I just got the chance to watch last night’s Tonight Show, which was a great one; Jay Leno was at the top of his form. (I especially enjoyed his crack that he had John McCain and Dara Torres on “not for politics and the Olympics, but just because I like being around people who’ve been told they’re too old for the job.” Nice shot at NBC there.) It was interesting to note the dead silence from the audience when Leno mentioned Joe Biden, and interesting too to see how well Sen. McCain connected with them; it underscored the point folks have made that he’s much better in an informal, unscripted setting than he is in a stump speech. (That, I imagine, is the reason Barack Obama has refused to do the town hall meetings with him, because Sen. Obama is the other way around.) I expect it helped that this was Sen. McCain’s 13th appearance on the show—I got the sense from watching him and Leno that there’s a fair degree of friendship between the two of them, as they seemed to enjoy talking with each other. They cracked a few jokes—some at Sen. McCain’s expense, a couple at Sen. Biden’s—but they also had some serious discussion, and I think some worthwhile points were made. In particular, I appreciated his response to Leno’s question about the dollar that the first thing we need to do is “stop sending $700,000,000 a year to countries who don’t like us,” which was the beginning of his argument for expanded domestic energy production—drilling, nuclear, hydrogen, the works. (Perhaps my biggest surprise of his appearance: he got applause from the audience for calling for offshore drilling.)If you didn’t get the chance to watch Sen. McCain on Leno, the video is below.
One last comment: might I just add how much I hope to see Gov. Sarah Palin sitting in that chair a few weeks from now as the Republican VP nominee? I think she’d rock the show.
I’m surprised that you’re surprised by the audience response to offshore drilling: The polling is through the roof on the drilling issue. It is a huge winner for Republicans, which will be only strengthened by the selection of Palin. I agree with Limbaugh, and will go out on the same limb: The Dems will overplay their hand (they already have) and will wind up, contrary to the Conventional Wisdom, getting seriously skunked at all levels.
Yeah, but a Leno audience?
Rob and Wayne,
I too was a bit surprised by the response. Everything that I have seen on this issue say that it is a red herring put out to dupe the ignorant. Whoever is selling it is doing a GREAT job. The old story of being able to sell ice to Eskimos comes to mind.
It is absolutely amazing how well the Republicans can get an idea out and sell it. I stand in awe….
Still a terrible idea, but it makes a great sound bite.
Oh, this is a repeat of what I said on another right-leaning blog:
Almost every McCain oriented blog is focusing on the character or lack of character that is Obama. The policies associated with either McCain or Obama are almost never mentioned. Ever.
On the Obama oriented blogs, we see a focus on the policies and policy failures. If a characteristic of a candidate is mentioned it generally is tied into an issue (i.e. McCain is so rich he can’t possibly understand the economy…).
Granted, I haven’t looked at every single blog out there, but that trend seems to be there.
I say this not to pass any sort of judgment, but to simply remark on the contrast.
That kind of thing is always interesting to me and I thought I would share.
Senator McCain,
After Hillary’s speech last night, IT’S NOW OR NEVER!!!!
Thanks for posting these, Rob. I’m always in bed when Leno comes on. I always enjoy seeing candidates in a (somewhat) less scripted situation, and he comes across pretty well; having a sense of humor has to be the critical element in working in a crazy place like Washington!
That it certainly does, Joyce; glad you appreciated the videos.
As for your comment re: Obama, that hasn’t been my experience; I’ve seen discussion primarily of his energy policy vs. McCain’s, and of his foreign policy, as well as more generally whether he would govern to the center or to the left if he’s elected. There is a definite interest in his character, etc., but I think that’s driven by the fact that we don’t know him. As for McCain, I know I’ve made comments on his character (as have plenty on the right), both positive and negative.
Also, no, it isn’t a red herring–going to work to increase domestic production is important because of its effect on oil futures. The current price of oil has a lot more to do with speculators, á la the real-estate bubble, than it does with practical realities, and opening up drilling will affect that immediately. (Indeed, the prospect already has.) Then too, it’s the nearest-term step we can take to reduce the 20% of our oil consumption that comes from the Middle East.
As far as I’m concerned, the hydrogen economy can’t come soon enough (and not least because in desert areas, the resulting water will be at least as valuable a commodity; the wise are already predicting that when oil fades as a cause for conflict, water will replace it, and anything that can alleviate will be a help); but for the immediate term, we need to take other measures. Removing the obstacles to nuclear plants on the French design and starting construction of those is another.
One other thing to commend Senator McCain and his advisors on:
He (and they) seem to have learned a lesson from Bob Dole’s failed 1996 campaign; namely, be the “after the campaign”, funny Bob Dole during the actual campaign itself. By laughing along and adding to Leno’s age jokes, McCain keeps the jokes on a topic that isn’t much of a problem for him, i.e. his age. Contrast that to Leno’s joke about Obama/Biden last night that hit closer to an issue Obama should worry about: Biden has 35 years of experience, so between them, they have almost 36 years of experience. Far more damaging issue to be having pointed out repeatedly.
Obama has a tough act to follow if he goes on Leno now.
On drilling: 80% of Americans support drilling, so red herring or not (which it is not), those are some powerful numbers. To the Dems eternal chagrin, most Americans do not relish being in a dependent position if they can avoid it; as people are informed of how much oil we are sitting on the average person says “and why are we not doing everything we can to get it?”. Most Americans understand basic supply and demand issues, if not the rich complexity of why a gallon of gas costs what it does. More importantly, they recognize that more supply from us, means less we buy from them. Call it what you will, but I call it the deeply ingrained American trait of self-reliance.
Energy is a national security issue, and I think McCain is now viewing from that angle, which honestly doesn’t take much selling really. If the Dems don’t provide a credible solution to high gas prices, and don’t explain how their opposition to drilling isn’t standing in the way of progress on the issue, they will encounter people voting their pocketbook.
An economy no longer dependent on oil is a laudable goal, but realistically, we are going to be an oil-based economy for well into the future, and we need to ensure that such an economy has the affordable resources it needs to guarantee a prosperous future. Even if our vehicles were no longer oil-based, we would still need oil for an unbelievable number of things in our modern world. My wife and I were in the car the other day running through the list of oil-based products: let’s just say it was a very long list…
True; I don’t know what percentage of our hydrocarbon production goes into products (such as plastics) rather than energy, but that’s a use for oil that isn’t going away. I don’t think the goal (at this point, anyway) is to never need oil again, but rather to replace it as a means of energy generation, and thus a) reduce pollution, and b) ensure that we no longer need to keep filling the coffers of countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela.
Again, I love the drilling comments and the other sound bites for it: national security, reduction in price, control of oil speculation, and reduced dependence on foreign oil. You can even add, “no more swapping young American blood for oil”. All terrific sound bites.
Of course, if you dig down a bit, there is not a lot of substance there. Oh, I am sure you will protest, but all data seems to support that assessment.
It is funny, but the comment by Obama regarding the car maintenance was far more practical. It doesn’t fire up the imagination to be sure, nor does it make a good sound bite, but alas, it is true.
I have come to the belief that most Americans would prefer that the solution to our issues not involve them when given a seemingly easier choice. I quickly learning that the politics of solutions seems to mirror the path of least resistance laws. In this example, Americans can reduce their consumption through their own actions, or they support solutions purported by others and implemented by others.
For sure, it is a pretty shallow view of the American populace, but it seems to hold true.
for someone who chides others for not being open, you’re astonishingly closedminded…
Oh, I forgot to absolutely agree with regards to the water issue.
Anyone else read those articles and Pickens windmills? The insinuation exists that he is running water pipes along the same corridor as his electric infrastructure. There are several articles on this, and they seem to mirror you assertions regarding water. I think he is trying to tap into that huge aquifer and run it into Dallas. Supposedly made his own city for the water municipality ability….
Let me join you with a prediction of my own, the farming industry (due to a large number of pressures) is about to undergo one of the largest technical revolutions in its history. These pressures include the usual suspects: transportation costs, water issues, health issues (I didn’t realize that lettuce could kill me!), and consumer shifts (worldwide organic movement limiting several markets).
In addition to these, we have what appears to be a rather insidious ploy by a certain large company to corner the market on seed development, ownership (I did not know they changed the laws to allow this), and distribution.
Anyhow, that is all off topic, but hey, despite our differences, we seem to thrive on this information.
All right, I opened the water comments up myself . . .
First of all, I think this is on topic, but who knows?
Vanderei,
Actually, I am not closed minded to this process at all. If I thought for a second that digging a hole in my backyard would help do all the things listed, well, I wouldn’t be typing this blog entry, I would be digging!
Seriously, part of me loves what McCain is saying, “we should try everything”. Unfortunately, as much as I like that idea and adore the follow up sound bites, we have some real limits on what we can fiscally accomplish.
I guess my point is this, if we are limited by what we can do, then we need to be very careful about our selections. As a person who grew up during the seventies, the thought of “drill, drill, drill” seems irresponsible given the projected return on investment in terms of tax dollars versus actual benefit (not to mention that it might actually slow down our conversion off the oil standard). Even the rosiest of predictions show an exceedingly small improvement to the market following this strategy.
If the oil companies are willing to drill without subsidies and tax breaks, abide by the strict environmental laws for those areas (of course), and finally provide that oil to the American market first, then what the heck, drill away. The current proposals, that I have reviewed, require your tax dollars and will lump this oil into the worldwide market.
Just so that is clear, your tax dollars are used to pull it from the ground and then it is sold to China. World market economics are at play here unless we specify otherwise.
Oil is selling extremely well at the moment, and most Democrats feel that the oil companies are trying to gain access to as much of that resource as possible. The markets hot, and while I do not begrudge them for their efforts, linking their desire for more profits to helping Americans at the pump is probably not realistic.
As Rob and others have stated, there are other sources that I think deserve our tax dollars and focus than the drilling solution. Part of me thinks control of the oil commodities speculators will occur when they figure out that we are serious about putting them out of a job.
McCain, to his credit hasn’t ruled out any of those other options, I am just uncertain as to how much he is willing to pursue them based on the Republican’s close ties to the Oil Industry (not that the Democrats don’t have their own supporters that they have to dance around). I am not implying a conspiracy, it just seems like it would be hard to go against one of your biggest supporters.
Off topic alert! I am linking another topic to this one with this comment.
While I readily admit that Sarah Palin is my favorite VP candidate, her selection would unfortunately solidify the fears and suspicions of the Democrats based on the comments above.
Two things. One, the issue is more speculation in oil futures than it is anything related to oil production; any decision to open additional American oil fields to drilling is going to bring prices down, and the oil companies know it.
Two, I don’t know of any ties John McCain has to Big Oil, but I do know for sure of one American politician they can’t stand: Sarah Palin. Gov. Palin has beaten them soundly about the head in her two years in office, culminating with the decision to award the pipeline contract to a Canadian firm (the big oil companies offered to build it, on the condition that they get paid and keep all the profits; Gov. Palin basically told them to go stuff themselves). As such, while she’s definitely pushing for drilling on the continental shelf and in ANWR, she’s about as un-tied to Big Oil as you can get.
Rob,
-I actually agree with your assertion that oil speculation would take a hit if we produced more oil. But, it is my hope you would agree, that would be extremely temporary given the rise in demand.
Regulating the oil speculators would have done that too by the way. I believe that measure was soundly defeated by the Republicans.
-Actually, McCain had little to few ties to Big Oil until recently. My sources say that once he reversed himself on the drilling issue, money from Big Oil flowed into the campaign coffers.
Honest.
Nevertheless, ties between Big Oil and the Republican Party are as real as ties between Labor Unions and the Democratic Party. They, along with a great many others, are big supporters. My concern is that it would be very difficult to make an energy policy that potentially cuts into their business. I hope that makes a little more sense.
-You know what, you are absolutely correct. She is not getting the love from Big Oil, but as an Alaskan governor, you can hear the sound bites already (inflaming the collective perception and perhaps mis-perceptions of Alaskan politics). My sincere apologies for not clearly making that point earlier. As a fan of hers (honest)it was unfair to NOT make that distinction.
No apologies needed–our brains are never as clear as we’d like them to be. I’d simply make the point that defeating those sound bites would be easy (there have been more than enough things said against her by other Alaska Republicans to take care of that).
As far as oil speculation taking a hit, no, I’m pretty sure it would be permanent, since we’re in a bubble; bubbles almost never reinflate. Also, I don’t doubt that the oil companies are doing what they can to boost McCain now that he’s changed his position; if they think they can tie him down to their preferred position, though, they’re mistaken.