Republican Convention: Palin speech electrifies delegates

Another Texas lawyer attending the Republican National Convention is Jared R. Woodfill, a partner in Woodfill & Pressler in Houston and chairman of the Harris County Republican Party. He sent this posting early this morning: Over the past few days, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska has been the subject of innumerable personal attacks directed toward the governor and her family. In large part, the attacks have gone unanswered. Tonight, that changed. The mood of the convention was electric, as the crowd of delegates and their guests waited with anticipation. Grass-roots conservatives were energized as former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani warmed up the crowd for the main event. Palin left the crowd awe-struck, living up to the expectations set by politicos, the media and the Democratic Party. Unlike Sen. Barack Obama’s coronation speech, Palin’s remarks contained details regarding, among other things, a path to energy independence. Her response to recent attacks made it clear that she was not seeking the approval of Washington elites but, instead, the confidence of the electorate. Like Teddy Roosevelt, who spent two years serving as governor of N.Y.  prior to being selected to be part of the McKinley ticket, Sarah Palin is also an anti-corruption  maverick in the mold of TR.  Onward to victory in November!
-- Jared R. Woodfill V

Comments

[Jason Steed, Round Rock]

You say: "Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska has been the subject of innumerable personal attacks directed toward the governor and her family."

What attacks? Asking questions about a virtually unknown political figure, now chosen to be possibly the next VP, does not constitute "attacks."

The GOP/McCain campaign is creating and perpetuating this myth that she's been besieged by attacks -- but they never name any names. Tell us who's doing the attacking! Tell us what the attacks are!

Simply reporting that she has a pregnant teen daughter is not an attack. Reporting that she is lying about not supporting the bridge to nowhere is not an attack. Reporting that she has ties to Ted Stevens and a secessionist group in Alaska -- these are not attacks.

It's called journalism. It's McCain's own fault that he didn't properly vet Palin before selecting her -- or, alternatively, he knew about all this beforehand and selected her anyway, assuming he could simply claim "attacks!" the minute the reporters started doing their jobs.... Which is it?