That’s the big difference between Obama and Clinton/McCain on this gas tax issue. It’s also the sort of thing I want from a president after so long.
Breaking News
Comcast Close To Buying NBC
Oliver Willis
Like Kryptonite To Stupid
-
-
Topics
Kristy Sanchez-Trujillo
T-Mobile Outage
T-Mobile
Megan Gale
Sylvie Van Der Vaart
Clash Of The Titans
Ashley Neufeld
Afton Williamson
Kyrstin Gemar
Tesla Coil
Xperia X10
Cany Vossough
Reza Vossough
Ninel Conde
Julia Louis Dreyfus
Guardians of Childhood
Botox
Chase Utley
Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time
Cherokee
Christopher Lee
Prince Charles
Prince William
Prince Harry
Cleveland Browns
Ernie Accorsi
Reina Flynn
Reid Gray
Cole Hamels
Brett Myers
Quinn Gray
SEPTA
Burlington Northern
Star Wars The Old Republic
Nightmare On Elm Street
Gerard Butler
Amrit Dhaliwal
Louise Linton
Gwen Stefani
Curtis Lavelle Vance
Anne Pressly
H1N1 Vaccine
Melody Ross
Oasis Of The Seas
Disney Cruise
Selita Ebanks
Anthony Sowell
JJ Redick
Axe Body Spray
Christopher Walken
Dragon Age Origins
Good one here.
http://agonist.org/schecter/?p=9345
Hmm.. Not pandering? That $1,000 middle class tax cut graphic as an answer to what we’re paying at the gas pump is not pandering?
Truth is, Hillary caught Obama’s campaign unprepared to deal with this issue and has landed a big punch square on Obama’s jaw by having a good policy and a good ad up and running before the Obama team could get their policy straight.
The policies he is putting forweard, asking for higher fuel efficiency standards? What the hell is that going to do for me next week when I fill my tank? I’m not getting a new car anytime soon. It means NOTHING.
Now Hillary’s plan, that shows me leadership: SHE is taking on the oil cartels, and telling them to their face THEY are going to pay the tax reduction so I can pay a lower price. THAT is what my President is supposed to do.
Nowhere does Obama give us specifics other than saying :”we have to take a look at price-gopuging by the oil companies”. WHO is going to “take a look”? What are they going to do about it? How is that going to reduce my price at the pump?
Typical Obama: Short on details, short on ideas, short on leadership, great on rhetoric, speeches, and sound-bites.
Yes, Hillary’s farsighted plan to give people $40 in order to move her poll numbers up a point that does nothing to help the energy or economic crises. God, even the Clinton campaign isn’t pushing as much stupidity as you.
Truth is, Hillary caught Obama’s campaign unprepared to deal with this issue…
Even people in the tank for her don’t think a gas tax holiday is a good idea.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/30/expert-support-for-gas-ta_n_99474.html
Hmm.. Your “expert” thinks we oughta raise the price of gas and drive less?? Yeah….right.
Tell that to Americans trying to drop the kid at daycare at 7 am tomorrow so they can hurry up and drive to work.
Politically, Obama here is trying desperately (ads are expensive to produce) to try to catch up and take this issue away from Hillary, but she got off too quick.
She saw the wideout got a step on the defensive back, and delivered the ball on time and on target. Obama is like the duped safety sprinting to try and catch him from behind before the score, but it sure looks like seven for Hillary here.
Oh, and Ollie? $40 may not be much to you, but try and think like an American who is desperate for a candidate to do SOMETHING meaningful to his pocketbook NOW, OK?
“HOPE” and “CHANGE” and a $100 tax credit sometime next year doesn’t go in the gas tank.
Maybe teh stupid is taking over this site, where OBama is like teh Precious.
Make that $1000, would you? LOL
Wellstone, if Hillary is right on this issue, then is McCain more right since he thought of the proposal first?
You are a riot.
Wellstone: The policies he is putting forweard, asking for higher fuel efficiency standards? What the hell is that going to do for me next week when I fill my tank?
Is that what you really want? A quick fix that saves you 40 bucks on your next tank of gas? You want that more than a long-term fix that will save you significantly more money on an ongoing basis?
Wellstone: Tell that to Americans trying to drop the kid at daycare at 7 am tomorrow so they can hurry up and drive to work.
You’re right. Finding alternate sources of energy, increasing fuel efficiency and other longer term solutions to fix the underlying problems won’t help much with dropping the kid off at daycare tomorrow. Which actually just goes to show how complex the problem is.
How do we provide relief to those who need it right now, the daycare dropping mom and the lower middle class (at best) truck driver who already spends a huge chunk of his income on fuel already while also moving to a long-term permanent fix to the underlying problems?
It is a complex problem. It requires considerable thought. It will involve some continued difficulties in the shorter-term while we try to get things fixed.
So, which route do you really want? Act like a six-year-old throwing a tantrum until you get your treat right here right now solving the problem only for today, or act like a thinking adult who recognizes things will be tight for a while but the effort will pay off?
This issue is a microcosm of everything wrong with Clinton’s way of thinking. Yes, the dumb knuckle dragging UG $40 GOOD NOW answer is the easy, dare I say conservative approach to make that is kind of like a prostitute – feels good for a little bit but has no long lasting value.
What Obama (and these guys who know a thing or two – economists) say is that how about we get ourselves into a marriage. A caring, nurturing long term relationship in which we eventually do lower fuel costs and DONT FUCK UP THE PLANET.
Look, in a week or so Clinton’s going to tell us she wasn’t really for this plan so it doesn’t matter much, but its just stupid. It’s like voting in favor of a war because of what a momentary poll says without worrying about the long term effects of that vote.
It still amazes me how some people can continually be so stupid. Take Wellstone for instance.
It’s not like this is ALL she’s going to do, you idiots.
Clinton will give us relief NOW, and it will come at the expense of the oil companies, and she has aleady promised detailed plans for long-term investments in alternative energies, new ways of thinking about our future, and real, solid policies instead of Obama’s Kumbayah rhetoric.
Hillary Clinton understands that the best way to get the oil companies to the table is not with some vague and hopelessly naïve plaint that we should all sit down and hold hands and work together for America, but by busting them across the chops with a 2X4 and THEN giving THEM a chance to request the privilege of sitting down with US or facing the consequences.
That’s the kind of President I want: Obama’s kind of leadership is better suited to building movements and communities of the weak and disenfranchised, not solving strong, real-life problems, taking on and winning against powerful, ruthless adversaries, and making executive decisions. Obama leaves that to others, like his wife, while Hillary LIVES to make a difference.
I’m not looking for a visionary, I want a Chief Executive.
And Calvin Jones, the 13th apostle, can kiss my stupid ass. Hah!
And to z_adura, McCain and Hillary’s proposals could not be more different. Hers is MORE right by far since she proposes to have the OIL COMPANIES, not the taxpayers, foot the bill.
I get a kick out of all the “experts”, like Gregory N. Mankiw, Bush’s Economic-Adviser bitch who wrote a book that called supply-siders “charlatans”and had the passage excised out the latest edition after he BECAME a Bush bitch, saying the tax reductions would encourage the oil companies to charge even more for the product.
Hillary’s got’em there too: The higher their profits, the higher the windfall charge to them will be as well. That money’s going into the alternative energy well one way or another.
Way to go Hillary!!
Hey, Ollie, where’s the HUGE thread about Hillary’s bravura Presidential performance with Falafel Bill O’Reilly last night?!! She left skid marks on his shiny forehead and played him like a chump.
I can’t wait for the audacious Obama to try and stay ahead of O’Reilly. But he will not dare to risk his punk ass after he came off weak on Sunday against Chris Wallace, the guy Bill Clinton all but bitch-slapped.
Wellstone,
Others have tried to convince you, but I’ll give it a shot. If the gas tax holiday is such a good idea, then why do economists hate it? Even Krugman (clearly a Hillary supporter) called her plan “not evil” (his description of McCain’s plan) but merely “stupid”.
Read his column from Monday. Then pick up a decent economics textbook and read the section on taxes.
Given the inelasticity of gas demand during the busy driving summer months, any difference in gas prices from lifting the federal tax would be greedily absorbed by price increases.
Hmm.. Your “expert” thinks we oughta raise the price of gas and drive less?? Yeah….right.
..Robert Shapiro, formerly the undersecretary of commerce in the Clinton administration…
“My” expert? Nice try, thanks for playing.
Clinton will give us relief NOW, and it will come at the expense of the oil companies,
No, it won’t. You repeal the gas tax for three months. Great. A gallon of gas is .18¢ less for the oil company. What is their incentive to lower the cost at the pump? None.
Pull the other one.
Hillary Clinton understands that the best way to get the oil companies to the table is not with some vague and hopelessly naïve plaint that we should all sit down and hold hands and work together for America, but by busting them across the chops with a 2X4 and THEN giving THEM a chance to request the privilege of sitting down with US or facing the consequences.
Oh sure. That’ll work. It’s like a meth addict trying to negotiate a lower price from a dealer. The dealer KNOWS he has the upper hand because the addict NEEDS his product more than he does.
You also do realize, Wellstone, that neither Clinton nor McNovocain are President right now and have no power or ability to suspend the gas tax this summer?
Huh, would you look at that.
Wellstone: but by busting them across the chops with a 2X4 and THEN giving THEM a chance to request the privilege of sitting down with US or facing the consequences.
Yeah, that’s a method that’s worked so well for the current Commander in Chief.
It is misguided, immature and totally lacking in any actual understanding to think that you can just bully folks around and they will just do what you say.
First and foremost, the president just doesn’t have the position of strength from which to do that. Duros’s comment on the meth addict is not too far off the mark. Do we really want a president who doesn’t really understand what their position is? I can understand not wanting to show your weaknesses to the folks on the other side of the negotiating table, but you do have to know what your weaknesses are yourself.
Wellstone: That’s the kind of President I want: Obama’s kind of leadership is better suited to building movements and communities of the weak and disenfranchised,
And just what do you think in a very real sense the vast majority of Americans are? You were ranting earlier about the mother who has to drop her kids off at daycare at 7 in the morning. How much power do you thing she wields compared to the smallest of the oil companies? How much influence do you think most citizens have compared to the special interests and lobbyists who actually control much of Washington?
Obama’s kind of leadership is better suited to building movements and communities of the weak and disenfranchised,
Ummm, what’s wrong with that? Sounds good to me. Didn’t Jesus say something like “what you do to the least you do also to me?” Bringing up the the weak and disenfranchised can only make our country stronger.
Bringing up the the weak and disenfranchised can only make our country stronger.
Yes, but then it cuts into the power of the ruling class, and Lord knows we don’t want that. The Clintons’ actions in terms of the Democratic Party are a microcosm of how they feel about the rest of the nation…We Own This.
My point is that Hillary will FIGHT for the weak and disenfranchised and wield that 2 X 4 for them; Obama’s answer is for the disenfranchised themselves to find a way to fight the battle after he unites them.
I like Hillary’s brand of leadership better; that’s someone who is not afraid to step out in front, and someone I will get behind.
America understands this, too: It’s the “We Own This” crowd, the ones who earn $50k plus and the power Elites with the college Educations and the Volvos and BMW’s that are supporting Obama and donating money to his cause.
The working class mother and father have, time and time again, in state after state, voted to put Hillary forward as our candidate.
“America understands this, too: It’s the “We Own This” crowd, the ones who earn $50k plus and the power Elites with the college Educations and the Volvos and BMW’s that are supporting Obama and donating money to his cause.”
Wow, I’m an elite because I have a college degree and make over $50k? I even drive a European car! I’m just like the Bush’s and the Trumps and the Buffett’s!!!1111!!!@@ America Fuck yeah!!111!1@
If “America understands” that Hillary is the one fighting for them, than why is she losing? Are there more elites than regular folks now? And if that is true, than are the elites truly the elite?
But seriously folks, what impresses me on this issue is that Obama didn’t just knee jerk jump on board. He would have paid no political price to do so. However, he isn’t playing Americans for fools and telling them that a short term fix is going to solve their problems. It takes real leadership to do this.
My point is that Hillary will FIGHT for the weak and disenfranchised and wield that 2 X 4 for them; Obama’s answer is for the disenfranchised themselves to find a way to fight the battle after he unites them.
That’s not what you said, and it is no where near what Obama has said.
t’s the “We Own This” crowd, the ones who earn $50k plus and the power Elites with the college Educations and the Volvos and BMW’s that are supporting Obama and donating money to his cause.
I call bullshit. I drive a Ford truck and make WAAAAAYYY less than $50K.
Seriously, ’stone, you are spinning like a top here lately.
The working class mother and father have, time and time again, in state after state, voted to put Hillary forward as our candidate.
I guess that’s why she’s only won 15 states to Obama’s 30, right?
Oh right, 17 counting FLA and MI. 18 if you discount the caucus vote in TX.
But….she’s still losing.
It takes real leadership to do this.
Treating me like an adult. Not just telling me whatever I want to hear to get ahead. Not underestimating the intelligence of the American public, but not underestimating their dumbness either.
Hmm. I dunno, has that ever been done before?
Jesus, Hillary’s kind of leadership at least through the filter of Wellstone’s imagination sounds more like totalitarianism than democracy.
The fact is that she talks a great game, but she’s a shitty salesperson and shitty coalition builder. The net result is that she would lead with tough talk and brave pronouncements and then end up being less effective than Carter. Sorry, but I don’t feel like reviving the Republican beast.
Wellstone: I like Hillary’s brand of leadership better; that’s someone who is not afraid to step out in front, and someone I will get behind.
See, that I can understand, and even respect. You’re explaining something reasonably specific that you like about Hillary. A much better way to make your argument than the ranting about why Obama is all bad that you’ve been using lately.
More “I support my candidate because” and less “And yours has no redeeming qualities whatsoever” goes a long way towards not making you look like a Hillary-bot who has no opinions of his own.
You know, for all their (many) faults, I have never felt the need to reply to each comment, or even most comments, of posters like Jay, JayTea, and SaveFerris. I usually disagree with them, but only occasionally need to voice disgust or incredulity at things they write on this blog.
Not since the legendary Frank DiSalle was posting here regularly have I felt the need to constantly reply to the stupidity of a single poster. Until Wellstone, that is. And this makes me really sad, because 1) I originally thought Wellstone to be a good, reasonable person, and 2) It really bothers me that I can find real commonality between a conservative moron like Frank and a guy like Wellstone, supposedly who is on my side of the aisle.
Rather than reply to all your inanity this time, Wellstone, here’s a different way of thinking about one of your central tenets. Those college-educated, semi-wealthy people you mention that are going for Obama… Why is there so much mistrust for the opinions of educated, intelligent people? SHOULD there be? It reminds me of the derision that Bush backers (and conservatives in general) have for the opinions of highly educated people (i.e., college professors). It is absolutely ridiculous to me that, somehow, MORE education, MORE intelligence makes your political opinion less valid or less trustworthy. I thought that this kind of sentiment was localized on the conservative side of the aisle, but it looks like I was awfully wrong about that.
I am none of the things Wellstone says I am, except for the college education. I own no car and do not make 50k a year.
My finger must have slipped when I voted for Obama.