While I normally don't pursue this type of "speculative journalism," an idea popped into my mind that I just can't let go of. The more I think about it, the more fitting the nuances of the whole idea become: That Sarah Palin was not only picked as a last-chance, hail-mary candidate, but also as the one who the GOP could intentionally scapegoat for the failure of the McCain campaign should (read: when) Obama take(s) the general election.

In light of the recent unethical and unlawful violations Palin was found to have committed, a lot of us are simply piling the report onto the mound of evidence that Palin was never capable of being the Vice President. The interesting part is that we already knew this when she was nominated, we knew it when the McCain camp insisted that she had been properly vetted, and we sure as hell know it now after those infamous Katie Couric dialogs. There is no way that the GOP really thought she was a valid running mate. While they may be out of touch, they're not insane. Well, maybe they are insane -- but they're certainly not trying to lose.

So why pick a fringe, hyper-conservative loose canon like Palin to back McCain's run? Answer: to see if she could rattle the base and steal enough Clinton supporters to win the election... and because they knew that if the stunt didn't pay off they could simple say "she couldn't handle the pressure of national politics as she led us to believe she could." Sarah Palin means nothing to McCain or the GOP if she doesn't get McCain the election. They are treating her like an expendable commodity when they refuse to let her speak to non-friendly media alone or reduce her canned speeches to circular talking points.

This alone is enough to make me feel bad for Palin. It's clear she doesn't have the poise to perform on the national stage, but it isn't because she won't try, it's because she isn't at the same level of competition. She is a small town, low-profile governor asked to play the role of big city politician. Frankly, it was never fair, but I digress.

If you'll remember, the Palin pick was announced the day after Obama rocked his DNC speech and put a surge of electricity into the Democrat's battle wagon. Palin obviously shocked the country too, but not for the same reasons. Would we have seen the same response had McCain chosen any of the other names that were thrown around? Certainly Elizabeth Dole, Joe Lieberman, or Tim Pawlenty would have all been solid picks for the ticket. So again, why Palin? Because names like Dole, Pawlenty, Huckabe, Romney, and Thomspon are already established GOPers with something to lose. The country sensed a Dem win in 2008 and so did the Republican strategists. I don't think they wanted to risk tanking the career of another one of their already successful, tenured party members. Palin offered a way out.

She, the great gamble, just might have turned the numbers and picked up the Hillary vote, but if she didn't her failure would be peanuts to the big red elephants. After a loss, she would likely slip back into obscurity in Alaska. While it might end her career, it wouldn't hurt the party elite. So, knowing that she wasn't ready to be on the national level, knowing that she had all kinds skeletons in her closet, but also knowing she was a woman that could draw the conservatives in by the tens of thousands and pull off the miracle of the century, they picked her. Very Bush doctrine, preemptive scapegoating, don't you think?

For the sake of decency, let's hope I'm wrong.