It looks like we might not just bend over today.  Nancy is saying no!

Congress will respond to the financial markets crisis by taking action this week in a bipartisan manner that will protect the taxpayers' interests. The Administration's $700 billion proposal does not include the necessary safeguards. Democrats believe a responsible solution should include independent oversight, protections for homeowners and constraints on excessive executive compensation.

"We will not simply hand over a $700 billion blank check to Wall Street and hope for a better outcome. Democrats will act responsibly to insulate Main Street from Wall Street.

Who is taking the lead on this?  One Barack Obama, that's who!  While McCain spent the day - ummm, anyone know what he did today? - Obama was on a conference call with Democratic leaders to organize the response.  That 7 point plan in Obama's speech today wasn't just for show.  

"Spokesperson Linda Douglass says that the conversations were about devising a "quick, bipartisan solution" to the economic crisis and they touched on the principles that Obama laid out in a speech in Charlotte, N.C., today."

Obama is leading on this issue and helping to solve the crisis without giving away the store.  It almost looks... what's that word again...  presidential!  

Well I think we're seeing why they kept her under wraps.  ABC got the puff interview, but she said something that I hope won't play well:

The Governor advocated the accession of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.

When asked by Gibson if under the NATO treaty, the U.S. would have to go to war if Russia again invaded Georgia, Palin responded: "Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.

Does anyone think that a war with Russia over Georgia or Ukraine is in our interests?  This isn't Iraq here; we're talking about going to war with a country that has many nuclear weapons.  I hope at some point in that interview she said why this is so crucial.  How many Americans had even heard of the non-state Georgia 3 months ago?  I thought it was the Islamists who were our mortal enemy now.

Time to bring back the Daisy ad.  

Update: Some people in the comments suggested a line of reasoning where Palin didn't actually call for war per se. I can see the point, but: (1) If Palin actually were the VP now, making a comment like that actually would go a long way towards bringing us to war. (2) We just spent 48 hours addressing if, "Lipstick on a pig," was a veiled attack. I'm not seeing the need to go out of my way to pull Palin out of a hole she dug for herself, especially because I'm not convinced McCain isn't itching for a war.

Palin's Church Promoting Conversion of Gays to Heterosexuals

Gov. Sarah Palin's church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

"You'll be encouraged by the power of God's love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality," according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed for about six years.

What biased, left wing media source is reporting that?  Fox News of course.  

There are reasons why Palin's church bothers me more than Obama's.  Obama, while he does seem to believe in Jesus, joined his church because he was amazed at the good work he could do by being a member of that community.  Palin joined hers because she believed in it.  Obama has denounced the controversial messages of his church.  Palin hasn't said one word either way.   Obama doesn't bring up the themes of his church at all.  Palin speaks in the language of hers and makes anti-abortion legislation her most important issue.   Some of you might want to add that  I like Obama and hate Palin, and I can't deny that bias, but the reason I dislike Palin so much is because of this.  

There's a reason they're keeping Palin off the trail.  Their approach is to lay low and hope that only the right people hear about her beliefs.  If she can't be asked about them, she doesn't have to either defend them (and lose moderates) or denounce them (and lose her supporters).  It's the Internet age though and I believe the truth will get out.

So the RNC is over now.  The Democratic convention gave Obama/Biden a 7-8 point bump that lasted, well it's still there.  The fear is that the RNC will undercut it.  I just don't see it.

So far, looking at the tracking polls, Monday and Tuesday were duds for the Republicans.  They didn't accomplish much or move anyone.  Obama actually widened his gap after Tuesday.  Then came Wednesday.  

I fully expect there to be a little Palin bounce in today's tracker.  The speech was well received by many (although it also caused the Democratic coffers to fill) so I do expect some movement.  I just don't see it lasting.  While filled with one liners, the speech didn't really say anything about policy.  OK, Palin lives in Alaska and she hates Obama but what else was there?  Moreover the attacks were all over the place and didn't really develop a theme.  Before Palin, the theme of the convention was going to be Not Ready '08.  Three days pounding that theme home would have caused some damage.  Now though, having watched two days of the convention - I'm sorry, I love politics but I could not subject myself to the tedium of a McCain speech -  I don't know what the overriding theme is.  I can sum up the DNC themes - The party is unified behind Obama and John McCain would be more of the same.  What's the RNC equivalent?  I guess John McCain is a war hero would be one, but that's about it.

As for Palin, for the next month at least it sounds like they're going to restrict Palin to safe audiences.  At the same time Clinton - and this is genius because not only is she the right gender, but she's not even on the ticket so it doesn't elevate Palin - is going to give speeches against the governor.  If she sticks to "Iraq is a mission from God"/creationist/book banner/a raped 14 year old shouldn't be able to get an abortion/in favor of bridge to nowhere and earmarks (especially if they show that newspaper clipping where she excitedly wrote "We did Well!!!")/against sex ed/left her town in debt, well where can McCain go in response to it?  Palin will win over the people who like those things but the rest of us will be appalled.

So Tuesday was a dud, Wednesday excited people and Thursday is being universally panned.  The speech will move the trackers some today but will Thursday keep them going?  Already Obama is doing the right thing, yawning off the attacks on him and saying, "OK, great, now where are you going to bring the country?"  It's a wonderful counter because it doesn't even look that much like an insult.

The DNC gave Obama a boost because it turned Democratic voters support of him from the 70s to the 80s.  Clinton speaking out against Palin can get it up to the mid 80s.  McCain was already in the 90s for his base.  He energized them, but if Palin's staying out of site and the speech starts to fade, where's the groundwork for a bounce?  Maybe I'm just whistling in the dark, but I don't see what happened here that's going to change anything.  

(Of course I didn't see the 2004 results coming in that way either but this is an optimistic diary...)

If you're like me, you found yesterday's RNC to be one of the most depressing political theaters ever.  An entire party joined together to say that we don't stand for anything other than attacks on our opponents.  It was a deeply cynical day, one where 8 years of George Bush government was described as liberal, where the VP pick could promote her opposition to a bridge that she campaigned on, where "change" was defined as having different people do the exact same thing.

Other than drilling for oil, tax cuts, and Iraq, no policies at all were mentioned.  Instead it was attack, attack, attack on Obama, not on issues but on his personal history.  As if that weren't bad enough, the ultimate mockery was made on those who work long hours for low pay to help out the less fortunate.  The Republicans don't stand for only helping the rich; they just think that the government shouldn't help those who need it and we should mock the private citizens who want to help.

Sure it angered us, but by staying away from issues, the Republicans left us an opening.  There's one question that can be asked that would destroy their bounce.  It's above ground, not cheap, strictly on the issues, and appears below the fold.

As I see it, Sarah Palin has 4 possible approaches tonight:

(1) Her stump speech now.  I highly doubt it but that's a possibility.  "I'm from Alaska.  We're wacky there.  I'm a maverick.  18,000,000 cracks.  Women vote for me."

(2) Standard VP speech, "Here's my history, Barack sucks, McCain is wonderful, cheering line 1, cheering line 2, vote for us!"

(3) Attack speech, "Obama is less experienced than I am.  He voted for these extreme pro-choice positions.  He doesn't want to drill. The press hates me because I'm different.  The press hates you too because you agree with me."

(4) Issues speech, "We must drill everywhere.  Life is important!  Iraq is incredibly important and we must stay there forever!"

No matter what she does tonight, barring a blinding disability that prevents her from reading the teleprompter, she'll get all B's and A's from the media.  Expectations are too low for her to get anything else.  The speech was written by the best Republican speech writers and she has speaking ability. The question is what happens next.

It all comes down to the issues.  Either she continues to try to hide her extreme views, she pushes a more moderate version of them, or she owns them.   That's where she gets into trouble.

I think the plan was to be stealth.  The late announcement followed by the national introduction at the convention gave a great chance to make a wonderful first impression that would belie the facts that would come out.  Once again though, McCain doesn't get the Internet.  Instead of her extreme views coming out in October when everyone thought of her as America's sweetheart, they came out this week.  People already have an image of her as a lying, scandalous, book burning, abortion extremist who also is a lightweight.  The lightweight image destroys the chance of just giving the perky speech, the extremist perception makes any movement in that direction dangerous too.  

The great thing about the trap is that after tonight, Palin is most likely going to avoid the media.  She'll talk to friendly venues and go to rallies to pump up the base, but odds are low that she'd appear on CNN or MSNBC or the Sunday shows because everyone is nervous as to how she'll play there with all of the scandals.

So expect a good speech tonight (or at least one described as good) but McCain made a risky trade off.  In exchange for energizing his base, he sacrificed his entire convention to the goal of shoring up Palin's ratings - is anyone even talking about tomorrow's speech?  You know, the one that has the top of the ticket speaking.  Nope, even the red meat attackers of yesterday were forced to talk a lot about Palin. - and will be giving up the traditional role of the VP as an attack dog.  Also the Democratic base is terrified of her so we're additionally energized to go out.  Yes, this worked in 2000 and 2004, but it does seem an awfully high price for McCain to pay.

UPDATE: Byron York of the National Review gives the approach:

These speeches often feature a lot of biographical material, introducing an unknown candidate to the world. There will be some of that, I was told, but it won't dominate the speech. "It's not going to be super-heavy on that," my source said. "It's going to focus on her reform background. Yes, this will be an opportunity to introduce her to a much larger audience, but it is going to be heavy on reform. She tackles big issues." The McCain campaign wants to present Palin in "a very strong way…she's very dynamic…she commands."

So they're going the reformer route. Get the earmark supporting quotes ready!

Update 2: This one from Time's thepage:

Palin to Speak as Ordinary Working Mom
The veep hopeful will deliver a relatively short, plainspoken headliner speech Wednesday, reports TIME’s David Von Drehle. “She’ll talk about challenging old-boy networks — oil companies, Alaska’s corrupt GOP establishment — and learning to lead.”

You've got to be kidding me. That sounds like her stump speech. Yeah it'll get good reviews if she goes there but almost immediately people will be asking about her credentials if that's all she can deliver.

The McCain camp is arguing over whether Sarah Palin was ever a member of the AIP.  I'm not sure if she was or wasn't.  She obviously is sympathetic to their cause as she addressed their convention in 2008 and told them to, "keep up the good work."

However, there's no actual evidence that she was registered that way. Her husband wasn't quite so careful though.  Todd Palin was a member from 1995 to 2002.  

Could you imagine the outrage if Michelle Obama were a member of an African American separatist party?  This should make a fun few days of conversation at the RNC.  Sure would be sad though if it affects their buzz.  

It has now hit the AP Wire. This should put a lot more focus on the membership.

The Republicans are resuming their convention tonight. On a night with a theme of "Who is John McCain," - and please don't make a drinking game out of references to his POW history; you can't vote if you die of alcohol poisoning - he's going to be partially defined by his close friend, George Bush:

President Bush, who was scheduled to speak Monday, will deliver his address via satellite at 9:30 p.m. ET Tuesday, officials said.

So the one political advantage that the Republicans got from reducing their convention a day has been wiped out as Bush will speak.  He's not in prime time, so I wonder if he'll take advantage of the lower viewing numbers and popularity among the base to praise John McCain.  We might get some clips to use after all.

I'm pretty surprised by this decision to say the least, but I should perhaps give up being surprised by Republican political decision in the wake of Palin.