The Republican party is fundamentally a misogynist organization;
their policies and attitudes towards meeting women's real needs
bear that out.

That's why I used misogynistic language to describe what they
are doing, and how these guys think. (And I'd be willing to wager
that language was used by some of the Republican power-brokers behind
closed doors.)

Now they've managed to dredge up a woman who is herself a misogynist,
and who also has at least marginal paper qualifications to enter the
race (she's a governor). Of course the reasons her qualifications are
so marginal and subject to debate is that it is rather hard to find a
qualified woman who'll support the anti-woman platform to an even
greater degree than John McCain, who is viewed by many of the party
faithful as "too liberal."

I mean you just don't get that combination of barefoot and pregnant
and a governor or member of Congress coming around that often.

So far she's turning out to be a good soldier/puppet. First she
was 'seen and not heard' and when she WAS heard she faithfully
recited the words written for her by the men who are packaging
her up to get out the Evangelical and Catholic vote.

That she represents the kind of person who needs a voice in DC
is just what her handlers would have you believe. But in fact
she's a sham, because her stances on the issues indicate that she
either has forgotten, or doesn't care, where she came from.

Look at her attempting to trade on her 'special needs' child!
Why would she wait until NOW to be 'a friend' to parents of
such children, as she put it? Perhaps because it, and by inference
now, even the CHILD suits her purpose?