For the record, I think Sarah Palin is lacking in the experience department. I think Tim Kaine also isn't high on experience (and he was on Barack Obama's short, short, short list for the VP pick).

But do Democrats really want to derail their train over Palin's daughter's pregnancy? Or whether Palin can be a good mother and an effective VP? Or whether or not Bristol's boyfriend should appear onstage with the family at the Republican National Convention? 

Talk about miring ourselves in old politics! 

What in the world did Democrats think the Republicans were going to do? Say "uncle" because Barack Obama hails a new era of politics that will change the way Washington does business? Not. on. your. life. And they're proving yet again they don't want to make nice, belly up for change, or do anything any differently than they have always done it - by appealing to the base and forcing the conversation into screaming  territory over abortion, gun rights, gay marriage, and terror - their newest distraction.

Meanwhile, we're falling right in line with this modus operandi by panting breathlessly and apoplectically about Bristol Palin's pregnancy, about Sarah Palin's mothering skills, and about who should and shouldn't appear onstage with her, and why.

And once again, Democrats threaten to derail the train - and the country's - by also acting as Moral Arbiters of personal politics. 

Bob Herbert really gets it right in his NYT opinion piece yesterday. And mind you, I'm no Bob Herbert fan, after his endless Clinton bashing during the primaries:The Democrats need to be careful about the intensity of their criticism of Sarah Palin.

She may look like an easy target, an appalling lightweight who will send serious voters scurrying to the more substantive Obama-Biden ticket. And the temptation to get on her case probably became greater with Ms. Palin’s disclosure Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.

But the Democrats should not push this stuff too far. Ms. Palin is a lot more appealing personally than the often testy guy at the top of her ticket. And the inescapable reality is that there are millions of voters who identify with her, and may be quick to resent attacks that they perceive as bullying or overkill.

Stella noted in my post yesterday ("What does it mean to be a feminist?") that doing or saying something in kind to what somebody else does or says amounts to hypocrisy for hypocrisy. Yes. And in a year and at a time when everything in our country is falling apart due to hypocrisy, social Darwinism, and a bleakness that pervades not only our cities but our psyches, it really is time to say "Enough." Bob Herbert gets this, too:

Here’s the deal: Palin is the latest G.O.P. distraction. She’s meant to shift attention away from the real issue of this campaign — the awful state of the nation after eight years of Republican rule. The Republicans are brilliant at distractions. Willie Horton was a distraction. The chatter about gays, guns and God has been a long-running distraction. And we all remember the Swift-boat campaign.

[snip]

Respectful criticism of Sarah Palin is fine. But the great issues of this campaign loom like giant redwoods over the pathetic weeds of politics as usual and the myriad distractions that have turned one presidential election after another into a national embarrassment.

So, really, Democrats. What's it going to be? Are we going to wallow in the mud with pigs, reducing ourselves, our issues and our ideals to gutter-sniping about personal politics...again, led there by the latest Republican distraction?

Or will the issues and principles we say we stand for keep the train on the tracks this time?