For a moment, let's forget about Troopergate, Babygate, Vettinggate, Lawyering-up-gate, and any of the other "gates" that will undoubtedly rain down upon us before I finish typing this entry.

I've watched a bit of the coverage of McCain's choice of Palin as his VP candidate, and one question has consistently stumped GOP talking heads:

Is Palin the most qualified person (note: not "woman") available to John McCain?  Is this the best candidate the GOP has to offer?

I've seen this question asked in a number of ways, and each time the response has been a mixed bag of references to executive experience and "a proud mother."  I am still waiting for someone in the GOP to come out, guns blazing, yelling "Sarah Palin is the most qualified person to be John McCain's VP candidate, and you can go to hell if you think otherwise!" 

I am reminded of the (short) period of time when Harriet Miers was nominated for a spot on the Supreme Court.  Folks in the GOP, who were quick to defend the President's choices, were quick to point out that Miers was a good person, a bright person, and in theory capable of doing the job nominated for.  But no one every suggested that she was the best able to do the job put before her.  There were smiles, words of support and encouragement, and a willingness to "go through with it," but deep down, folks -- even supporters -- seemed to have a sense that she was the wrong person for the job.

We're talking about a woman who has already been selected as McCain's running mate, and GOP spokespeople and operatives quite frankly seem unable to say the words "most qualified" when it comes to Palin.

Again, this has nothing to do with her womanness, her daughter, whether she fearlessly led the Alaskan National Guard troops.  It is just a very simple question.

Is this person really the best the GOP has to offer?