Q: Where's Hillary? Did I just miss it in all the hoopla over Palin or is she sitting this one out, hoping Obama might fail and leave her another opportunity in four years? Sincere regards, Don

Submitted by Donald Fregeau from Fortuna, CA

A: Wow. So cynical. But that's what watching two uninterrupted weeks of politics will do. The first week saw Democrats pulling a Howard Beale, declaring they were mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. (How many times have they said that?) The second, Republicans decried the mess in Washington. But suffering from a case of collective amnesia, darn if they didn't forget that they've had the White House keys since 2001 and controlled Congress for six of the last eight years. So they proclaimed only they could reform the place. As for Sen. Clinton, she has been pretty true to her word about helping Obama. Most Democrats took the week off since it was all Republicans all the time. But in Denver, she scolded her supporters who were hanging back from backing him. And during the delegate roll call, she took the floor to call for his unanimous approval. She has pledged to hit the campaign trail this fall, too.

Answered 09/05/08 16:39:50 by David J. Goldstein

Q: With all the discussion surrounding the issue of experience with Mr. Barack Obama and the GOP insistance upon the lack there of, why is there no discussion about the lack of experience heard about Ronald Reagan or the current president prior to or since their elections? Even Bill Clinton has admitted his lack of experince prior to entering the White House.

Submitted by Malcolm E. Kucharski from Pittsburg, Kansas

A: All of them were experienced governors. Ronald Reagan served two terms as governor of California. George W. Bush was twice elected governor of Texas and Bill Clinton was elected governor of Arkansas five times. (The terms were only two years.)

Answered 09/04/08 19:25:28 by David J. Goldstein

Q: Why so much dumb stuff and no intelligent issues?

Submitted by The Wizard from Winston Salem, NC

A: It all depends on how you see the world. The author of the question (which I edited for brevity) also asked if former Sen. Fred Thompson really wants "to pick the next VP on the basis of who is qualified to field dress a moose." Hopefully not. But in the eyes of some voters, one candidate's skill with a moose is another's decision to ride the train from Delaware to Washington every day for more than 30 years so he can come home to his family every night. Both show a common touch. Still, the convention has been more style than substance. Nothing new there. Looking for a lot of substance at a political convention is like trying to find Mozart at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. But every poll shows that the economy is America's biggest concern. None of the big name speakers, however, ever mentioned the middle class. Not Palin, Giuliani, Romney, Lieberman or Fiorina. "This election is not about issues," McCain Campaign Manager Rick Davis told the Washington Post this week. And the convention, like the Democratic party in Denver, is about funny hats, balloons and fiery speeches to juice the base so it will work hard in the fall. But this four days has come off much better than Republicans had anticipated a week ago and they're giddy. Teddy White once described the Democratic convention in 1960 as "a continuous drone of great worries." That could have been the mood in St. Paul: a nominee who sometimes thumbed his nose at party dogma, a base that didn't trust him or really like him and a president whose popularity was lower than dirt. The party was even worried about having him there. His last convention as president. Then last night Sarah Palin wowed the hall. She was combative and personal in a speech heavy on sarcasm and condescension toward Obama. She even took a veiled shot at his wife. But the audience was on its feet and the party will leave Minnesota with a bounce, probably in the polls, but certainly in its step.

Answered 09/04/08 18:58:34 by David J. Goldstein

Q: Is McClatchy going to do a truth-squad report on the Palin speech like AP?

Submitted by HC from Plymouth CA

A: No. The bureau's story last night about Palin's speech challenged her claim about her role in a natural gas pipeline project in Alaska. It will publish a story today about the job of community organizer, which she disparaged because Obama used to be one. In general, as the campaign progresses, McClatchy will point out misstatements and falsehoods by any of the candidates in the normal course of its reporting.

Answered 09/04/08 14:40:44 by David J. Goldstein

Q: Here in SC the Republicans are estastic, since ours is the most conservative county in one of the most conservative states. Since Palin is clearly to the right of McCain, doesn't this hurt him with independants? How is it playing in the midwest swing state of Missouri

Submitted by Howard Harris from Greenville, SC

A: I haven't seen any polls yet from Missouri involving Gov. Palin. The latest polls in the state put McCain ahead. But independents are always a jump ball. This year it will be a battle because both McCain and Obama appeal to them. Palin's views on a lot of the conservative hot buttons, like abortion and sex education, could be a deciding factor for some voters, one way or the other.

Answered 09/03/08 21:10:40 by David J. Goldstein

Q: If Ms. Palin is so qualified, why didn't she write her own speech...Gov. Pawlenty said tonight on a cable station that, "they've written a great speech for her." So, it sounds like she's a puppet whose strings are being pulled by McCain, and NOT her own woman.

Submitted by Dick from Stratham, NH

A: I think it's pretty common for campaigns in both parties to have at least some working ideas and themes prepared for the running mate's speech. Gov. Palin was probably able to bring her own ideas to the final draft to make it more her own. It is, after all, her introduction to the nation and she can better express who she is and what's she's all about than anyone.

Answered 09/03/08 20:17:59 by David J. Goldstein

Q: When does Palin speak tonight?

Submitted by steve ellis from waynesville, nc

A: 10:35 eastern time.

Answered 09/03/08 19:07:56 by David J. Goldstein

Q: Why is the press reporting anythiing about Palin's daughter's pregnancy? The press wasn't interested in John Edward's mistress's pregnancy. What's different about this case?

Submitted by Thomas from Kansas City

A: The Edwards story first showed up in the supermarket tabloids. That's not a source you want to bank on, even if they're quoting your mom. But they had the goods this time and the press eventually followed, cautiously. The Palin story is different, not because of what it says about Gov. Palin's daughter, but what it says about John McCain's judgment and how he makes decisions. He named her the same day he sent a team to Alaska to fully vet her, according to reports. But more details keep coming out and the campaign can't control it. So its strategy is to insist that the vetting was thorough and blame the media for everything that's gone awry. That's often a last-ditch strategy when things aren't going the way you've planned.

Answered 09/03/08 19:04:43 by David J. Goldstein

Q: When is the press going to subject Obama and Biden to the same sort of scrutiny they're subjecting Palin (and her family!) to? Or is there a double standard?

Submitted by TJ from Overland Park, KS

A: There's no double standard. Ever since Obama got into the presidential race in Feb. 2007, he's been X-rayed by the news media. His life story, his parents, his grandparents, his wife, his education, his jobs, his record in the Illinois legislation and in the Senate have all been scrutinized and continue to be. It was hard to pick up a newspaper or watch cable news last spring and not see the stories about Obama's pastor and his controversial sermons. Or what about the stories on Obama's ties to Chicago real estate developer and supporter Tony Rezko, who was found guilty in June of bribery and influence peddling? Obama had no connection to any of that. But he did purchase property from Rezko in a sweetheart real estate deal that Obama has since said was a "mistake." Then there's the ongoing rumor that Obama attended a Muslim Islamic madrassa in Malaysia when he was young. Several news organization, including McClatchy, have found that the school's purpose was not Islamic indoctrination. If it seems to you like it's all Palin all the time and hey, when are you guys going to start reporting on Obama and Biden, that's because the Republican convention is the big story this week. Last week it was Democrats 24-7. The coverage will soon even out again. Palin, however, will still have a spotlight on her every move. She will get more attention than most running mates because she was such a surprise and so much is not known about her. That could end up being a two-edged sword for McCain. They picked her, we are told, because they wanted to shake up the race. It worked. But the homework they did on her was pretty thin. Now the press is trying to fill in the gaps.

Answered 09/03/08 16:49:52 by David J. Goldstein

Q: What does "GOP" stand for?

Submitted by Naomi Cartledge from Australia

A: The common belief is that it stands for "grand old party." But the Republican Party's web site says that it actually means "gallant old party."

Answered 09/03/08 15:29:31 by David J. Goldstein

Q: How might one obtain a copy of Sen. Fred Thompson's address to the convention? Or the copy of any such address?

Submitted by Pete Burrows from Colebrook, NH

A: The speeches are available on the Republican Party's convention site: www.gopconvention.com

Answered 09/03/08 15:21:53 by David J. Goldstein

Q: Is Palin going to resign her slot on the ticket this week or early next?? Thanks...

Submitted by RB-Chicago from Chicago, IL

A: Do you know something that the rest of us don't? Don't expect to see Palin get the boot. But this has been a topsy-turvy year. Any prediction is suspect. It would take more of the drip-drip-drip of disclosures about the governor, the kind that would continue to raise questions about her judgment, and McCain's for selecting her. "We're confident we know everything we need to know about Gov. Palin," Campaign Manager Rick Davis said in a TV interview today. They better hope they're right because it appears they've been learning some of the things about Palin about the same as the rest of us. The New York Times reported today that McCain didn't send a vetting team to Alaska until last Thursday, the day before he told everyone that she was his running mate. Do you think it's possible they missed something? The Times also said that aides to one of the top veep also-rans, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, said his vetting lasted up to two months. It was also unclear exactly when McCain learned that Palin's 17-year-old daughter was pregnant, the paper reported. McClatchy, meanwhile, has reported that neighbors, members of the Alaska political community and others have said they were never contacted about Palin. The Washington Post has reported that McCain advisors said Palin underwent an FBI background check. The FBI said she didn't. Stay tuned.

Answered 09/02/08 22:06:57 by David J. Goldstein

Q: Is the real reason Mr. McCain (or his campaign advisors) picked Sarah Palin because she is a fundamentalist Christian? Because it sure cannot be for any other reason that I can see when there are so many more qualified candidates.

Submitted by Gary Priester from Placitas, NM 87043

A: I don't know whether Gov. Palin refers to herself as a fundamentalist Christian, but leading social conservatives haven't been this happy since they mugged former White House Counsel Harriet Miers on her way to winning a seat on the Supreme Court. Look, no matter what else he has to do to beat Sen. Obama, tops on John McCain's list is making sure he leaves St. Paul with the GOP base jazzed up. Before Palin, that was no given. If McCain had picked Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman - both of them close McCain allies and pro-choice -there would have been a lot of unhappy delegates in the twin cities. McCain was never comfortable with the social conservatives, nor they him. He once called two of their leadings lights, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, "agents of intolerance." But Palin punches every ticket. She's against abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research. Earlier this year, she likened the Iraq war to "a task that is from God," according to a report today in the left wing Huffington Post. Religious Right leader Gary Bauer called the pick a "grand slam home run." Ralph Reed, who used to run the Christian Coalition, said, "social conservatives are finally putting on their cleats and getting onto the field." That's a big boost for McCain. Palin's gender also helps. More than half the voters are women. Now Republicans can bill themselves as "change" agents, too. This is about drawing a few more women voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. To the McCain brain trust, that possibility was worth sacrificing his no experience attack on Obama. Yes, the vetting job on Palin raises a whole lot of questions.("I've interviewed summer law clerks for longer times than this," Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, said on MSNBC.) So does the fact that he met her only one time before. But bottom line, if he wanted to shake up the race and make some news, mission accomplished.

Answered 09/02/08 20:11:51 by David J. Goldstein

Q: I keep hearing from Republicans that Sarah Palin has more experience than Barack Obama. Well, if you apply the same litmus test to John McCain, she has more "experience" than he does! But nobody rebuts their argument with that fact! I think it is a ridiculous argument in the first place. Thanks, Jennifer Karches

Submitted by Jennifer Karches from Bowling Green OH

A: What they're talking about is "executive" experience. Palin has some because she's been a governor and a small town mayor before that. As senators, the only decisions McCain, Obama and Biden get to make are how to vote. Does that really mean anything politically? If you're talking about someone like a Tom Ridge, who's been a governor and cabinet secretary, yes. But the reality is if you're the McCain campaign and you're on the defensive about your pick almost from the moment it was announced - and been buffeted by even more questions since then - you use whatever you've got. It's always said that the most important qualification in picking a vice president is to do no harm. It's also about picking someone who is qualifed to become president. A lot of questions are swirling around Palin - - and as a result, McCain - on both points.

Answered 09/02/08 18:52:09 by David J. Goldstein