« Hillary Will Introduce "Gas Tax Holiday" Legislation | Home | New Ad Hits Colorado Senate Candidate Bob Schaffer On Forced Abortions »
Mark Udall, A Key Undecided Super-Delegate, Blasts Hillary's Gas Tax Holiday
Here's a bit more evidence that Hillary's insistence that members of Congress declare whether they're "with us or against us" on her gas tax holiday proposal risks causing friction with them at a time when she's courting them as super-delegates.
Rep. Mark Udall, who's running for Senate in Colorado and is undecided in the presidential race, has just come out against the proposal in very strong terms indeed:
"Senator Clinton claimed yesterday that I either stand with her on this proposal or stand with the oil companies. To that I say: I stand with the families of Colorado, who aren't looking for bumper sticker fixes that don't fix anything, but for meaningful change that brings real relief and a new direction for our energy policy. We can't afford more Washington-style pandering while families keep getting squeezed."It is exactly the kind of short-sighted Washington game that keeps us from getting real results to our energy problem."
Coming from a key undecided super-delegate, that's some harsh language. And it bears a striking resemblance to Obama's criticism of her proposal, too.
Advertisement
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
May 2, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Impeccable timing, as usual.
May 2, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
This man needs a donation.
May 2, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you Greg, I was starting to lose confidence in you.
Can't wait to hear Gottalife's B.S. on this one.
May 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey man, Gotalife doesn't even know how to spell B.S.
May 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's some familiar key phrases in that statement. I'm thinking he's not too undecided anymore.
May 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've said it before and will say it again:
This stunt may work with voters, but it will drive Supers further away.
May 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ouch!
May 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't care if he's uncommitted, committed, or whatever. It's just refreshing to have a politician stand up and call "PANDERFEST!"
Hey, is this another Hillary headline?
: )
Have a nice weekend, Greg.
May 2, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed. It is nice to see that at least someone in power is able to call bull$#!^ by its right name.
May 2, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woo hoo! I'm so happy I get to vote for Udall in November!
May 2, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me too!
May 2, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
you mean painting house members into a corner won't win over supers for hillary? how very surprising!
May 2, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure using the exact same words Bush used to get us into the war didn't help either.
May 2, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
But it might win her spot as #2 on McCain's ticket -- where she (not so) secretly aspires to be. Her, Lieberman and McCain -- coming to a panderfest near you in Fall 2008!
May 2, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes! There are vertebrates in Congress.
Sniff- I'm so happy.
May 2, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Greg? Why do you call him "key"?
May 2, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I'm wondering that as well. Why is he a "key" undeclared super? No snark here - I really want to know.
May 2, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Colorado. Fairly well known name.
From Wikipedia (note last sentence):
"Mark was born in Tucson, Arizona, the son of Morris "Mo" Udall, a former congressman from Arizona and candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1976. He is a cousin of Congressman Tom Udall of New Mexico and of Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon, and nephew of former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall. The Udall family is one of the most prominent political families in the United States."
Important to note that he's running for the US Senate. I assume he's very tuned-in to what the Colorado constituency is thinking.
May 2, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah ... thank you. I knew they were well-known but it's clearer now. ;)
May 2, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've only been out here for 15 years, so what do I know, but Udall is a very big name throughout the Intermountain West, not just with Democratic elitists, but with the base, too.
May 2, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me channel gotalife for a second:
This is obviously one of obama's misled secret superdelegates, drinking the kool-aid and playing the gas card. Everyone in colorado supports the gas tax freeze, I read it. Go educate yourselves, I'm not gonna do it.
Whew.... that was painful. I don't wanna try that again.
May 2, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You forgot to mention that Obama should drop out of the race.
May 2, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not authentic gotalife without that.
May 2, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
And there has to be some reference to trolls and some uncited bullshit that he/she cuts and pastes into the comment. ;)
May 2, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
And it's on point on the thread. Not doing good with the channelling.
May 2, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yah, yer head just turned around three times. Aspirin?
Rep. Udall doesn't sound so undecided.
May 2, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should also mention that Obama only won Colorado because of our huge black population.
Or was it our latte-sipping birkenstock crowd? I can't keep straight why we don't count.
May 2, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean your Birkenstock-sipping latte crowd.
May 2, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, just like Obama.
He will lose.
"The choice is simple: Senator Obama wants the American people to pay the gas tax this summer but Senator Clinton thinks Big Oil should.
The Clinton gas tax holiday is financed exclusively through a tax on windfall profits from oil companies and keeps the Highway Transportation Trust fund intact. Hillary opposed a plan in 2000 for a gas tax holiday because it was financed with transportation funds.
Sen. Obama voted three times for a gas tax holiday in 2000 when gas prices were less than $2 a gallon."
Two losers.
May 2, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
How would the oil companies pay the gas tax? I'm confused.
May 2, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
They owe the government billions but have not paid because w and cheney are in office.
It is an attempt to try to get some of the billions they owe.
Obama wants to do nothing short term but she does.
Its a smart move by Clinton, bad move by Obama.
Like most plans, hers are better.
May 2, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
You ought to consider a career in fiction writing. You do enough of it around here as is.
May 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
you MUST realize that Hillary/McCain are talking about the gasoline SALE TAX, that's payed BY THE CONSUMER AT THE PUMP.
Not eve you could be this dumb.
May 2, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now now, don't underestimate him...
May 2, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
wanna bet?
Stick around, s/he'll amaze you with the depths of stupidity s/he can reach. And when you think s/he can't dig any deeper into the moron well, s/he'll break out the jack-hammer and dig even deeper.
I think in a former life s/he was a fan or a propellor (which would explain all of the one-way high-speed spinning).
May 2, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
What did that mean? I'm serious - I read that and I cannot grasp any meaning out of it.
You have a gift for posting utterly meaningless comments. Do you have all this shit on magnets - like those refrigerator poetry magnets? You just switch them around all the time? Or do you have phrases written on pieces of paper and draw them out of a hat?
May 2, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
An asshat.
May 2, 2008 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I adore that picture.
It's priceless.
May 2, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, both Clinton and Obama favor the windfall profits tax. The point over which they disagree is the gas tax holiday. In other words, they both favor making the oil companies pay up. The only point on which they disagree is Clinton's bogus tax "break" which achieves nothing.
May 2, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Giving consumers $5 BILLION in additional discretionery cash during a recession is not nothing. It is a stimulus and a psychologicl relief for those living paycheck to paycheck.
Obamelitists fail to understand any of this.
May 2, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently so do any number of economists.
May 2, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do they "owe the government billions"? Is there an existing tax that you know they aren't paying?
May 2, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
you forgot the part about how you undrstand colorado better than mark udall
May 2, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
it shoots!
it scores!
it exactly meets expectations!
where's troll critic when you need him?
cut-and-paste-job: +30
dubious unreferenced quote bonus: +50
simultaneously calling candidate and supporter names: +80
creative use of logic: +5
May 2, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
See what I mean (from my post upthread)? A cut/paste with no attribution - LOLOLOL!!! God, Goatlife, you are so predictable! ;)
May 2, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are a willfully ignorant idiot.
You know this is just more Hillary pandering, but you cut and paste the same stupid shit time and again.
Did you used to live under power lines? Were all your toys painted with lead paing? Were your parents alchoholics who made thier money juglling babies? If so, you might be a Gottalife.
May 2, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
gotalife seems to be an errant Java script, left to haunt TPM (and HuffPo) by its adolescent programmer, who long ago abandonded it. The cut-n-paste with no debate gives it away.
The "nyah-nyah, cuddly as a cactus" user interface cries out "I was written by a child." Even Eliza had manners.
No other defense is pitiable.
Pax,
M.
May 2, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
God I love facts:
a) Clinton's bill has zero chance of being signed by Bush if it includes the Windfall tax and she knows it so the entire thing is an exercise in futility.
b)Obama voted for the Illinois tax holiday because the state had a surplus already for that year because the tax was based on a percentage and gas prices had gone up enough that the tax was not necessary at that point. That's called responsible government!
An article in the New York Times about a 1996 Gas Tax Holiday that the Republicans & Bill Clinton pushed for said:
"But the tax relief, if it ever comes, will be trivial -- and will have a negative impact on public policy. It is, in short, something of a political fraud."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E5D81139F934A15756C0A960958260
Wow! Political Fraud!
From our Panderer in Chief Hillary Clinton
May 2, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus (1) experts say a federal tax holiday is even less effective than a state one, and (2) maybe he learned a lesson from his experiences (unlike Hillary, who even after her healthcare debacle shows no signs of changing tactics).
May 2, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ooh, and on point, too.
Obama voted for a gas tax holiday in Illinois, and, very interestingly for a politician, learned a lesson from it:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/a_holiday_from_gas_prices.html
It doesn't matter how you fund it. The oil companies win in the end.
But a tax holiday sounds a lot sexier than subsidies for large-scale solar energy or raising CAFE standards and classifying Hummers as heavy trucks.
May 2, 2008 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, can you even tell that my comment was directed at gotalife? We all got so much to say. Nice to see ya'all.
May 2, 2008 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
This legislation is an outrage to New Yorkers!
Our entire state democratic leadership is fighting against this foolishness in Albany where the Republicans are pushing a state gas holiday. This is on a par with Clintons's vote on Iraq from our perspective. She is screwing and going against the will of New Yorkers for some cheap hit. What a phoney! What a fraud!
May 2, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Word up from a fellow New Yorker!
May 2, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope New Yorkers run somebody against her next time she is up for reelection.
May 2, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow - maybe Shelly will have a go at her now. He doesn't like to be crossed, not when it comes to maintaining his Assembly majority.
May 2, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, man, now that's something that ought to go on the front page of the NYT. Has it yet?
May 2, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Boomerang.
May 2, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Colorado likes Obama a lot.
May 2, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
They sure do. They also do not seem to care much for denial and pandering.
May 2, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is pandering.
May 2, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary isn't a he.
May 2, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
must be referring to Bill? I thought he wasn't running the campaign anymore.
May 2, 2008 11:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
by not offering FREE MONEY, he's pandering, while hillary offering FREE MONEY isn't pandering. got it.
May 2, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
We sure do. And we get to be the ones to host his acceptance of the nomination at the convention. Fancy that.
May 2, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
More charm from Hillary, the vetted candidate with no skeletons in her closet.
Hillary's 12-year-old rape victim (& MSM's selective spotlight)
By observer2 - May 1, 2008, 9:32PM
The Politico mentioned this in an article:
The Obama side is frustrated with the news media for not carrying more
of its argument. His operatives thought a Newsday story looking
exhaustively at her legal career — including the revelation that as a
young lawyer she attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old rape victim
— would provoke a herd of other coverage. It did not happen.
From the Newsday article:
However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting
to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday
examination of court and investigative files and interviews with
witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.
Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor, according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive.
If you're interested, there's more commentary at Daily Kos.
Imagine if lawyer Obama had destroyed a child rape victim's life like this. But since it is supposedly feminist Hillary who participated in the proverbially "second rape" in the courtroom, we hear crickets. Is this what she meant by "working with children"?
This is quite disturbing, and the media's covering it up or ignoring it is quite remarkable. This, the same crew that breathlessly covers what the candidates are eating and wearing. Surely, a story about Hillary badgering a child rape victim would sell papers, no? Why no TV interviews with the victim? Why no followup? Why no peppering of Hillary as she boards her bus?
May 2, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is old news that nobody knows about.
Of course Hillary has been fully vetted...
May 2, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, you want to get punked again.
Give it a rest.
May 2, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, I commented on that diary.
I'll say it here - this is bullshit. She was doing her goddamn job.
A lawyer's first ethical responsibility is to her client and winning the case.
Knock it off with this one, please. It was a trial. I don't always like some tactics, but that does not mean they are unethical.
If you were wrongly accused of something you'd be screaming for someone to help you in any possible, too.
Stop this.
May 2, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Checkout this review of War Room from 1993:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/videos/thewarroompghowe_a0b00d.htm
"Carville's tearful farewell speech to his staff as they close up just before the election, Stephanopoulos's frank talk with a potential blackmailer and a Mickey Kantor comment about the people of Indiana (when it looks as though Clinton's ahead in Dan Quayle's state) attest to this."
May 2, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
This I believe.
and won't say another word about it.
May 2, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
What Tena said. Leave this alone.
May 2, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed, as relevant as church bulletins. There are so many other legitimate areas of concern that are in the Now (obliteration comes to mind).
May 2, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
May 2, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we really want to get into Hillary's not so sterling legal carreer there are better things to get into.
1) Her not being able to pass the DC bar.
2) Her conduct during watergate
Either of those would be better, in my opinion.
May 2, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way way better. In fact, somebody put up a diary with all her real legal failings.
May 2, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the Watergate thing is huge.
She behaved like the Bush justice department, and we don't need any more of that in the white house.
May 2, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is very true and doesn't get talked about and really should.
That's really relevant to who she is.
May 2, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's not really enough there to meaningfully comment on it one way or the other. But I'll point out to you, as a laywer, that there are ethical boundaries that you do not cross regardless of your client's interests. And IF a lawyer harshly cross-examines a 12 year-old girl on a rape claim without a strong basis for doing so, that MIGHT cross the line (depending on the circumstances, of course). I'm not saying one way or the other. In fact, I think you're right: this is way too murky an issue for ANYONE to be weighing in on 30 YEARS AFTER THE FACT. I for one am very glad that my candidate doesn't try to make hay out of this one, in keeping with his "above the fray" approach to these meaningless political games.
May 2, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Colorado resident!
Why the hell is Udall undeceided at this point????? Anyhow Mark, if you can see through that, can you not see through all her other bullshit.......I just dont have the patience for silly stuff! God this campaign needs to end!!!
May 2, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
From his comments above, I doubt he is undecided - merely undeclared. Of course that begs the question of why he won't declare yet but...
May 2, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough newfapalooza...Point taken! Change my comment to undeclared...lol
May 2, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I swear to Jesus and Allah and Elohim:
I just heard Wolfson whisper in a briefing:
But don't quote me... until you've see the tape on yourtube too.
May 2, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, what he actually said was "I'm not sure Colorado is even a part of the United States...."
May 2, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
you are one my favorite commenters.
May 2, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha ha.
May 2, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary not only very aggressively tried to smear the 12 year old rape victim, but then repeated the same behavior years later in smearing women who complained about Bill's sexually assaulting them, like Paula Jones and Juanita Broderick.
They were all set to claim Monica Lewinsky was a young flake with fantasies until that blue dress turned up with DNA proof. I see a pattern here of destroying victims of sexual violence for her own success. She has no ethics and no remorse for the people she destroys.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/05/hillarys-12yearold-rape-victim.php
May 2, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a better thing to point out:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863
May 2, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He probably voted for cheney's oil bill too.
So you want to do nothing.
Or you can go with the gop and drill and build refineries.
Or stop whining about gas prices because you want to do nothing.
May 2, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretzel logic.
Meheheheh.
May 2, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "Life" brothers are going to go at it head to head! "Gota" verses "Goat"!
May 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!!!
I bet I know who's going to win!~
May 2, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
why can't you see that hillary is taking a principled stand by waving money in front of people's faces even though this legislation would line the pockets of oil companies if it ever passed, which it won't.
May 2, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The avatar was effective! Yikes! And 100% agreed.
May 2, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The net effect of the 2005 Energy Bill was to INCREASE taxes on oil companies.
May 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also there are many great green intiatives in it as well.
May 2, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Hillary Gas Bag Clinton introduces her Oil Well, Woop-De-Doo-Doo Senate Bill:
Has Hillary jumped the Shark.
She claims that her experience qualifies her to get things done in Washington.
If her Gas Tax Holiday Bill does not get passed, then she will have been exposed as someone who can not get even an urgent piece of legislation(by her own definition) moved on.
Vermont Teddy Bears have now added McHillaryCain, the conjoined at the hip Pander Bear, to its product line.
May 2, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Senator Hillary Gas Bag Clinton introduces her Oil Well, Woop-De-Doo-Doo Senate Bill"
Now, don't candy-coat it, you should really come out of your shell on this...
In the face of Truth, the Clintonian reflex is to fling sand into the air. Through this exact moment, both Clintons do not yet get the Inter-Webs. Who are they kidding?
May 2, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has stood with the gas companies for a long time. This bill of hers is just an expedient way for her to give the perception to the the voters that she is in there corner. They might buy it - but this gas tax holiday is not necessarily a good thing.
May 2, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt Udall is undecided. It would be more precise to call him undeclared.
May 2, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I bet he's a member of the Obama strategic reserve.
May 2, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was just going to say that.
May 2, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant! That's been a concept just waiting for a catchphrase!
May 2, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
stragetic reserve
I love that. That shows long-term judgment visa-vis short-term pandering.
May 2, 2008 10:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's an amazing rebuttal. And I'm sure just the first of many. Antagonizing superdelegates like this is simply idiotic.
May 2, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
which of course leads to paging Idiotic
May 2, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
One word from Jeremiah Wright will cause more of a stir than an entire speech from Udall.
May 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why? Because you hope that's the case or have you researched their respective Q-ratings?
May 2, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
It doesn't matter how much of a "stir" it causes in the public. This is a superdelegate matter and I'm sure they don't much appreciate Hillary Clinton dragging them into her self-made mess.
May 2, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
From racist scumbag Aryan Nation Trolls(ANT) such as you.
May 2, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
This response was to Otto the Grand Wizard's pet sewer rat.
May 2, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
god bless our politicians, they're so rich and full of opportunities!
let's make sure nothing ever changes!
May 2, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
This should be causing a stir (I will not let go of this until we hear more):
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863
May 2, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks-- finally a good summary on that.
I think ignorance of the law is still no excuse, but I guess we'll see...
May 2, 2008 11:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Insider Advantage news for N.C.:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/RCP_PDF/INS_ADV_NC%20Dem%20tables%20May%202.pdf
Looks like things are reversing.
May 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, formatting sucks on here!
IA 05/01 - 05/01 611 LV 49 44 Obama +5.0
IA 04/29 - 04/29 571 LV 42 44 Clinton +2.0
IA 04/14 - 04/14 541 LV 51 36 Obama +15.0
May 2, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, my eyes were crossing!
May 2, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has only 80% of the AA vote?
May 2, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Er, 79.1%
May 2, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, thank you for running this.
May 2, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll second Phoebe's thanks, Greg.
May 2, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Greg - I'll add my thanks as well because I've been pretty tough on your posting today.
May 2, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just dropped $100 on Udall. Verbal "fingers" to Hillary make me feel generous.
May 2, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sent him $100 too.
May 2, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
BAM! Go Udall! He hit the nail on the head, both with how worthless the plan is, and with how shameless and pathetic her pandering and attacks are.
Way to go Mark!
May 2, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary demonstrated to Congress in no uncertain terms she's as bullheaded as Bush -- and co-opted his rhetoric to boot. She brought into stark relief the contrast between her style and Obama's. Could this be Hillary's tide-turning mistake? One can only hope.
May 2, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even at this late date, how is her campaign leadership so blind to the corner she's painted herself into? It's one thing to propose a stupid idea that's probably not going to score you much with the voters in the first place - especially once they find out you're going to "give" them a lousy $30 over 4 or 5 months. But it's another thing entirely to push something so flimsy so hard that you piss off people you desperately need to win over by forcing them to comment on, much less publicly vote against a "tax break" that won't do anyone any good in the first place. Gee, Hillary, think this might come up in GOP attack ads in downticket races this fall?
What a moron.
May 2, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Today especially I have been totally at a loss to understand what she thinks she's doing.
What do any of them think they are accomplishing? It's gotten more and more bizarre.
Can you imagine a BillHillary Clinton administration? Just shoot me if that happens, deal?
May 2, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
O Jenn I forgot - I have a message for you from Woody -he said hello and thanks for the CD.
May 2, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just wanted to say hi, tena! have a great weekend!
May 2, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi - back atcha!
:)
May 2, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh cool, I thought he probably had gotten it by now but it's been so long since it was promised that I knew he probably didn't still have my email addy!
May 2, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me tell you - you can grow moss waiting for Woody to get back to you on something.
I finally yelled at him enough he's gotten better about answering me.
;)
The only person worse is mena.
May 2, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does Sen Clinton hope to get a Senate vote so she can use YET ANOTHER irrelevant metric to prove her electability? She acts as though it's 1992 and no one is watching in real time.
May 2, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew Sullivan had a great post about the Clintons' (specifically Bill's) inability to grasp the "youtube generation," highlighted especially by Bill's "I did not say they were playing the race card.." shpeel the day after saying just that. And how in the past what made him so great was his ability to say whatever he wanted and quickly move on, leaving the press always 2 steps behind.
May 2, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Not this time" seems to be attending to itself.
But I will still donate!
May 2, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish I could get over my deep loathing for Sully but I'm pretty sure it's too late. I know a bit too much about him now.
But I do agree - Bill had a gift for talking fast and making it sound smart and real and he could move a reporter or anyone else about 5 steps off the point very smoothly.
He wasn't called Slick Willy for nothin - and it wasn't just the sticky wickie, either.
May 2, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, Obama played everything just right - success has gone to her head and she's going to do herself in, he doesn't have to go after her at all. I guess she thought possibliy winning NC and IN was worth the risk of alienating other Dems. (And I bet Bill has been calling them all all day, making excuses for her - "She's in a tough situation, the press isn't fair, it's just politics, we really love you all.")
May 2, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
From what I have heard, he doesn't plead, he threatens.
May 2, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you! As a Govt. employee who has had to change how and what I buy because of the 2005 Energy Bill and all of its green initiatives, I have a hard time understanding all the hate. Maybe it is because I'm unaware of the other parts of the legislation, but I'm glad some recognize that there were some positive aspects to it as well.
May 2, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry! That was in reply to josephcast way up there. I was sure I hit the reply button! Arrgh!
May 2, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
No probs. While I don't necessarily agree with Obama's vote on it. I can, at least, understand it. Twas good for Illinois with the ethanol incentives and what not.....
May 2, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, not so good for Illinois:
The gas tax moratorium proved politically popular in Illinois, but economically questionable. The Illinois Economic and Fiscal Commission estimated that the state lost $175 million in revenues during the six-month period. A subsequent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research showed that gas prices fell by 3 percent, meaning that only three fifths of the savings from reduced taxes was passed on to consumers.
May 2, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, link is buried way way up this blog, so here:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/a_holiday_from_gas_prices.html
May 2, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Imagine being a Dem. in the Senate on this vote. Your choices are:
1. Vote for a total piece of crap.
2. Do the right thing and then have your Rep. opponent in the next election say "Hillary Clinton says my opponent doesn't stand up to Big Oil for the working person!"
I'd be pretty pissed about now.
May 2, 2008 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent point. Add to it a maxed-out donor base v netroots dollars that are realling jet getting into third gear...Sen Clinton cannot inherit this money machine, and green is the color undecided super dels actually see.
It will all be over soon.
May 2, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
So what am I, chopped liver?
;)
May 2, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
(bow deeply)
May 2, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I missed that one too!
(bow even deeper)
May 2, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, Ms. Gardner, if you knew ahead of time that this mailing had the potential to lead to confusion and aggravation, why didn't you wait a few days until after the primary to send it?
May 2, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope this ends soon so we can have a Clinton holiday between Memorial Day and Labor Day.
May 2, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think he is key because especially at this point, any undecided super (i mean automatic) delegate is key.
More importantly love the calling bullsh=t on the Panderfest.
May 2, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
And another thing about this moronic gas tax holiday - how stupid is to try to pander to working-class people with a tax break that 1)cuts out the poorest workers, those who rely on public transportation - they won't even get the lousy $30, 2) overall gives a bigger break to the people driving the least fuel-efficient vehicles...you know, the ones we can thank for prices being as high as they are right now in the first place (better fuel efficiency = lower demand = lower prices), and 3) has anyone mentioned that it averages out to about $30 per driver spread over 4 or 5 months? Hey, don't knock it, that works out to about 1-1/2 McDonald's Value Meals per month.
Never let it be said that Hillary is out of touch with ordinary working people.
May 2, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that I think about it, that would be an ideal prop for Obama when hitting her on the gas tax holiday....1-1/2 fast food value meals. "Here's Hillary's plan for high gas prices, folks!"
May 2, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shhh... This might actually add to her argument:
1. mass transport = urban (you know, "elite")
2. anti-SUV = Prius
2. 1/2 Happy meal = 1 latte.
May 2, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, isn't it more like 2 Happy Meals to a latte? Or are latte taxes suspended where you are?
May 2, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
And, obviously, I can't count.
May 2, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you to the gas tax which subsidized my bus ride to work today. Guess I am an elitist.
May 2, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
So what has Mark Udall done in his 10 years in Congress to keep gas prices down?
May 2, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
What has Clinton done in her eight years in Congress?
May 2, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
He voted against the war in Iraq.
May 3, 2008 1:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's no such thing as an "undecided" superdelegate. These people's minds are made up!
There are "undeclared" superdelegates, and Clinton is ticking them off!
May 2, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
lets see, how much is 5 billion divided by 250,000,000?
Am I correct in counting that as $20 per person?
Approximately?
Gosh, that ought to buy a few votes...
Not quite what Heather Wilson was offering in the last election, but it's enough for a few bottles of Mad Dog.
May 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
As usual, she's not thinking big picture or longterm. That's why her campaign finances are a mess. By the way... shouldn't we be hearing how much she took in for April about now ? Things are awfully quiet..
May 2, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
HRC's proposal is even more noxious because it plays into the Republican frame that taxes are inherently bad and should be cut at the earliest possible moment. That kind of thing can last longer than HRC's failed presidential bid.
But suppose this silly bill got passed into law (not that Hillary or anyone else thinks it would be). What happens come the Fall, when John McCain and Co. call for the tax "relief" to be made permanent and paint any Democrat who says otherwise as a "tax and spend Liberal." What would HRC say then?
May 2, 2008 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
He could use any donations. You can donate here:
http://www.markudall.com/
His opponent in his Senate race is Mr. Schaffer, you know, the one connected to the Marianas Islands & Forced Abortions?
Right now they are polling about even. Pretty sad.
Do a good guy a favor & send him some bucks!
P.S. I'm in CO too.
May 2, 2008 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't imagine Udall is truly undecided. He's in a tough Senate race in a state where Hillary Clinton is wildly unpopular. Who do you think HE wants at the top of the ticket?
May 2, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
Allard's seat should be a slam dunk for Dems, but Colorado is also a STRONG Obama state.
Regardless of how corrupt Bob Shaffer is, the wingnut GOP base in CO is going to come out for him (and against Hillary, if given the opp). Udall needs every last vote he can get, but he isn't going to get them if The Monster is the nominee.
If Hillary gets the nomination, the Dems will lose CO on two fronts, which would suck royally.
May 2, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Especially for those of us who live here.
My congressman is Tom Tancredo...
May 2, 2008 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
is hillary driving around in a big suv while making these comments/ads????
May 2, 2008 10:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
In China, they have panda bears, cute and cuddly. In America, we've got pander bears, and they're vicious with fangs!
May 3, 2008 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
A breakdown of the gas tax holiday shell game:
1. There is no oversight of the oil industry.
2. There have been no substantive investigations of consumer price gouging by the oil/gas industry in at least eight years.
3. Ergo, there is no guarantee that this savings will be passed onto the consumer.
The formula is: you remove the gas tax at x, the oil industry is in no position to keep the cost of gas at the pump commensurate with this reduction.
The federal government, already fiscally bankrupt, removes a tax without any guarantee that price of gas will actually go down. Instead, a likely event will be that gas will go down by roughly 9 cents a gallon, which means a 9 cent a gallon profit for the gas company while the candidates get to extoll the virtue of looking out for the averagoe joe.
Will there be an effective way to track the net impact of a gas tax holiday? How much savings will actually reach the consumer? Why is this timed around the 600 dollar tax rebate?
To repeat: it is ineffective to offer a tax rebate on a company that has a history of price gouging. You are, in effect, giving cover to the oil industry to fix prices while consumers are dazzled by SLIGHTLY lowered fuel prices coinciding with the 600 dollar tax rebate.
A similar stunt was pulled when the 300 dollar tax rebate checks went out. The federal oil reserves were tapped, which dampened prices at the pump at no cost to the oil industry... they were effectively subsidized. Oil consumption spiked, and the oil industry once again enjoyed a windfall profit courtesy of the federal government.
I am repeating myself in order to make the same general argument several different ways so that you and other readers will GET IT. Without effective oversight and regulation, any and all efforts to ease consumer prices will have zero net impact.
We need to find more and more ways to diminish oil consumption, through conservation and efficiency. The cost of food worldside is spiking, and this is in part due to the cost in fuel of shipping food along with the cost of plastic to store the food, since plastic is derived from oil.
I am surprised that progressives could actually fall for this just because they favor a candidate. We are being hoodwinked... the greater our oil consumption, the more enthralled the world is to King Oil. So any and all sops that will result in a consumption spike is only driving that spike into the coffin of the global economy.
May 3, 2008 2:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
This comment was intended as a reply to any and all Hillary trolls who are sacrificing their ideals at her altar... like children in the belly of Molloch.
May 3, 2008 3:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama crushed Hillary in Colorado, where environmental appeals play well. Udall hails from Boulder, one of America's true granola capitals. I can't see him backing Hillary. His constituents would kill him.
May 3, 2008 5:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would just like to say it's surprizing that her using of the Bush "you're either with me, or you're with the enemy" construction doesn't work on Democrats. Imagine that.
May 3, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink