« Hillary Again Hits Tale About Indiana Company Sold To China During Clinton Years | Home | Hillary And Obama Now Spending Almost Equally In North Carolina And Indiana »
Here's Obama's Ad Pushing Back On Hilllary's "Gas Tax Holiday" Hit
Here's Obama's ad in Indiana and North Carolina responding to Hillary's spot yesterday hitting him for not supporting a "gas tax holiday"...
Interestingly, Obama's response never mentions Hillary's spot. Instead, he points to the "gas tax holiday" as a way of furthering his familiar message that he intends to rise above Washington's typical way of throwing short-term bogus fixes at serious problems.
"That's what you need from a president," Obama says. "Somebody who's gonna tell you the truth."
Advertisement
I was getting pretty tired of Obama's same-old ads, but this one is a sure winner.
Why oh why did Clinton sign on to such a brain-dead, boneheaded policy?
April 30, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pandering has a long history of being successful, that is why.
April 30, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, this is the best response possible to that pandering Hillary ad.
Obama treats voters like adults while Hillary treats voters like children. She harms the future by offering a sugar-hit treat in the place of a full meal.
April 30, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN actually shot the Holiday idea full of holes yesterday in a story revealing the holiday would create a 13 billion dollar shortfall in the highways budget and threaten over 300,000 jobs.
May 1, 2008 5:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bravo, Barack Obama. Call them on their bullshit.
April 30, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
This ad really deflates the argument that Hillary offers worthwhile solutions.
April 30, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a great ad in so many ways: substantively it hits the particular stupid policy and shows Obama's specific proposals (see, he does have them), and then folds it all into his overarching argument. Cosmetically, he's at his best, the crowd is great, the music hits just the right note...perfect. They should use this template a LOT.
May 1, 2008 2:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome ad. Hopefully this issue will dominate for the rest of the week instead of Wright. And he kept his word re: not having negative ads --- would have been easy to nail Clinton on this (i.e., the Clinton/McCain gas tax holiday)...surprised though that he didn't discuss how the gas tax will also cost thousands of construction jobs and continue the deterioration of the highway infrastructure.
April 30, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why go negative? He's won.
April 30, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because it's a terrible idea. It's not a personal smear - it's a policy criticism. Something we need to see a bit more of in this campaign.
April 30, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good for him. Today Federico Pena, Clinton's Energy Secretary, said that Hillary's and McCain's gimmick was just that and said both candidates were pandering to get votes.
April 30, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny story at HuffPost about a complete lack of expert support for the gas tax holiday:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/30/expert-support-for-gas-ta_n_99474.html
Even "the little people" think it's silly. This is the American Trucking Association's response:
Emphasis mine.
April 30, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nicely done. He should pound her up and down over this.
April 30, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great ad. I'm glad to some push back from economists and mainstream columnists on this issue. It really is a pander.
April 30, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton's and McCain's endorsements of this plan indicate either:
1) They are liars.
2) They are economic imbeciles.
3) Both 1) and 2).
April 30, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Good Ad. Honesty indeed. Bout time.
April 30, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right on the money.
Editorial from today's LA Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-gastax30apr30,0,399014.story
"Clinton is now running commercials in Indiana, site of the next Democratic primary on Tuesday, attacking Obama for his policy on gasoline prices. Never mind that there is almost no chance of getting her proposal through Congress before Memorial Day, even if it made sense. Here's hoping the people of Indiana can see through this ploy."
April 30, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama does nothing because he is bought and paid for by big oil.
That is the truth.
He can't even tell the truth about his pastor.
April 30, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL, a Hillary shill calling anyone dishonest?
Too funny.
Hey, little green footballs is calling, they miss their mascot. Go home troll.
April 30, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
A Hillary shill calling someone else bought and paid for is pretty damn hilarious, too.
April 30, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
you just suck up that pandering don't you?
April 30, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a link where you can figure out how much money this tax holiday would save you.
http://www.jabberwonk.com/flinker.cfm?cliid=13lkzo
April 30, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
goatlife, you really need to get a life.
April 30, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuuuuuuse Me!
Meheheheh.
April 30, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a fine ad, perhaps the best I've seen from Obama.
One of the reasons this is an effective ad is because there is real daylight between Clinton and Obama on this issue, and he's got the better argument. On most domestic and foreign policy issues, a clear difference isn't obviously demonstrated in 30 seconds, even though highly informed voters see Clinton as far more hawkish.
Because there's significant difference between Obama and McCain, this ad demonstrates what kind of ad Obama can run once he shakes Clinton off his leg.
April 30, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I give it a B+. It points out the idiocy of the "gas tax holiday". It possibly sets himself up for some disappointment, though: the tone of the ad implied to me that Obama might actually be able to lower gas prices. But there's little a President can do about gas prices anyhow, other than raise them by taxing it more further.
Obama is certainly showing more maturity and judgment here than either of the other two candidates.
April 30, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not starting stupid wars would be a good start. ;-)
April 30, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Finding someone to run the Fed that stops the dollar bleeding out would help, too.
April 30, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or maybe sensible economic policies that don't create stagflation. That would be good, too.
April 30, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or putting the money that has gone into Iraq into supporting alternative fuels research, thus creating a new "industrial revolution" led by the US that would bring the world to our door.
We blew the chance to be the innovators. It is what we have always done better than anyone else. When you have a president, vice president, Secretary of State, and god-knows who else in the administration all in bed with the oil industry why would they look to other forms of fuel just because it is good for our country?
Imagine if we had started the equivalent of a space-race to develop alternative fuels, and their engines. Would we be transferring out wealth to the Persian Gulf now? Would we be at war with a country that was no threat to us? Would the whole world consider our president to be a more serious threat than binLadin?
No. We would still be an actual super-power, and deserving of that title. Bush has done to us what he has done to every endeavor he has touched. McCain wants to perpetuate it, and I am sorry to say that I believe Hillary does as well. Why? Because she is running as a Republican.
April 30, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
We *had* an energy policy initiated it under Carter.
It was dismantled under Reagan and beyond (including Bill Clinton).
While the Iraq War spending didn't help, it misses the point to look in that direction.
The fact is that the US Public didn't like hearing from Carter the real issues on energy -- and they still don't.
As we have seen, gas in the US is *still* cheaper than anywhere else in the world, and yet we complain about $4/gal.
The elusive "alternate energies" is a misnomer. Oil is needed for things far beyond just fuel... It is especially needed in agriculture and pharmaceuticals to make fertilizers and pills.
We need to look beyond the simple mantras on energy. Both the left and the right sides have them -- and neither tackles the tough issues.
April 30, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it is a good ad but it could have been stronger. He needs to spell out what David Shuster said last night on MSNBC: that the three month cut in gas taxes would cost a $9 Billion loss to the Highway fund and probably 100,000 jobs in the construction industry. So the trade is: 1/2 a tank of gas for 100,000 jobs. I think that puts it in very stark and powerful terms. It is a stronger way of saying it than just short term solutions versus long term real fixes.
April 30, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, but I think on the 30 second spot, this worked. He can follow up with that info and that would indeed hit home.
April 30, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
No worries. It just means there is room for a sequel.
This ad is much deeper than a policy critique. It is about the fundamental honesty and authenticity of the candidates.
April 30, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Let me show you the facts and figures . . ."
Yeah, always a strong pitch. Ask Willie Stark.
April 30, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is great stuff.
Gas tax holiday...
Is bad policy
Won't really help people like you
Exposes the emptiness of Clinton's promises
Elevates the importance of truth-telling
Works on lots of levels. plus it uses humor, mockery, in his own voice rather than the spooky, gravelly negative ad voice.
Play this over and over, it can be a turning point...
April 30, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like this reviewer - Josh, hire him/her!
April 30, 2008 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously, that reads almost like a haiku. Not the 5-7-5 arrangement, but that could be reworked:
Gas tax holiday
Won't really help people like you
Is bad policy
Empty promises
Importance of truth-telling
Is elevated
April 30, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
With apologies to Economides ... The original is better, but once I got the urge to haikuify, I couldn't help it.
April 30, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
This ad is OUTSTANDING. Nailed it. Very effective. Bravo.
April 30, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
While Obama does nothing Clinton is going after big oil:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=7354
April 30, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
For what? More campaign contributions?
April 30, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Snark, laugh, good one!
April 30, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like Clinton says, talk is cheap.
April 30, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Finally, something that should be a clear indicator on why Hillary Clinton should be yanked from the public stage (as well as McCain).
Although it's a small item, Hillary's notion of gas tax holidays is pure bogus -- as many economists are now describing. Unfortunately Obama can't say the real issue: we are running out of oil... and not even in your children's lifetime, but your lifetime.
However, at least Obama explains it to people that a gas tax is a non-solution.
Any that would still back Hillary after this gas tax fiasco deserves everything they get in terms of an energy crisis, because it's clear that Hillary won't be solving anything.
The American way of life will *have* to change. Do not expect convenient air travel within 5 years. If we don't rebuild inter-city railways systems, you will be stuck in a local place.
Cities with great distances and no light rail (southern California comes to mind) are going to be hosed big time.
This is not a matter of buying Priuses. Oil is figured into the shipping costs of everything you buy. It's figured into the inputs into all your agriculture products.
So even if you walk or bicycle everywhere (assuming that is practical or possible), you will be affected by the oncoming energy crisis.
Hillary has just shown us that she can't handle the issue and is afraid to speak the truth. She is like McCain.
Hillary Clinton has shown us she is not ready on day one.
Hopefully, the people in IN, NC and the few remaining primary states will realize that Hillary is playing them for fools -- a few bread crumbs today, just to get elected. And then a shrug, telling us there is nothing she can do about high prices of oil.
Make no mistake: anyone that tries to get you to believe that it's the "evil oil companies" is misdirecting your attention from the real issue:
We are now in a process that the world will see less oil coming out of the ground than the year before.
I highly recommend two recent blogs that had very important discussions (disclaim: I initiated the first one):
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/i-am-very-disappointed-in-obam.php
and
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/gas-prices-us-vs-europe.php
Remember when I blogged about energy costs and how it would be the key issue of the next presidency? Looks like I was wrong: it may well be the key issue of the current presidential campaign!
We should stop talking about trivial issues like some words from Rev Wright. (And heartily denounce and reject any politician trying to focus our attention there.)
None of it will matter with $5/gal gas and $5 bread.
Think about it.
April 30, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Think about this - Europeans have been paying $5 and $6 for a gallon of gas for years.
They haven't collapsed.
We ain't going back to cheap oil. You can get over that one.
April 30, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
In India, I pay about $ 7.5 per gallon. US has to get over the profligacy of such a limited resource.
April 30, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep.
I can't believe they are still selling: giant RVs; hummers; stretch limos - which have proliferated; ATVs - which emit so much particulate air pollution is surpasses that emitted by automobiles...ad infinitum.
April 30, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Directionally, I don't disagree with your statement, but I don't think it's as dire as you suggest. A large part of the run-up in oil prices is really just a decline in the dollar. It dropped again today to $1.56=1EURO. Five years ago they were equal. Put another way, without the dollar decline, that $3.60 gallon of gas would be selling for $2.40. Decades of cheap oil has also taken the wind out of conservation efforts. CAFE standards have not been changed in years. Oil prices are notoriously elastic, so we should expect that, just as in the 70's, conservation efforts will curb demand and reduce prices, although it will take a few years to effect.
So while it's true that oil will continue to be limited in supply in the future, a stronger dollar and a few less Hummers will go a long way toward reducing prices.
April 30, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The dollars decline and oil running out are in fact tied together but in more than the straightforward way you suggest.
In fact, it is *oil* that is stabilizing the dollar because OPEC agrees to sell oil in dollars, creating some demand. We are presently in danger of having OPEC trade in Euros and the Yen. *Then* you will see oil prices truly rise on the declining dollar. At present some non-OPEC nations (Russia, Venezula) are doing just that.
The US still has plenty of enemies (including China) who would like to see more of the world under less of it's influence. And you can destroy a country more effectively economically than via warfare. This is one of the reasons why China is buying up our debt while hoarding it's own currency. For the time being, China needs our markets, until they can manufacture for their own.
The only reason why this plan will ultimately fail is that the world is presently in a late industrial mode -- again, because we are past peak oil. Without this form of cheap energy, consumerism, as we know it, will cease once and for all and all economies will collapse.
If you go back to the first blog I listed in my original post, this is discussed by myself and others in some detail.
The world is very complex but it's possible to get a handle on it -- especially if you demand the politicians not spout easy, simplistic (but ultimately false) notions.
Some excellent books to look at concerning these issues (all available on Amazon):
OVERSHOOT by Catton
AMERICAN THEOCRACY by Phillips
BAD MONEY also by Phillips
April 30, 2008 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I liked American Theocracy. Had a good flavor. Salty!
Meheheheh.
April 30, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're not really running out of oil.
We're running out of *cheap* oil.
April 30, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually both are true. Our running out of oil is exactly the reason why we are running out of cheap oil. We are past peak oil, which means that every year less oil is available than the previous year.
And yet demand continues to rise.
So, your point is...?
April 30, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just as a reminder that it's not so simple as the doomsday cry of we'll be completely out of oil in X years with X equaling whatever number of decades fit the speaker's agenda.
And I know you probably know that, but a lot of people don't.
I don't pretend to understand all the complexities of international oil markets and supplies. It's complicated and oftentimes, to me, counterintuitive. Iraq's oil supplies for example. Is the point of controlling Iraq's oil for the purpose of pumping it out faster? Or to guarantee not too much gets pumped out? The more demand outpaces supply, the higher the price of oil goes, and the more money some very powerful people make without any additional effort. Those people have no incentive to see output increase.
And none of this should be construed in any way as saying we should be blasé about oil consumption. It will, ultimately, run out. It is a nonrenewable resource. It is an immediate problem for the environment and a contributor to global climate change. We do need alternative energy sources.
April 30, 2008 11:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like asking my "green" friends (read: old-school, "save the planet" environmental types) exactly what the carbon footprint of riding their bike is. The response is invariably either "Nothing!" or, somewhat more intelligently, "What?"
Of course, I'm not telling you anything you don't know here, but when you ride your bike you still burn energy in your body. Which comes from food. Which is grown using petrochemical pesticides, fertilizers, agricultural equipment, refrigeration and transport.
(Back of the envelope) Every food calorie we consume in North America represents something like 10 or 11 calories of petrochemical energy. Let's say you ride your bike 12 miles to work and back and you burn something like 1500 round-trip. So this is actually like 15k petro-calories. A gallon of gas in North America has something like ~30k calories, so you've burned the equivalent of a half-gallon of gasoline. Keep in mind, these are quick figures and they can easily double depending on how far your ride, how much you weigh and (here's the kicker) what you eat. If you fueled your bike with locally organic grains, fruit and vegetables, good for you because you probably did better than my figures here. If you fueled your bike with beef, congratulations: You may have just doubled my figures. So now your bike gets 24 MPG. So does the average light truck.
And this represents fuel that was actually burned along with the carbon released into the atmosphere that goes with it.
The point here isn't to say that it isn't good to ride your bike, but rather to attempt illustrating the complexity of energy and to reinforce your point that everyone will be affected regardless of their personal habits.
April 30, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
DF, your posts continue to provide the light in enlightenment.
One of my favorite mental exercises about alternate energy sources is to talk about return on energy invested.
100 years ago, when you stuck a pole in the ground and oil gushed up, you got about 100x the amount of oil out as you put in.
Today, you are looking (at best) at 10-20x the amount of oil out as oil in.
Even the most optimistic biofuel numbers show that you are getting about maybe 20% energy out as energy in. 20%. If we are in a concerned era with 10-20x energy out as energy in, what happens when we are less than 2x????
And these are pie-in-the-sky numbers. There are many more studies that show that you are better off burning oil directly, or even that you are losing oil in the transition to biofuel.
People have no idea what the real numbers are -- and it's politicians that count on that.
April 30, 2008 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The accent truth is what's most important.
Reminds people Hillary is a pathological liar.
Oh, and gotnolife: She has taken more $$ from big oil, big pharma and the big insurance than all other candidates combined.
That includes all those who have dropped out as well.
You should try doing some real research.
April 30, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right.
And what's more, everyone in this country isn't quite as naive and stupid about things as Hillary apparently thinks they are - else she wouldn't try this stupid political give-away trick. It's going to backfire on her - people get those things for what they are, far more than we give them credit for, sometimes.
ahem.
April 30, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Backfire on her? I doubt it. There are plenty of people who will argue about the availability of oil -- or claim that it's all the oil companies' faults.
And some of them post on TPM.
The fact is that 1/2 the population has an IQ lower than average -- and the 1/2 with the above average IQ doesn't always have the correct info, or is more swayed by emotion than clear thinking.
Hillary's jumping on this issue precisely because most people will be dumb enough to vote for her because of her stance.
Unless we take it upon ourselves to constantly and consistently raise the dialog and educate people.
April 30, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're wrong because I don't think people are as simple minded as you do.
The Republicans do and apparently, Hillary does.
They aren't as gullible as portrayed.
April 30, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do you explain GWB getting *re-elected* in 2004 then?
Or that swift-boating is effective?
Or that FNC is the highest rated network?
Or that high-powered advisers told both Hillary and McCain to put out a bogus tax cut?
Somebody thinks you can fool all of the public, some of the time.
April 30, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've got to admit, Joshua, it gave me a start when he used "truth" and "President" in the same sentence.
Refreshing, eh?
April 30, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL. Amen.
April 30, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like the cut-aways to the older white voters nodding and smiling in assent.
Very powerful.
That's the demographic Barack said he needed to do a better job of reaching out to. This is a good start.
April 30, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, there is this vid of Obama at one his rallies that you need to see if you haven't.
Chino Blanco put up a diary around it - there is the most amazing 82 year old woman who is just in love with Obama and gets up and is so damn smart! She is worried about the environment, mainly food and water - damn this lady just rocks. Obama gets her name and tells her she's going to be his running mate.
I think Obama connects with people very well, from the different rally vids I've seen. I loved his roundtable interview with the paper right before Pa. He explains where he is coming from very clearly.
And he does that in this vid, too. But mainly, the woman is worth seeing the thing. I just love her. I think that would have been my mother if she were still alive.
April 30, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Breaking:
Hillary Clinton calls for six month tax holiday on Band-Aids to easy the pain of gunshot victims.
April 30, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those damn snipers!
April 30, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Liam,
I love this the first time you posted it...and it was just as good the second time around!
April 30, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Instead, he points to the "gas tax holiday" as a way of furthering his familiar message that he intends to rise above Washington's typical way of throwing short-term bogus fixes at serious problems.
And yet while in the Illinois legislature Obama himself voted not once, not twice, but LOL! What a hypocrit!
April 30, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
(&(^*(()() html tags work, do they?
In the Illinois legislature Obama voted three times for a gas tax holiday, that same 'short-term bogus fix'.
source- http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080430/D90CDUV02.html
April 30, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go figure.
But now he is bought and paid for by big oil.
That is why he will do nothing.
April 30, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you read your link it's from the Dept. of Lessons Learned.
Obama ended up voting against permanent elimination of the 5% state gas tax because of the long term harm it would do to infrastructure and the lack of appreciable tax relief for his constituents.
Oh My! A far sighted President, what a concept.
Oh My! Changing positions based upon Experience.
This is a winner for Obama.
April 30, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
April 30, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
You must be too stupid to realize that economic issues change from year to year, locale to locale, federal vs. state, etc. To equate the too as fully synonymous is idiotic.
Cat Ladies for Hilltard
April 30, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just like NAFTA, right Champ.
April 30, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, he has some experience with the idea and realizes its efficacy. Also, this is from the Washington Post's fact-check on the issue:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/
April 30, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good ad. Well done. As I said yesterday, I would prefer a candidate proposing higher gas taxes, but given that I cannot get that sort of straight talk or sound thinking, I will at least be content with the one brave enough to avoid truly idiotic pandering. For a 30 second ad, I thought that this was remarkably content-rich, but it also hit on most of the more effective non-intellectual points in the debate as well, without every saying a word against Sen Clinton. I am impressed (as usual).
April 30, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want Senator Obama to tax bagpipers until they stop strangling that endangered species.
April 30, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would say faux bagpipers, who tend to show themselves as avatars.
April 30, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is a good ad, don't get me wrong, but I kinda wanted him to tie Hillary and McSame together and slam them a bit.
April 30, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena,
Not only are we not going back to cheap oil, we are heading to VERY expensive oil.
Europe is a completely different societal architecture than the US -- starting with distance and lifestyle. I suggest you look at the second blog I list where Americans abroad describe the differing lifestyle.
In many European cities, most people don't even own cars. Imagine trying not to own a car in the US. Except for NYC, Boston, Chicago and parts of Washington DC, an automobile is practically a necessity.
Also, Europe doesn't want additional hikes in oil prices either as food prices are food prices. And a lot of food is grown in the US -- with it's heaving petrochemical inputs.
April 30, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I totally agree with you. Europe may reap a slight windfall if OPEC does decide to take oil off the dollar and put it on the euro.
But boy is it going to hurt here.
I agree with everything you say except that you think Hillary's idea is a sure sell to people. I just don't think so - I think most people are suspicious of being told they are getting something for nothing. Especially from the government.
April 30, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sincerely hope you are correct, Tena. I would love it for you to come back and tell me how cynical and negative I have been (even though I know this isn't your style).
The evidence I've seen is to the contrary, but I hope my research in this area is way off base!
Here's to your instincts!
April 30, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll go you one better. I think most people can do simple math. They can subtract 18 cents from $3.79 a gallon and realize it's peanuts. If $3.79/gallon is your problem, $3.61 is not much of a solution.
April 30, 2008 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Kerry Rips MSNBC On Wright: 'You People Need To Let Go Of This'
A loser whining for another loser.
Classic.
Wright will be back. He has books to sell.
April 30, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
The tide is turning. (h/t to gotalife).
April 30, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The tide is a tsunami now.
Obama is toast.
April 30, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oooh, scary.
April 30, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way to mix those metaphors.
April 30, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmmmm. Toast!
Meheheheh.
April 30, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can vote for someone who feeds you bullshit and a piece of candy (Hillary/McCain) or you can vote for someone who treats you like an adult and tells you the truth. It's a pretty simple choice.
April 30, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
What Momentum Looks Like:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/30/143916/115
Yup toast.
April 30, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, yeah. A hotbed of momentum at mydd!
LOL.
April 30, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gosh, too bad the supers aren't paying attention!
April 30, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now she is going after China.
Obama, nothing, nada, zip.
Crickets.
Clinton is a leader Obama is not.
And Obama should not be talking about the truth.
Like he did not know about his radical, racist, kook, friend of 20 years.
Give me a freaking break gop trolls.
April 30, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gotalife -- will you vote for McCain when HRC doesn't get the nomination?
I'm really and sincerely curiuous.
April 30, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I am starting to think the Dems will run him and lose on purpose because we are in deep trouble. They probably don't want the blame for what is coming and the reason the gop are retiring droves.
Maybe they want the gop to clean up their own mess or trying to kill off the gop party.
It is a totally bizarre cycle but no, I will never vote gop.
April 30, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Got gop eh? My Hero!
Meheheheh.
April 30, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting to hear your view about the GOP. As I said, I hope to show you in the near future some little issues about how the Clintons are now tighter with Wall Street than the GOP.
Of course, we know that Wall Street always has the little guy in mind.
But I thank you for answering.
April 30, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great ad. I think it would be smart of Obama to co-opt, if not altogether quote, this line from Friedman's column today (the first of his column's that's resonated with me in a while):
"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."
These type of arguments REALLY resonate with down-ballot voters. Of course, I'd be loath to see Obama pull a Hillary and ratchet up the anti-China rhetoric, but I don't think that he has to do that to make a very salient point. In other words, these are facts. No need to characterize them.
April 30, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great, listen to Mr. 6 more months (Friedman unit)
in Iraq.
Are you freaking kidding me? The guy is a gop loser.
April 30, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loser!
Meheheheh.
April 30, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't wait for a dyslexic TPMer to start responding to the two of you...
April 30, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hell, I'm dyslexic and I can tell 'em apart. Goatalife is the one who says "Meheheh."
April 30, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the laugh (goatalife...)
April 30, 2008 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great ad. I've been looking through the local Indiana newspaper sites, and watching the videos of Barack and Michelle at small rallies, town hall meetings, and it's really impressive.
When you look at what the presidential election is really about at the local level and compare that with what the MSM punditocracy is talking about, it's as if they're on a different planet.
I spent an entire hour free of the Rev. Wright frenzy, the latest polls, and sound bytes.
Corporate media is so detached from the real world. It really has no business reporting the news.
April 30, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The best hope for Obama is that the voters did not pay attention to his lies and tossing his paster of 20 years under the bus like they do here.
Good luck with that.
April 30, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awwww....c'mon, gotalife!
I asked a simple question above.
Are you ducking me?
I'll try again:
When HRC doesn't get the nomination, will you vote for McCain in November?
April 30, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look up ^^^^.
April 30, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is why gotalife is my favorite troll. He wont vote for McCain. Thank god.
April 30, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remind me again on the ultimate difference between Hillary Clinton and McCain? They've morphed so much during the campaign, but that doesn't mean their cores are changed.
If you want to play party politics, I suggest you look at BAD MONEY by Kevin Phillips who shows how the corruption of Wall Street has influenced the Clintons in a manner similar to the corruption of oil on the Bush Dynasty.
This is, once again, why dynasties must be denied the White House.
April 30, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the response...and for the nudge so I could find it!
April 30, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Paster?
Meheheheh.
April 30, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you add the cost we pay in taxes for our military protection of the shipping lanes for oil, we are already paying 5-7 per gallon.
April 30, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love this ad. It's nice to have one candidate who doesn't adopt policy positions because they're convenient at the time and actually has foresight beyond the primary.
April 30, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I liked the ad, but I would have LOVED it if it had told the real truth, that most of the money from a tax holiday would go to the OIL COMPANIES, not consumers. Imagine it ending this way:
"And according to economists (flash some recent newspaper quotes), most of the tax money will actually go to the oil companies. Now, I'd like to remind you, as my opponents are pushing this plan, now you know WHY I don't take money from oil industry lobbyists. I am Barack Obama and I approved this ad."
April 30, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like their wouldn't be any kind of hits at the polls after the wright re surfacing gotalife.....Man, I cant wait till this primary is over!
April 30, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
ECON-101
If you reduce the price of a commodity at a point when demand is highest, it will serve to increase demand and the price will be still further bid up. Oil companies must be laughing out loud.
Price elasticity effects will most likely result in an even higher price at the end of the "holiday". Serious journalists should hammer Clinton on this and make her justify her illogical policy and the craven pandering that it represents. Hillary is demonstrating once again that she is definitely not worthy of the Presidency.
April 30, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I'm sure her foreclosure moritorium would be the same kind of resounding success New York saw with its rent control policies. I'm sure they'll be no adverse unintended consequences whatsoever.
I mean criminy, does she have any economic plans that weren't tried, and proven disasterous back when Nixon was playing God of the Command Economy in the 70s?
April 30, 2008 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you! *sigh of relief* It's about time he started grabbing the pen from her!
April 30, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
So just suppose this actually happened. Just as Obama emerges from the Democratic Convention with the nomination with the economy still tanking McCain says "See, Democrats are gonna raise your taxes, Obama is going to let the Gas Tax Holiday expire and make every hard working American have to choose between buying gas to get to work or paying the mortgage."
April 30, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, because that $12/month is gonna make the difference between whether you pay your mortgage or not.
May 1, 2008 7:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
OK BobFred2. Please explain how this proposal will attract veto-proof majorities in both houses? Your hypthetical situation has a few too many "ifs" before it to be seriously considered.
BTW, TCFKaNCS's observations about "suspending" the operation of market forces by banning foreclosures is right on. Hillary might as proclaim the suspension of the laws of physics.
Hillary is really pathetic in the way she insults the intelligence of the country.
April 30, 2008 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
If only McCain & Clinton had some way to propose this gas tax holiday to some sort of branch of government that would vote on it and get real results from their ideas.
Oh well, too bad private citizens Clinton & McCain don't have that...
May 1, 2008 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
That would be a great idea except the leaders in the House, just said it's not going to get a vote basically because it doesn't even have Democratic support in Congress!
Opps!
May 2, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
The ad hits Hillary hard on her credibility gap. Aside from general likeability, dihonesty is her chief liability, and the ad targets that.
May 1, 2008 7:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Via The Carpetbagger Report
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15380.html
Clinton, on the attack, takes to the airwaves on ‘gas-tax holiday’
May 1, 2008 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm know I'm late to the party on this one; but that is a great ad!
May 2, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink