Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Great Leaders Quoted. A Gassy Quiz.
Earlier today during a conference call, when asked why she continues to back the idea when it lacks support, Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson explained it this way: ""We believe that the presidency requires leadership. There are times when a president will take a position that a broad consensus of quote unquote experts will agree with, and there are times when a president will do something that, the group of experts quote unquote does not agree with.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/news/2008/05/clinton_support_gas_tax_holida.html?ft=1
Hmmm, what other great leader thinks ignoring so called quote unquote experts and charging ahead with stupid, ill-conceived policies is "leadership? Okay, anyone else? Good. Who else?
Good. Now our next quote from today.
“I want to know where people stand and I want them to tell us, are they with us or against us when it comes to taking on the oil companies?” she added.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/hillary_are_members_of_congres.php
Hmm, what other great leader thinks simplistic manichean divisions are the mark of an effective and inspiring leader? Well, okay, full credit if you chose him, though I don't know that he's really counts as a leader.
One last quote. What other great prognosticator does this remind you of?
This primary election on Tuesday is a game changer. This is going to make a huge difference in what happens going forward. The entire country -- probably even a lot of the world -- is looking to see what North Carolina decides
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/hillary_tuesdays_voting_will_b.php
Hmm, what other great prognosticator was known for constantly predicting that a turning point was right around the corner, that some make or break moment is at hand, some big event that would reverse all past trends has arrived? Anyone?
Okay. One last question. Can anyone else think of any politial consultants whose work invariably indicates taht they believe that you can never really underestimate the intelligence of the voters?
.jpg/400px-Thomas_Friedman_2005_(5).jpg){kind=link}
Comments (16)
They learned from the Republicans almost too well.
May 2, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't laugh for crying. She's gone completely over to the dark side; she's not even pretending to differentiate herself from Bush. And too many Democrats are buying this--they think they're getting cheap gas, free health care, and sunny skies forever if they nominate her.
How can Obama stand by and let her get away with presenting this as a Democratic campaign? I've supported his higher-road campaign, but basically Hillary is starting to get her support by being Bush. And people like Bush's soundbites; the idea of keeping the Bushian soundtrack and getting handsome folksy old Bill back while losing the Shrub--it's a work of evil genious. If Obama doesn't start something, for heaven's sake, she's going to get elected and we will indeed have four more years of Bush. Some things might have to trump Obama's dignity.
Steve, you've ruined my evening. Though I did enjoy the amusing Bush photos, easy to find though they may be.
May 2, 2008 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Westmoreland gave me a chill.
May 3, 2008 1:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
She's going for the blue collar/low info voters. Those don't spend a lot of time watching/reading political news so they get the few minutes during their local evening broadcast. They'll hear a bite of "tax holiday" or "against the oil companies" and that will resonate. They won't necessarily hear the larger picture that it really would benefit the oil companies (increased consumption and ability to increase prices to make up the slack) and hurt taxpayers (remove billions from infrastructure budget while giving the average family about $30 minus any price increase). Lots of people fall into this category - just too damn busy to spend time analyzing. That's why it works.
May 3, 2008 5:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm hoping that there are still some intelligent voters left to switch to Obama from this gas tax pander. I canvassed in Indiana last weekend and I did talk with some smart and still undecided people. I think this is a new low for her - but I seem to say that about every week. If anyone can volunteer and make calls this weekend for Obama - it could really help.
May 3, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thomas Frieman in the New York Times...
Dumb as We Wanna Be
It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/30/opinion/30friedman.html?em&ex=1209960000&en=fbfb1283acfe0ebd&ei=5087%0A
May 3, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is all the sequel of her finding her voice.
May 3, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like to think of it as her finding her soul, or rather that she doesn't have one.
May 3, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's worth a direct quote from Friedman's article:
“It’s a disaster,” says Michael Polsky, founder of Invenergy, one of the biggest wind-power developers in America. “Wind is a very capital-intensive industry, and financial institutions are not ready to take ‘Congressional risk.’ They say if you don’t get the [production tax credit] we will not lend you the money to buy more turbines and build projects.”It is also alarming, says Rhone Resch, the president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, that the U.S. has reached a point “where the priorities of Congress could become so distorted by politics” that it would turn its back on the next great global industry — clean power — “but that’s exactly what is happening.” If the wind and solar credits expire, said Resch, the impact in just 2009 would be more than 100,000 jobs either lost or not created in these industries, and $20 billion worth of investments that won’t be made.
Solar and wind represent an unimaginable potential source of economic growth. While the US dithers and panders to oil and ethanol interests, Europe is plowing ahead with R&D of new technologies. So when we're finally forced to seek alternatives to the status quo, we'll once again have to buy the product overseas.
We're a stupid, stupid, stupid country, especially when it comes to complex issues like energy policy.
May 3, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And that energy policy is exactly what we're going to need at the national leadership level if we're ever going to do anything about either oil supplies or clean energy. (Both, really...)
A refocusing of national priorities on a scale combining the Manhattan Project and Project Apollo might be sufficient. Turn our combustion-based infrastructure towards the creation of a non-combustion-based infrastructure. It can be done, we just need the vision and political will.
May 3, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the thing. This series of comments by the Clinton campaign are going to have absolutely no effect on the voters.
On the superdelegates? I think the Clinton campaign probably just jumped the shark.
Nice post, NCSteve.
May 3, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't a gas tax holiday provide the same type of recession busting stimulus as the tax rebate and the over-loose monetary policy? We're in a recession; people are hurting; and working class people are hurting the most. Won't giving people a 30 cents a gallon break on gas prices provide a little relief.
Nobody is suggesting that we make eliminating the gas tax permanent policy. To me, as someone with a degree in economics, the gas tax holiday is the least harmful and has a much more immediate impact than the tax relief check. The most dangerous policy, and the one that helps working people the least and the moneyed interests the most, is the overly loose monetary policy. If we lower interests rates too much, our bankers around the world will flee to other currencies and investments that pay a more realistic rate of return. And they don't have to withdraw money in mass or even stop rolling over current investments. All they have to do is stop financing our balance of payments deficit by investing the money in their own domestic economies or elsewhere around the world.
I know many of my colleagues don't like the gas tax holday, but I would bet that they don't like the tax rebate either. And I would bet that they are really apprehensive of the Fed's short term focused monetary policy.
May 3, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi redstateleroy,
From what I understand, federal gas tax is about 18.5 cents/gallon. Also, the economists I've heard weigh in on this have mentioned that the supply of gasoline is essentially already fixed for the summer season. So, if the tax is removed from the price structure, won't the price of gas at the pump simply rise to compensate? Of course, then you can institute a windfall profits tax on the oil companies -- but then again, why introduce a new tax to the framework if you already have an effective system in place?
I haven't done any investigation of the tax rebate or the Federal Reserve's monetary policy, but I suspect that I agree with your points on those.
FWIW, I'm not an economist, and I'm certainly not trying to imply that listening to a radio segment and reading a couple articles is anywhere near as much education as is required to obtain and economics degree.
May 3, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've read that it would save consumers about $10 per month, and cost the National Highway Trust Fund about 3 billion per month. That's a very bad deal for the U.S. economy. Just ask Minneapolis.
May 3, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hard-earned lessons include tax breaks being hard to rescind. And yes, the "stimulus" is about as helpful as one meal to a homeless guy. He'll still be homeless tomorrow.
Best argument against altering the gas tax is that it should been increased, lots, long ago. This will make that even harder. When you're hooked on cigarettes and can't afford them, cutting the tax is not the way to get off the habit. And when we can see the price possibly rising hugely, the tax holiday only delays the inevitable.
One reader suggested instant subsidies for mass transit, free rides for a while. Sounds promising.
May 3, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been posting this link around the site, so forgive me if you're tired of seeing it:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/a_holiday_from_gas_prices.html#more
...in which there's some debunking by pointy-headed experts. The stimulus is minimal, the damage to government funding is maximal, and noone's going to be imposing a windfall profits tax on oil companies anytime soon. Obama knows this from personal experience in Illinois.
Clinton's proposed tax holiday is like the idea that global warming might not actually be happening, and might not even be caused or worsened by human activities, based on the fact that there are a few right-wing-based "scientists" who just don't think so.
May 3, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment