A word of caution about the feeding frenzy going over Palin: The GOP are counting on this to take on a life of its own and make her into a sympathetic figure for those prone to believe that this country is under the influence of a "liberal" media. I don't think it's going to work this time, because things are looking bad for the GOP. However, I will be interested to see what she says in her speech tonight in contrast to this little speech to evangelicals in Alaska a while back. Remember how many people were turned off by Buchanan in 1996? Let's just say ol' Pat's in her corner. Point is, we all need to be careful, and start talking about this potential smoke screen. Because she's going to frame herself as the girl next door tonight. Think Ollie North. Or...

...this may seem counterintuitive, but I can't help but think back to the Anita Hill controversy, and wonder if Thomas would have sailed into the Supreme Court in 1991 if not for the sexual harassment allegations. At the time 98% of the Senate was male, and...I'll need to check the record on this...but I wonder if Thomas would have had the votes if his record and views alone were all that were considered. The controversy polarized a lot of people at the time, and though the shift took place later (remember 1992 as "year of the woman?"), I think for some in the Senate, the claim Clarence Thomas made, that of a high tech lynching, might have resonated with some in the Senate who might otherwise have voted against him because it made him a "sympathetic figure." Food for thought anyway. Camille Paglia said as much many summers ago.