A lot of listeners called and wrote in to share their opinions of the vice presidential debate. Here are some of the emails we received:
I wanted Gov. Palin to do well. As a woman, I'm insulted. Don't wink at me. I WOULD NEVER BEHAVE THAT WAY IN A PROFESSIONAL SETTING. Also, I'm supposed to be thrilled that you "performed" well and met the ridiculously low standards that you set for yourself. She lacked depth, substance and command. I could go on and on and on.
I think that it's important to note Connie Schultz's own qualifications before noting who she married. Her Pulitzer Prize is more significant than her marriage to then-Congressman Sherrod Brown when she is introduced, and reversing the order is just plain sexist. Please apologize now. Thanks!
Patricia, East Cleveland
I agree that Sarah Palin sure did better than in the Couric interviews. She seemed coherent and poised. I felt that she re-itrated a lot of campaign talking points and often disregarded the questions being asked- but she did okay and I would say she did well when near the end she spoke of bi-partisanship. However, I thought that Joe Biden had the debate of his life. He was clearly knowledgable and specific on policy with a real command on the issues of foreign policy. And- he really connected with the voters with the story of his being a single parent and on many other point. I was actually really impressed with him.
Margaret, Independent Voter, Cleveland
I find it interesting that Palin's focus on energy comes at a time that the state of Alaska has a pipeline development deal in the works that would bring 40 billion dollars to the economy. Is this money earmarked for the State of Alaska or for United States if McCain wins the election? It seems to me that the approval is contingent if she and McCain win the election.
Where is the balance in your panel. You've invited an insightful commentator, a thoughtful educator and a profoundly biased Republican Party hack?