How many news organizations have sent on-camera talent up to Alaska? How many reporters? How many producers and camera crews? It is not cheap up there. Everything from hotels to convenience store food to (important!) alcohol costs more. I mean, is Alaska even part of most cell phone plans? I bet the roaming charges aren't pretty.

So, there is almost no way the coverage will turn to Palin's favor so long as CNN and the rest are investing their money in airfare, hotels, car rentals, tips, bar tabs, data transmission charges, etc. on a story in a place that is thousands of miles away.

What could the outcome be? "Well, Wolf, we dropped 300 grand on this and it turns out that Sarah Palin is just a super-nice terrific lady with an all-American family. And here's an old schoolmarm from Wasilla we dug up to tell everyone how swell she is!"

Just as the media's investment in covering troop buildups in Kuwait and Qatar virutally assured that they would be cheerleaders for the invasion of Iraq, the journalistic buildup in Alaska -- the buildup of investigative journalists! -- ensures a bad outcome for the Palin party.

If McCain had chosen Joe Liberman or Mitt Romney, the media could be phoning the stories in. All the tape loops were ready to go. No travel required. They would have been lazy, and hence compliant.

Instead he dared them to do some reporter shit. To do investigative journalism!

Now McCain's people are complaining about the media's treatment of Palin, but really they only have themselves to blame. For the first time in a long time, it seems to me that the Democratic side has a better understanding of how the media actually works.

Amazing.

Oh, and if you haven't heard the latest news, Palin sat in her home church two weeks ago and listened to a sermon about how terrorist attacks are God's "judgment of unbelief" against the Jews.