Did I hear that last lady correctly? I thought I heard her say she admired Sarah's willingness to stand up to big oil companies. Considering Sarah's husband works for a big oil company and she favors drilling in Alaska, I'm a little confused on how or where one thinks she would stand up to big oil.

I don't think anyone who gets to the White House is going to stand up, sit down or talk back to oil companies. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong Jilli, but Obama has also agreed to drill off the coasts and in Alaska as well.

"Values and the American family," huh?

Rac, Obama has agreed to consider offshore drilling only if it is part of a broader, comprehensive energy plan. I believe he is still opposed to drilling in ANWR.

I smell what you're cooking, Serial, but what does being a part of "a broader, comprehensive energy plan" mean? Both McCain and Obama have promised to invest money into alternative energy solutions while continuing to drill offshore. I think the sooner people realize that both parties must submit to the oil, auto and insurance industries, maybe the sooner we can start voting in third party candidates who are not beholden to anyone.

Go Nader!

My understanding is that offshore drilling is not unconditional, that it would be like a bargaining chip used if needed to come to some sort of compromise on funding and/or subsidizing development of alternative energy sources.

Obama does not support off shore drilling
As for Palin I think she rocks
And I'm proud of her for having her daughter take responsibility for her actions.
Should she pull an Obama and not "punish her daugther with a baby"?

Re: Palin. I really must admit that I am absolutely undeniably befuddled by this choice. We are into what...day 3 or 4 or her nomination and it's been nothing but a big, hot mess. She thinks global warming is an exaggeration, her stint as governor is far from "clean", and her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. All this and the media hasn't even gotten their teeth into her "troopergate" involvement.

Yet people continue to think that she's the next best thing to sliced bread. Perhaps it's for fear of the party appearing to be as divided as the Democrats have appeared for some time. Or perhaps I am just so unbelievably out of touch with 50% of Americans and half of our country's population really thinks highly of her and truly believe her to be the best candidate the Republicans have to offer for vice-president. If there is a Pro-Palin out there who can enlighten me (without the lame-o argument, if you want to have a debate about experience, let's talk top of the ticket blah blah), please I'm at a loss and I truly am interested to hear understandable and logical reasons for her nomination.

Now, re: energy. Below is a quick go-to guide that I pulled up on the handy dandy internets.

LONG-TERM VISION
Obama:
--Confront America's dependence on oil by developing energy alternatives and conservation.

McCain:
--Break the nation's dependence on foreign energy by 2025 with more domestic production and alternative energy sources.

ENERGY PRICE RELIEF

Obama:
--$1,000 tax rebate to help people pay high energy bills, financed by a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
--Release 70 million barrels of oil from the government's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to boost supplies.

McCain:
--Temporarily suspend the 18-cents-per-gallon federal gasoline tax.
--Opposes use of government oil reserve.

OFFSHORE DRILLLING

Obama:
--Will consider lifting oil drilling bans in some offshore federal waters as part of broader energy package.

McCain:
--End drilling bans on all offshore waters beyond 50 miles from shore, as long as state has say about energy development of its shores. (Quiet convenient for a Alaska, eh?)

NUCLEAR POWER

Obama:
--Existing plants must play a role, supports new reactor construction "only so far as it is clean and safe." Opposes the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump in Nevada and calls for another approach to dealing with reactor waste. Opposes nuclear waste reprocessing.

McCain:
--Wants to build 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030. Strongly supports Yucca Mountain project. Supports research into nuclear-waste reprocessing.

OIL PROFITS
Obama:
--Proposes a 50 percent tax on "windfall" profits of five largest U.S. oil companies and using the money to provide a "rebate" to the public to help pay for high energy costs.

McCain:
--Opposes new taxes on oil companies, saying such taxes would hinder investment in exploration and new production.

GLOBAL WARMING

Obama:
--Mandatory reductions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050, using a market-based cap-and-trade system.

McCain:
--Mandatory reductions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by 66 percent from 1990 levels by 2050, using market-based cap-and-trade.

CARS
Obama:
--Increase federal fuel economy requirements beyond 35 mpg.
--Invest in advance vehicle technology; put 1 million plug-in hybrid cars on road by 2015.
--$7,000 tax credit for purchase of advance-technology vehicles.

McCain:
--Current fuel economy standard adequate.
--Supports plug-in hybrid; proposes $300 million prize for improved batteries for hybrid vehicles.
--$5,000 tax credit for purchase of zero carbon emission cars.

ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
--Both candidates oppose opening the Alaska refuge to oil drilling. (but I bet if Palin could get rid of those pesky polar bears, John just might reconsider )

ALTERNATIVE FUELS

Obama:
--Proposes $150 billion, 10-year clean energy development fund for biofuels, wind, solar, plug-in hybrids and clean-coal technology, and electric cars.
--Invest $1 billion a year to convert old manufacturing centers to "clean technology centers" and new job training programs for clean energy technologies.
--Require all utilities to produce at least 10 percent of their electricity from renewable energy such as wind, solar or biomass.

McCain:
--Supports $2 billion program to develop carbon capture and other clean coal research and development.
--Use tax credits to promote energy research, and extend existing credits for "low carbon" renewable energy sources such as hydroelectric dams, wind and solar.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Obama:
--Overhaul appliance and other energy efficiency standards with goal of reducing building energy use by 25 to 50 percent. Weatherize 1 million energy-inefficient homes a year.
--Develop "smart grid" power lines to increase electricity savings.

McCain:
--Develop "smart grid" power lines to increase electricity savings.

Chancelta, perhaps you're just my lady for explaining why exactly she "rocks"?

I'm all about working mothers and was borderline insulted when the first reaction people had was "How is she going to be vice president with 5 children--one of whom is a baby with Down's?". You want to know how? Because she's a woman and that's just what we do.

With that said, I do draw the line with accepting a role like this knowing that it would thrust her daughter into a pit of media hyenas. You can't just say "respect my daughter's privacy" and expect this all to go away.

Given all the talk of family values recently, I can't help but be reminded of family value number 1--you're family comes first. No matter what the offer on the table is, you realize that what you are about to put your daughter through is simply not worth it. 17 years old and pregnant is scary enough. But 17 years old, pregnant and on every news station in the country and beyond is quite another.

Rac, I love the new avatar.

As for Palin I think she rocks
And I'm proud of her for having her daughter take responsibility for her actions.

Who else should be held accountable and take responsibility for her daughter's decision to have unprotected sex which resulted in pregnancy?

tiabia--you have me laughing this morning.

I don't think delegates at the convention are going to want to go on record as saying, "This was a horrible choice." They are going to want to support their party and their party's candidate.

i am really pleased that the party seems to be getting behind the choice more and more. besides the fact that it's good to mix things up a bit - it's really nice to see that regardless of what's going on in her family life - they are up for supporting sarah and we'll see how this makes the campaign more exciting to watch.

"McCain:
--Current fuel economy standard adequate."

and that, ladies & gentlemen, is enough to make me want to vote against mccain. i mean, luckily there's obama, so i can actually vote FOR him and not just against mccain... BUT, let's be real here. the current fuel economy standards are adequate? does this include keeping SUVs in the light truck category, therefore bringing their mileage standard lower? even when SUVs became the most popular type of car over the last few years? i can't believe this. this PROVES he's out of touch with america. just ask anyone who lives in a state where gas is still over $4.00 a gallon how they feel about the fuel economy of their SUV...

and in case anyone's thinking it's impossible for car companies to increase mileage:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17344368/

http://www.articleclick.com/economical-gallons-per-liter-for-cars.html

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4276559.html

ilanac-Campaigns should be exciting to watch because you are passionate about the issues and the support of the candidate you think best represents your interests. A campaign shouldn't be interesting in the way that a soap opera is interesting.

Guess I'm STILL waiting for the WHY Palin explanation from someone that is supportive of this decision from anything other than a pure entertainment standpoint.

The real question needs to be where is the eye candy in the delegates, from each side all I keep seeing is my parents and grandparents. Is there anyone else out there.

I don't think it's the case that the delegates are rallying behind this choice completely. George Stephanolopus (sp?) had Republican strategist Matt Dowd commenting on what the delegates are saying about the choice. Some are rallying behind Palin as a strong choice to represent social issues and Dowd also said that there are a number of delegates that don't want to go on record expressing disappointment and also their nervousness about McCain's choice. It's early - so things will change and reshape.

"but what does being a part of "a broader, comprehensive energy plan" mean? Both McCain and Obama have promised to invest money into alternative energy solutions while continuing to drill offshore."

Obama is not "for" offshore drilling. The compromise that he was referring to as being part of a "comprehensive" energy plan was put forth by the Group of 10 Senators this summer (5 Republicans, 5 Democrats). It would allow offshore drilling, but it has many restrictions.

The major components of the proposal include:

Expanding drilling opportunities off the East coast and Gulf of Mexico, which pleases Republicans

Keeping a ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, a concession to Democrats

Repealing a tax break for oil companies that Democrats have long called for

Putting billions toward producing more alternative-fuel vehicles, in part paid for by the oil and gas industry

"Like all compromises, this one has its drawbacks," Obama said in Lansing, Michigan. "It includes a limited amount of new offshore drilling, and while I still don't believe that's a particularly meaningful short-term or long-term solution, I am willing to consider it if it's necessary to actually pass a comprehensive plan.

"I am not interested in making the perfect the enemy of the good -- particularly since there's so much good in this compromise that would actually reduce our dependence on foreign oil..

Fit, I am confused as well. I just can't understand what would make McCain think that she would have been a better choice than Romney or Liebermann.

We have so many big issues to deal with, why did he chose the candidate that rallies the social issues crowd? Why not try to appeal to more Americans and get a economically savvy candidate?

I think the choice of Liebermann would have been too polarizing, but Mitt Romney seemed the likely pick.

My parents are Independents who have voted Republican in the last four elections. I spoke to them this morning and they are baffled by the Palin pick. They wanted Romney. The addition of Palin to the ticket has cemented their support behind Obama. Maybe it will have the same effect on other Independents, maybe it won't.

I agree Tia - Lieberman would have been too polarizing. And I'm thinking Romney would have been good on economic issues.

I really thought he would pick Romney.

and let's be honest, unless your gay neighbors are having a wedding while practicing abortions and destroying guns in their marble fireplace, as well as trying to brew their own glacial mound in their hidden laboratory, social issues are taking a SERIOUS back-burner to America's eco-woes.

I've actually done my own personal polling (please note, I'm not actually trying to say that I'm drawing conclusive data from said polling), and in nearly every case (all but 1) people who were firmly placed in McCain's camp have either been bumped out entirely and are not going to vote/vote for Obama OR are seriously wavering all over the pick of Palin.

Thoughts on this....McCain does this only to stir up attention, grab the media spotlight, get additional notches in his maverick belt. 2 weeks from now a remorse yet dedicated mother and wife respectfully withdraws from the campaign to put her family first. Romney steps in. Palin goes home with all eyes on Alaska, more pronounced national attention and serious leverage to get her state the liberties it needs to pursue its interests (polar bears and oil).

Okay, so this is crazy Fitz talking, but this is what happens when you've got nothin to work with.

I guess McCain has it covered and doesn't really need Palin to help w/the economy? Maybe all he wanted was someone to excite the base from a social issues perspective?

Admit it Fitz...you're psychic!!!

What a scenario Fit. We'll have to wait and see.

"Maybe all he wanted was someone to excite the base from a social issues perspective?"

Reality is often stranger than fiction, but either way the little rumours I have read make for entertaining reading.

So far, I have come across (true or false, who knows, I am merely listing people's musings) everything from:

1)Rove was behind it and told Lieberman to back off (McCain's first choice according to one source).

2)That its actually a ploy to discredit McCain after the party gets fired up and replace him with Romney or someone farther right.

3)That McCain chose her and the party was crapping itself until they realised she was actually bringing in the Evangelicals (who have been feeling somewhat sidelined and lukewarm by McCain as the initial choice).

4)That the viral "not her baby" story was actually leaked by the right to lure the Democrats into attacking her, then proving the child IS hers, thus giving them the chance to call the left "scumbags". Its not the first time Rove has deliberately baited the opposition which led some people to ponder this as a possibility.

No two ways about it, she shook it up, but by whose choice, and ultimately why, remains unknown. Was the choice expected to involve all this chaos about Trig and then later, Bristol? We will never know.

But what we do know is that the fundraising for the GOP soared in the days following the selection of Palin. No question, it gave the GOP a boost of rocket fuel when it needed it, like it or not, and it has the ENTIRE COUNTRY talking about her baby and her daughter instead of:

The Economy
Energy
Iran
Iraq
Russia/EU/Georgia

*sigh*

I think it's incredibly selfish of Sarah Palin to shove her family into the spotlight knowing the scrutiny her 17 year old daughter would suffer as a result of her pregnancy. It's certainly not fair for us to make a spectacle of that innocent girl, but they should have known this is what would happen.

I don't think, at this stage of the game, that many will go on record expressing dissatisfaction with the pick. I'm sure there must be quite a lot of grumbling behind the scenes and in private--I mean, look at the impressive list of people passed over, for whatever reason, for Sarah Palin--but the Republican Party has shown itself during elections to be very good at pulling together in a show of party unity (or at least creating a very good illusion of it).

Op-ed from David Brooks on McCain's pick if anyone's interested: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/opinion/02brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion...

This was a strange choice, indeed. I'm not a Republican so my opinion doesn't count.

I can't wait until the week is over -- how boring. Who the heck wants to hear Bush speak. If I was the one making the RNC schedule I would have told Bush to stay home. I'm sure he does nothing for their image.

I'm sure Republicans are very happy. Personally, I would have been moved to look at the McCain ticket by a woman who was actually qualified - examples include Elizabeth Dole, Kay Bailey Hutchison and Olympia Snowe. If I were these women, I'd be deeply disturbed that McCain's advisors are out there telling everyone she's by far the most qualified VP candidate he could have picked. I'm sure she's a smart woman, a good mom and decent governor, but VP? no.

If a girl (like a 17 year-old for example) is not ready for a child why should she be burdened with one and then forced to have to get married, and play house and all that boring stuff. I truly feel sorry for Bristol.

But anyways I still think in the long run this is a huge mistake for America if McCain where to win. Not McCain being pres. but Palin being the VP. Terrible, terrible pick.