Joan,

It's not about the where, but the who and the what and the why.

All the coverage of "bittergate" has focused on references to guns and religion, and criticism couched as elitism. I think Obama's quote smacks of racism. He's basically saying that these rural whites are bible-carrying, gun-toting haters (antipathy)of non-whites and immigrants who are bitter about manufacturing jobs going overseas 25 years ago. What if a white politician characterized African-Americans as bitter welfare recipients who resort to crime and rely on welfare because they never got over the impact of slavery 150 years ago. Both attitudes are messed up.

This was the first debate where the candidates were pressed for specifics, albeit belatedly, on issues like Iran, Iraq, taxes, social security, Israel, etc If it took someone from Fox news to influence the liberal media to be more relevant, and host an informative debate, more power to Rupert.

Markets are driven by psychology as much as supply and demand. While the future daily production out of ANWR might be 5% of domestic needs, opening up ANWR to drilling would have a huge psychological impact on the market and speculators because it would show the US is serious about addressing its needs and not kowtowing to the oftentimes self-destructive wishes of the environmentalists. Just as the market was impacted when Clinton said he would use the Strategic Petroleum Reserves, Bush is right to keep pushing on this issue.

The Dems have caved on this issue because they realize that pushing it only adds to the (accurate) perception that they are weak on national security. The overwhelming majority of the people in this country see no value in launching a futile lawsuit against telcos, are not terrorists or sympathizers and have no fear of their privacy rights being tread upon in the name of national security, and therefore tend to come out in favor of the Bushies on this issue. Hoyer and his litter recognize this and have backed off in time for the election--a prudent political decision.

Hillary is focusing on the "bitter" whites because their numbers are greater, and because the Clinton's have been nothing but savvy politically and realized that the reverse Bradley effect is inevitable--ie at the end of the day, as a result of ethnic pride or identity politics or racism, the preponderance of African Americans were more likely to vote for Obama than not. Just as Oprah became politically active suddenly and "coincidentally" the first time in her career when a viable black candidate was running for President, other African Americans are also jumping aboard Obama's bandwagon. This should not be surprising or take a college professor to figure out.

These must be the girly men the governor was referring to.

This aticle slams McCain for proposing what must be a part of a long term solution. Nothing proposed by anyone can have a huge immediate impact and save the environment and reduce energy prices and create energy independence but a number of steps can be taken and should be taken to try to accomplish these goals. People on the right tend to feel stronger about the latter two while people on the left seem more concerned with the first, at the expense of the second and third..

That said, our current situation did not happen overnight, it is a long term trend which accelerated due to increased demand from China, India and other emerging markets. It is not going to be fixed overnight, and certainly won't be fixed due to bi-partisan inaction.

I remember when Jimmy Carter, the worst president and ex-president of the 20th and 21st centuries, sat in his cardigan in front of the fireplace saying something about the 70's energy shortage being the moral equivalency of war. Not sure how morality enters into it but at least he was right about its importance. Decades later we are still not fighting this war with the right weapons, if at all.

Why is there such opposition to drilling using a specious argument that its not an overnight fix?Is waiting for solar or wind power to become more economical and widespread going to cure anything overnight? Is building a few more nuclear plants going to change things overnight? Of course not. But blaming ourselves for our own economic progress and wealth solves nothing. Various actions must be taken,with a sense of urgency, to address all of these challenges.

Yes, we must drill for oil and gas offshore and in ANWR.

Yes, we need to start using shale and taking advantage of our untouched western resources.

Yes, we must begin to build safe, nonm-carbon emitting nuclear plants.

Yes,we need to encourage or even mandate better mileage in our vehicles, although the market is off to a faster start.

Yes, we need to increase research in alternative, clean fuels, including solar, wind and clean coal, since we have so much of it.

So why don't we allocate a portion of the lease payments for royalty rights to pay for this r&d, and a portion to the states affected by the new drilling? And why don't we lose the nimby mentality and allow for new refineries and nuke plants?

And McCain is right about the psychological impact all of this will have on the markets, as markets discount the future. And it will slow the outflow of our nation's, and our individual wealth to our military and economic enemies/competitors.

So we should stop this right/left bullshit and finally act in our own interests to achieve the goals of a cleaner environment, slow global warming, and create energy self-sufficiency and lower prices through a combination of approaches, and fund them out of the royalty payments from the new drilling leases.