vailian

.. but I am worried about some of the things she seems to stand for.
We have had a president the last 8 years who is convinced that faith and military might can cure all evils.
But I think the process in Iraq has probably demonstrated that shock and awe is not guaranteed to ensure peace and understanding in the region.
And his designated successor also has a military background, meaning perhaps a continuation of this philosophy?
So it was with a bit of relief that I read that he has a female running mate, a working mother with (I am hoping) some social sensitivity.
But I keep running across snippets of her biography that seem to point in another direction.
ABC News ran an article this morning which includes these quotes:
On the war in Iraq:

Pray for our military men and women who are striving do to what is right. Also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God.

.."a task that is from God"? Not "a task to help the Iraqi people" or even "to help America"-- but a "task from God"? Now that is calling in the Big Guns!! This reminds me forcibly of justification for the Crusades. And suggests that she may have that attitude that her God is somehow superior to theirs.
It is reported in the same article that the speaker at the last church service she attended in Alaska before the Republican convention had this to say:

He told congregants that terrorist attacks on Israel were God's "judgment" of Jews who haven't embraced Christianity. Brickner said, "Judgment is very real and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television. When a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment -- you can't miss it."

Anyhow I guess she is probably a good choice in the sense that she represents a logical continuation of the present course in the Middle East. Whether that is a Good Thing is perhaps debatable.