to your expectation noted above). McCain spokesmen also use code language to refer to white racist voting patterns when the McCain staff claim that Palin’s nomination is meant to reach out to voters who “aren’t certain about Obama” (read: Obama isn’t white enough). An article in Slate.com, I think by Jacob Weisberg (which I can no longer locate), argues that Republicans could defeat Obama only by appealing to white racial anxiety, and I think that’s true.

I’m a conservative Republican myself and I can’t think of any reason to vote GOP this year except out of racism (if I vote at all, I’ll vote for Obama). Quite a few prominent Republicans or former Republicans have publicly endorsed Obama: Susan Eisenhower, the granddaughter of Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, was a lifelong Republican when she publicly endorsed Obama at the start of 2008 (she officially declared as an independent on 08/21/2008 in Invesco Stadium). Wikipedia has a list of other prominent Republicans who have publicly endorsed Obama, under the heading “Obama Republicans.”

Aside from Rovian party hacks like Limbaugh, the only other well-known Republicans who have been explosively enthusiastic about Palin as VP have been white Evangelicals (again contrary to your expectation noted above).

Surprisingly, the staff at National Review Online (conservative journal) have united in rejecting Palin’s nomination on the ground that she’s too radically unqualified to step in as Commander-in-Chief, given the risk that McCain might die in office.

Given the GOP’s history of playing the race card and the fact that only party hacks and white Evangelicals have shown enthusiasm for Palin, I’m surprised that Obama supporters, as exemplified in the threads at “Feministe,” seem to accept at face value McCain’s claim that he’s playing gender politics in choosing Palin as VP. When, on “Feministe,” I posted my above-stated point about racism, no one took up the issue except the commenter “William” in a later Feministe thread where he stated that Palin’s nomination reflected at least in part an appeal to prejudice — but even he called the Palin nomination a “genius” choice for achieving the goals of GOP strategists!

Regardless of what McCain and his staff publicly claim about their choice for VP, McCain & Co. must certainly have been aware that someone like Palin is not going to draw in Hillary supporters or any other women who are not already ultraconservatives.

So the only motive I can think of, besides galvanizing the GOP’s Evangelical base, is to provide a cover under which covert white racist voters can try to prevent a black (actually biracial) candidate from becoming President.

Also, to add to your critique of Palin herself, one additional incentive for choosing her as VP is that she is the only GOP woman in high office (state governor) that I know of who is not known to be tied to the Bush-Cheney mafia. This helps McCain distance himself from Bush. Congresswomen like Kay Hutchison, Olympia Snowe, etc., and even former EPA Chief Christine Todd Whitman are compromised by either working with Bush in Congress or being temporarily part of the Bush administration.

I apologize for this long post which repeats my former posts, but I really would like to know how Obama supporters see the racial angle that might lie behind Palin’s nomination. It really surprises me that Democrats and the press seem to unquestionally accept McCain’s claim of playing gender politics, without considering an appeal to racism in choosing Palin, in light of the fact that she might not ever be qualified to replace McCain as Commander-in-Chief.