I watched Obama's whole speech last night. As a speech, it was brilliant. It was at times inspiring, soaring and lyrical, but at other times tough and pugnacious.

Some of my favorite quotes:

"That's the promise of America - the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation."

And I felt the lump in my throat when Obama said this:

"So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America."

And how about this for poetry:

"This country of ours has more wealth than any nation, but that's not what makes us rich. We have the most powerful military on Earth, but that's not what makes us strong. Our universities and our culture are the envy of the world, but that's not what keeps the world coming to our shores.

Instead, it is that American spirit - that American promise - that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertain; that binds us together in spite of our differences; that makes us fix our eye not on what is seen, but what is unseen, that better place around the bend."

***

The more cynical among us brush off Obama's inspirational abilities as mere political theater. But if he can inspire a generation of scientists to help end our addiction to oil, that's not just theater. If he can inspire us to work together to restore some of America's lost prestige, that's not just theater.

But if we elect Obama, will we get Obama the Populist, Obama the Robin Hood; or will we get Obama the Reasonable? Obama the Reasonable knows that if you tax certain people and companies too much, the people will stop working and the companies will leave the country. Obama the Reasonable knows that when you lower cap gains taxes, tax revenue usually goes UP, not down. I have more specific concerns about Obama as well. For example, every time I hear him mention "windfall profits tax" on oil companies, I go into deep cringe mode. I liked the idea of a recent letter to the WSJ: "Why not a special tax on "windfall donations" received by political candidates?" the writer asked. A very good question, indeed.

I don't care if Exxon made $11 billion or $40 billion last quarter. A post-facto "windfall" tax is un-American. What we should be doing is ending future subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies, NOT undertaking a retroactive profits grab.

Some conservative folks do a lot of screaming about solar and wind subsidies and why they should be ended. In fact, republicans are currently blocking alternative energy subsidies right now, which has the industry in a tizzy. But the anti-subsidy wailers often totally fail to mention the special tax laws and subsidies that benefit oil companies. There are some absurd tax benefits for investing in oil and natural gas (I would be happy to explain details separately in case anyone cares), which should be eliminated. Full disclosure: I have a very small investment in an oil/natural gas deal in Oklahoma with a friend. But like Nick Kristof railing against the farm subsidy he receives, I don't even want the special tax benefits associated with this energy deal.

And more importantly, if we are going to be fair about it, some percentage of our defense budget is really a subsidy for big oil and for all of us who use gasoline. We spend enormous amounts of money to help patrol middle east shipping lanes, etc. (Not to mention the overall costs of Iraq war...if you say that the war was only 5% about oil, that's still about a $50 billion oil subsidy.)

Alternative energy should be getting at least a big of a subsidy. With a $459 billion defense budget for this year, and an assumption that only 5% of it goes to keep the oil flowing, that's still a $23 billion annual subsidy. Solar and wind should be getting something equivalent, even if it's mostly for R&D at the NREL in Golden, Colrado (the Federal Government's National Renewal Energy Lab). Considering the national security implications of our addiction to oil (let alone the global warming implications), this should be a giant no-brainer. Do you know what NREL's current annual budget is? About $300 million, or literally the cost of about *ONE DAY* in Iraq.

***

Wow, that was quite a soapbox digression, when I meant to jump right to Sarah Palin after Obama.

Regarding Governor Palin, I think it was a brilliant strategic move by McCain. However, I don't think that McCain is so presumptuous as to think that most Hillary supporters will vote for McCain simply because he picked a woman as his VP. McCain has already been excoriated, by some in his party and some outside his party, for "putting politics first" and "showing an extraordinary lack of judgment" by picking someone who is "totally unqualified" to lead our country, but may help him get elected. I have a question. I don't know what's in McCain's heart of hearts, but what if deep down, he really believes that Palin would be a good leader for the country? I think there's a very good chance that he thinks so. And maybe he thinks she would even be better than some of the other shortlisters for VP who have long resumes but perhaps are short on judgment or are too entrenched in Big Washington and Big Business.

Why do so many people automatically think Palin is not up to the job? After all, despite the small population of Alaska, Palin has more executive experience than Biden and Obama put together. Biden and Obama can only offer legislative experience, and zippo executive experience besides running campaigns. Palin has also caused exuberance in the (large) part of the republican base that is comprised of pro-lifers, in part because of her general pro-life stance, but also because she lives it: this year, she gave birth to a child with Downs Syndrome. She knew of this condition early in the pregnancy and chose not to terminate, which is opposite from the choice that many, many parents would have made. So she is a hero for that to millions of people in the US. But not to me...in my book, it doesn't make her a hero or a goat; it's a deeply personal decision for which none of us should judge her or her husband.

And even if most of Hillary's supporters would never vote for a pro-life person, male or female, I think at least 27% of Hillary's 18 million voters are looking for a reason to vote for McCain. And in Sarah Palin, they may have just found one. In a close election like this, that could make all the difference.

Don't get me wrong. I have not hopped on the McCain-Palin bandwagon, and I don't even know very much about her. I am just pointing out some things that I find interesting. I think the republicans have run our country so poorly for the past eight years that it's a no-brainer to give the other party a chance. As Obama pointed out, McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time...and who among us thinks Bush was right 90% of the time?