Everyone seems to elide over the fact that Mr. Obama stated that he would end American reliance, with 10 years, on oil from the Middle East.

Since the US imports little oil from the Middle East (most US imports come from Central/South America and Africa) this would seem a much simpler accomplishment than to end America’s addition to oil period.

- Quincy Vale

Regarding Obama’s speaking ability……the Greeks used to say, “When Aristotle speaks, the people applaud. When Demosthenes speaks, they march!”

Donna Hannigan
Dennis, MA

Would it not be more accurate to refer to Barak Obama as a “bi-racial” man rather than a “black man” as you’re doing right now? Isn’t that what he represents and a more accurate depiction of who he is, cultural norms notwithstanding?

If I hear one more pundit assume that I’m going to vote for a woman because I’m a woman, I’m going to lose it. How condescending to assume that a candidate is more appealing because of their gender. It’s the same assumption of ignorance that seems to inform anything involving a woman’s ability to make good decisions.

McCain’s pick of the young Alaska governor as running mate is hailed as a brilliant step by Tom’s guests today. I think that it is rather the Republican’s jujitsu strategy gotten too clever by half.

How can McCain criticize Obama as not ready to lead if he has chosen someone with even less experience to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

Yes, she is young and charismatic like Obama but she is hardly his mirror image. She pales in comparison.

This is a strategy to grab limit coverage of Obama’s acceptance speech to one news cycle and appeal to disaffected female Clinton supporters. It’s clever and cynical. Let’s hope that the news commentators pick up on this in addition to gushing over McCain’s pick of a woman as running mate.

I don’t know anything about the person McCain has chosen as his running mate. But, at first blush, it strikes me as a defensive move; a concession to the Democrat/Obama campaign themes of youth, vigor, change. As if the Republicans are saying, “Well, OK then, we can do that too”. It seems to be more of a shallow political move, rather than a solid, considered strengthening of the team asking to lead the nation.

I am the stark contrast to all this. I’m southern, white-male, gun owner, religious Christian, that has voted Republican for 21 yrs. But, this time I’m voting for Obama. I am setting aside my political differences and placing my bets on him. We have got to get past this stranglehold on our country of oil and level this global economy playing field that is killing America.

In one fell swoop McCain has stolen the thunder from the Democrats and from Obama’s speech last night. He has shored up the flagging support from his Christian connservative base with an extreme social conservative. And he has created a potential draw for millions of disaffected Hillary supporters because of Palin’s solid mom-cred - 5 children, including one with Down’s. Furthermore, this will be seen as a bold move which will help erase his image of stodginess. So any objective observer is forced to say, “Well played, sir, well played!”

BUT, it also presents problems for the GOP and opportunities for the Democrats. For one thing, as a former Miss Alaska runner-up she weakens the ability to use the bimbo imagery they’ve employed against Obama. And far more substantially, she’s a first term governor who’s never held a national office. In theory we should evaluate all VP candidates for their potential to step into the Oval Office and take command, potentially in a crisis. Not only does she fail that test miserably, but two other things:

1. The lack-of-experience stick the GOP has been hitting Obama with has just disolved in their hands.

2. Given McCain’s age, having a VP who can hit the ground running is even more important than it might be for most other candidates.

McCain’s ginormous blunder.

When the press is done trying to wring all they can out of McCain’s VP choice (shouldn’t take too long) his judgement will again be called into question.

Does McCain think that his pick for VP cause disaffected Hilarians to make good on their threat to vote against their interests?

Weak presidents need strong VP’s.

The aged Regan had the former DCI.

G. W. Bush had Cheney (or vice versa).

Does McCain think that his pick for VP cause disaffected Hilarians to make good on their threat to vote against their interests?

Do you think it won’t?

Or do you just hope it won’t?

I REALLY THINK THIS WAS A BIG MISTAKE ON McCAIN’S CHOICE FOR VP. THE FACT THAT HIS CHOICE IS A WOMAN WHO IS 42 IS NOT SO BAD. BUT THE FACT THAT SHE HAS BEEN A SMALL TOWN MAYOR (6000 residents) AND THAN A GOVERNOR FOR 2YEARS IS ALMOST LAUGHABLE AFTER ALL THE NEGATIVE REMARKS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT OBAMA. AT LEAST HE HAD 8 YEARS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND 2 IN CONGRESS AND JOE BIDEN HAS A LIFETIME OF REAL EXPERIENCE. THIS IS ALMOST A JOKE. MS. PALIN IS PRETTY AND THE MOTHER OF 5 KIDS AND VERY PRO-LIFE. ALL GOOD THINGS. BUT SHE IS NOT SOMEONE THAT I WOULD FEEL CONFIDENT ABOUT IF ANYTHING WOULD HAPPEN TO MCCAIN. IF THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE QUALITY OF HIS CABINET, IF HE WERE ELECTED, GOD HELP THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I THINK HE IS FARTHER INTO HIS DOTAGE THAN IF ORIGINALLY THOUGHT.

A few thoughts;
1. McCain’s choice seems to be reactionary to the DNC convention and the speech last night. It seems as if they wanted drama over substance, surface over depth. I don’t see this as having been the most qualified candidate for the job.

2. I agree with the earlier post that most women are going to look at the platforms of the candidates in order to make their decision. I would hope the Obama campaign continually hits on the fact that the next president will be choosing the balance on the Supreme Court with several likely appointments.

3. I was blown away by the convention this week. Wow! Just wow!

I REALLY THINK THIS WAS A BIG MISTAKE ON McCAIN’S CHOICE

“We can shout, don’t hear you!”

Over on the BBC “Have Your Say” forum I’ve seen some US Hillary supporters claim they will now consider voting for McCain because of this. Of course they could be plants, but that would seem to be a weird forum to put plants.

I mentioned in another posting that the lingua franca of the common people is symbol and emotion. Viewed in those terms Palin is a red state dream-come-true: Former beauty queen, anti-abortion, mother of 5, worked on a crab boat, lifetime NRA member, hobbies include moose-hunting and cooking mooseburgers. Her husband is a champion snowmobile racer, winner of the “Iron Dog” race four times. He has solid blue-collar cred - he’s an oilfield worker for BP part-time, and works part-time as a commercial fisherman.

The fact that none of this has anything to do with being qualified for President is irrelevant - it does qualify her to get votes and that’s the whole point.

It seems as if they wanted drama over substance, surface over depth.

You say that as though it’s a bad thing.

That’s how our system works. It’s all symbol and surface and emotion. The Democrats do it, too, and up until this morning I thought they were playing that game better than the GOP this year. C’mon - a black man and a woman as top picks, Hillary tossing back Jack Daniels’ in a bar, the grandson of a goat-herder, an aging elder statesman with cancer promising to be there for the inauguration . . . we could go on and on.

The qualifications for getting elected, i.e., for attracting votes, have become totally divorced from the qualifications for actually holding office. The GOP’s criticism of Obama as a celebrity rock star were perfectly valid (and if anyone has any doubt they need only watch last night’s speech at Invesco Field) but the GOP’s complaints should be seen as those of the old master resentful of the young upstart. Ronald Reagan was a master of showmanship and celebrity, and Aahnie, the Governator of California, continues the tradition.

And American voters love this stuff! They long ago abandoned any pretense of being well-informed, preferring instead to be well entertained by their TV “news”. If you want to attract voters you have to be entertaining, dramatic, and have a great story.

Listening right before 8 p.m., I hear Tom Ashbrook and various guests talking about how Joe Biden will have to be “careful” about how he talks to Ms. Palin, so as not to seem to “talk down” to her. What is she — a candidate for the vice presidency who needs to be tough and smart enough to step into the president’s shoes at a moments notice? — or a frail flower of womanhood?! If she wants to play in the “big leagues” she needs to be questioned, analyzed, criticized and judged in the same trial by fire that all the other candidates have to face!!! Why does she deserve a FREE RIDE? Why should she be treated with kid gloves? Media: get off it and put everyone on an equal basis!!!

This is the first time in my entire 63 years that I have left any comment at all to some radio or TV programme. I count on you guys, so I am especially upset by this current broadcast (I am listening now, between 8 and 9 pm, EDT) and this woman’s (I don’t know her name, the analyst) dismissal of the man who admitted crying, and the very emotional response so many of us are having to Obama’s speech and the historical moment of his nomination by the Democratic Party. I have been crying, too, all week, starting with Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s reference to Denver as a special place because of the “mountain top,” and I am white and professional, middle class. Does she have any idea what this means to us? Who we are? How many of us, I think, though of course it may be hope and needs substantiation, we are? You media guys have to start taking us seriously so that we, at least, have a fighting chance to win this election.

I’m just stunned to hear any analysis of McCain’s vice-presidential pick that doesn’t include the words “completely insane”.

He’s shot himself in the foot on the inexperience argument, and an extreme right-winger will gain him NOT ONE crossover vote — Hillary supporters are angry and disappointed, but they’re not idiots. (Hey, Ann Coulter is a woman, why not pick her?)

But the real core of the insanity is the mom-cred issue. I hear about this as a throwaway item on the “appeal to the base” list, and I don’t think anyone has seen it for the disaster it is. One commenter above summed up what seems to be the general consensus: “And he has created a potential draw for millions of disaffected Hillary supporters because of Palin’s solid mom-cred - 5 children, including one with Down’s.”

This is patently ridiculous. Yeah, Hillary is a mom, but this woman is a MOMMY and every mother reading this right now knows exactly what I mean. How much time and energy and focus does the mommy of a four-month-old have? Democratic and Republican women will all give you the same answer: not enough to remember to buy milk, let alone run the free world.

“But she’ll have nannies and everything, she doesn’t have to be hands-on caring for the baby.” OK, but there goes all your mom cred: is a mother who does not mother really a mother? And how is it going to play with the family values base? She leaves the care of her tiny, special-needs baby to others so she can be vice president? Not good.

It just floors me that none of the analysis thus far has seen this issue for the trap it is. My prediction: this is NOT going to play, and it’s going to call McCain’s judgement into question big time.

I am forced to say not “well played, sir” but “holy crow, man, are you off your meds?”

So, if McCain were to die on his inauguration day, Palin would be president. Sounds like a scene straight out of Battlestar Gallactica. If it happens, I hope it works out.

This is plain Republican cynicism at full speed.
It will increase McCain’s Republican base and he now has the evangelical vote. The problem for the Obama team is that she knows how to play hard ball and when the VP debates happen Biden will have to walk on egg shells with her to avoid looking like a bully. In short he needs to make her look like she is not prepared to be President if anything happens to McCain. By the way McCain can just announce he will only do one term which will make her President.

What is so interesting is how the Republicans can get away with attacking mom and grandmother, Nancy Pelosi, and yet you will see when the Dems start in on Palin are they going to cry foul.

This is a going to a very interesting political season.

I read this on Andrew Sullivan’s blog, it’s from one of his readers and it sums up some of what I was thinking about the Republicans:

“I had been reluctant to acknowledge how flawed and dead the conservative movement has become; that’s over now. No more excuses, no more clinging to old visions of rational discourse and principled debate. I really have witnessed the death of conservatism and its replacement by a kind of toxic babbitry which would be merely laughable or cringeworthy if it were not also so extraordinarily dangerous.

This election year has been a series of revelations and disillusionments–the crudely ugly tactics of Limbaugh and Hannity (and–worse–their embrace by Buckley’s heirs at National Review), the thinly-veiled racism and nativism of the campaign against Obama, the transparently cruel and God-hating ideology of movement Christians; but–even though dismayed by McCain’s bizarre campaign–I had retained some illusions as recently as this morning. I believed McCain to be at least a patriot, sincerely concerned with issues of national security.

His nomination of Sarah Palin ended that illusion, too.

No remotely serious politician–no honest patriot–would think of placing this individual a heartbeat away from the Oval Office, however admirable she may be, however lively her biography.

Moreover, the elation on the right regarding Palin’s nomination made clear to me that none of them has ever been remotely serious about national security, either. On the contrary, as the left has insisted for years, for them it really has all been about political advantage, noise and bluster and ugliness with no core of principle, no genuine strategic commitment.

The very same people who, only yesterday, insisted that Obama’s resume was too dangerously thin to entrust him with the oversight of our national security, today are celebrating Palin’s accession as a triumph for conservatism (evidently this is because she is hostile to both abortion and polar bears). Their hypocrisy is staggering–they truly do believe in nothing but their own entitlement to power by any means.

And I’m very much afraid I must conclude this is as true of McCain as it is of his ghastly cheerleaders, the Limbaughs and the Hannitys. Nothing else could explain the elevation of a woman so singularly unqualified in every aspect save gender.”

Your pundits were falling all over themselves to say how “Brilliant!” McCain’s pick of Palin was. Really? Might it just a bit early to be making such sweeping pronoucements on someone who has just appeared on the national stage?
Do your experts really think large numbers of Clinton voters are going to rush to support McCain because his VP is anti choice, wants creationism taught in the schools, wants to drill in ANWR, is against listing the Polar Bear as an endangered species and has absolutely no experience on any national issue? Oh yeah, she’s a woman, so that will make it all better?
Have any of your experts noticed that even Alaska Republicans question her qualifications to be a 72 yr. old heartbeat away from the presidency?
Just what sort of qualifications are required to be considered an expert for the purposes of your show? Apparently any sort of reasoned consideration of the facts isn’t one of them.
Palin may well turn out to be a smart pick, she may just as easily turn out to be a disaster, but it is far too soon to tell. For all of your guests to so instantly and enthusiastically label this choice as brilliant makes me take all their so called expertise with a grain of salt.

When will this show be posted to iTunes for those of us who like to listen and can’t do it when the show airs or don’t want to be chained to our computers?

I am only following up on these comments to echo some of the sentiments collected here:

This headline stealing, shallowly politicized choice is very insulting to me and it should be to women as well. Any woman worth her salt should be outraged that this kind of pandering is going on in one of the most important elections of our times. It assumes that Clinton supporters (and women in general) are so vapid and intellectually bankrupt that all they need is a woman on the ticket to consider a vote for McCain. No doubt there are some supreme idiots that would, like Lemmings, follow this choice and vote us into a disastrous corner.

Most woman know, as most any tolerant liberal person know, is that Republicans are anti-woman, anti-sex positive, bigoted, fear mongering, authoritarian “daddy” types that crave nothing else but power.

I personally think that this choice will be a complete disaster for McCain.

I have to take issue with the “Brilliant” label which Tom’s guests ascribed to the
choice of Palin For GOP-VP. Please, can anyone say, “President Palin” (Who??) with a straight face. The very fact that the GOP thinks it can plug any pant-suited woman
into that slot and have a majority of women in this country fall in line behind her is insulting and absurd. However, shallow as her resume is, her pinball hits a lot of lights with the GOP: young, female, mother (5, one with Down’s), conservative, pro-life, gun enthusiast, hunter, brought up Pentecostal but most importantly she’s in the pocket of Big Energy. She can’t wait to start drilling ANWR and off shore! Hopefully,
she can resolve her “Troopergate” issue in time but then again let’s just add it to the incredible laundry list of scandals perpetrated by Republicans over the past eight years.
I do agree with Tom’s guests that we better buckle our seat belts for the rocky ride ahead because it will be a nasty couple of months filled with invective, innuendo and subtle or not so subtle forays into the race issue as only the GOP can deliver.

This show was never posted in the podcast feed,
along with the other one from this date.

I never got any reply from On Point.

As a result, I stopped listening to the show.

– Dr. Heyman