Hillary Clinton is to Sarah Palin as Thurgood Marshall is to Clarence Thomas

Guest-post from YKW today:

Only one thing in common, and both times a very cynical, politically fashioned, lump of turds designed to make the Republican appear to be interested in the issues, only to find the single least qualified person for the job who fits the perceived conditions - in Thomas's case it was his race (and absolutely not his judgment) and in Palin's case, well, she apparently has a nice rack, and none of Hillary's experience, judgment, or politics. I've come to expect the worst, basest kinds of moves over the years from the GOP, but this one truly harkens back to Clarence Thomas. Just like Thomas, there are plenty of other more qualified Republican women who McCain could have chosen (Eliz. Dole and Kay Bailey Hutchinson come to mind, even Condaleeza Rice - none of whose politics I care for, but you have to admit they
are infinitely more qualified) and instead they go with a complete unknown, blank slate Tina Fey knock-off, a Dan Quayle for the 21st Century, on the theory that no record is better than some record. They can attack Obama and Biden at will, knowing that Palin has no record to judge.

I think the Hillary voters that McCain was attempting to seduce with this pick see through this charade. And the rest of the country will begin to think, do we want an untested 2-yr governor of Alaska a heartbeat (of the oldest ever if elected president) away from the White House? I think not. I don't see how any independent will think she's a smart addition to the ticket.

Sorry John, your misjudgment, and your underestimation of the maturity of the voting population, is showing. Again.