Please...vetoing something that would save Americans 20 bucks a month while costing us thousands of jobs along with our roads and calling it a gimmick isn't elitist or out of touch. We aren't exactly rubes here at the bottom of the income ladder. We recognize that gas has gone up in the last week what a repeal of that gas tax would be and will probably go up the same next week. This is our generation's version of "let them eat cake".

But by all means keep pushing that the 109 million dollar candidate is more in touch with regular Americans along with the husband of nearly billion dollar beer woman.

Gas tax 'holiday' is a terrible idea.

As an added snark:  Obama voting for Clinton's bill from the senate.

Priceless.

This is a truly terrible post, Jerome. I was hoping you would be above trying to defend Clinton's actions on this one, but I'm not at all surprised to see you trying. Not even Krugman is with her on this one, for Christ's sake.

Just about everyone who has taken anything beyond an introductory university course in macroeconomics has written an article saying what a horrendous idea a gas tax holiday truly is. The reasons are plentiful, and include:

(1) The gas tax holiday will not save the average gas consumer more than $28 over the entire period of its proposed duration
(2) The temporary decrease in price will cause a corresponding increase in demand, which will ultimately result in even higher prices for the good once the holiday is over
(3) Burning fossil fuels isn't good for the environment, remember? It's not something we want to be encouraging.
(4) Remember that national deficit? Perhaps we should be levying new taxes on oil companies, but  that's beside the point. Clinton's idea is still really stupid. While McCain would have us borrow more money from China to put in the hands of the OPEC nations, Clinton would just hold off on paying down that debt to China (and thus end up borrowing more) to put the same amount of money in their hands

So yeah, Jerome, Clinton's proposal is bad for gas prices, bad for the economy, bad for the environment, bad for the consumer, bad for the budget, and good for... OPEC? China?... and Clinton, if people really are as dumb as you and her campaign seem to think they are. She's getting a lot of pushback over this one. I would hope the truth wins out.

And I have faith it will... I was an intern for the Obama campaign in Iowa last summer, and you wouldn't believe the number of people who told me directly what a boondoggle they thought the ethanol industry really is. People aren't as stupid as you seem to think. They can grasp semi-complicated concepts if the media chooses to present them with the actual relevant information.

but I still think Clinton is wrong to advocate for a gas tax holiday, especially since her original comments adopted Republican frames about "tax relief" and Obama being out of touch with average folks.

I do agree that energy policy generally is one area where she has the edge over Obama. She should have done more to educate Iowans about the fact that she voted against the energy bill, while Obama voted for it.

I know environmentalists who caucused for Obama without realizing that he had voted for that bill.

Disgraceful post, Jerome.  You are blatantly promoting triangulation, the very reason that most self described liberals are not supporting Hillary Clinton.  Max Fletcher, you pretty much nailed it perfectly.

This "gas tax holiday" is simply ridiculous.  If you suddenly get rid of the tax, the increased demand will immediately push the prices back to the original price, if not even higher.  Thus, consumers WILL NOT get any relief.  And since the prices will remain the same, this "holiday" essentially transfers the tax money, which currently pays for highway maintenance and countless public works jobs, straight to gas companies!!

So gas holiday = tax paid straight to gas companies instead of highway maintenance.

Jerome, the truly progressive response to an idiotic right wing policy proposal is not to support it because it's an election year and sounds appealing  to voters on the surface.  Americans are smart enough not to be fooled by silly titles like "holiday".  If presented a logical argument, they will get it.  The progressive response is to explain to the American people why the proposal is a terrible idea.  Obama is doing just that.

I would rather his decision be the un-popular/correct decision than politics as usual.

I would rather have a President that leads . . . than does what is 'cool' - HRC decided that she would go hang out with the:

It still doesn't seem like a very comprehensive energy strategy does it?  What is Clinton or McCain's strategy after the summer?  Higher gas prices?  It isn't difficult to see who is out of touch here.

I am a die-hard Obama supporter, would not vote for Clinton if she somehow won, hate her tactics, her lies, her willingness to tear country apart for her own gain, but she is cleaning his clock on this new gas relief.  Barack has to do something too!

This is why nothing ever changes. Soundbytes, photo ops and pandering instead of policy. There are 2 components to skyrocketing energy prices:

1. Supply and Demand
2. Speculation and manipulation

The first problem can only be solved by cost effective alternatives to dependence on oil. The second was enabled by the deregulation pushed by both the Bush and the Clinton administrations. Reasonable oversight and regulation must be re-established in financial, commodity and equity markets as a first order of business to unwind the dangerous bubble machine distorting the economy.

Instead we have a 'plan' that like 'mission accomplished' plays well in the press and actually  has the opposite effect of what is needed. Real leadership.

"Obama came out against it, mocking the idea as a gimmick, by saying it would only save individuals $20 a month".

What Obama actually said was "This is an idea that, when all is said and done, will save you - at most - half a tank of gas over the course of the entire summer. That's about $28. It's an idea that some economists think might actually raise gas prices. And without a plan to pay for it right away, it means that the money would come directly out of the fund we use to pay for construction projects, which could cost the state of North Carolina up to 7,000 jobs".

Hillary has already lost the nomination - she can't even win it by her supporters spreading untruths about Obama.

Don't give McCain a 'get out of jail free' card when he comes up with bad ideas. Cut his hand off, not the hand of the person who will be running against him in the general election.

In an ideal world, I'd like to see gas taxes increased dramatically to discourage consumption, with other taxes lowered as compensation. However, I agree with Jerome here--rather than simply oppose the removal of the gas tax, and hand the Republicans a weapon against us, let's combine it with another way of getting the revenue by socking it to the oil companies. The end result may not leave us any better off than we are now, but we also won't be any worse off and we're much more likely to have a Democrat in the White House rather than ceding an emotionally powerful issue to the Republicans.

Remember when Jerome's posts were credible and thoughtful? That was cool.

Seriously, what is going on here?

We have supposedly liberal bloggers and smart liberals agreeing that it's a good thing to remove billions of dollars that would go towards infrastructure of roads, that it's a good thing that jobs will be lost, and it's a good thing that oil companies will make even greater profits.

It's nothing more than blatant pandering towards low information voters.

I give a lot of Clinton supporters credit - they are calling her out on this.

It's a shame, though, that Jerome believes that playing politics is more important than doing what's right.

also, on the strength of its alternative energy provisions, as did Obama.

Hillary is in no credible position to impugn colleagues for making difficult choices and voting for imperfect bills.

For this reason among others cited in above comments, your post is disingenuous and transparently specious.

Funny, that...

so Hillary is really against a bill the same as Obama but instead of taking the principled stand and saying this is a bad idea,

she offers a proposal she KNOW won't pass so she can say well I am for it but they didn't pass the windfall tax (which I knew they wouldn't) so now I am against the gas tax holiday?

and you expect smart democrats to give her credit for this pander?

she is playing the American voters for idiots and we should stand up and give her an applause?

Gas tax holiday is pure pandering. But sadly it works.

Why isn't the RNC going after Clinton with their ads? Have they already decided that Obama is the nominee? Or what?

The way it used in your post makes me think it is. What are you? "Conservative?"

By the way, a couple of new articles for your perusal:

Obama may win Hill superdelegate fight

Capitol Hill insiders say the battle for congressional superdelegates is over, and one Senate supporter of Barack Obama is hinting strongly that he has prevailed over Hillary Rodham Clinton.

GOP gives Clinton the silent treatment

From top to bottom, from McCain down to the youthful campaign and party staffers who work nearly around the clock to get him elected, the working assumption seems to be that the Democratic contest is over and Obama has won.

Even when Clinton attacks McCain, President Bush or GOP policies, the response is either outright silence or snarky, dismissive ridicule about a failed campaign barely relevant enough to merit a response.

One thing about the Republicans... They're much better at math than many here.

Jeez, Jerome,

Even Krugman saw through what a crick of crap Hillary's pander fest on the gas tax is.

Next up: Jerome explains to us all how Obliterating Iran is good for America.

C'mon, you support every single position of hers. Defend that one too.

This is amazing. Nearly unanimous declaration here (so far) that not only is this a bad idea, it is craven politics.

Jerome, you fail to acknowledge a simple fact -- that "gas tax" goes to keeping our roads under our feet, our bridges over the water, our infrastructure still standing.

When someone dies because the billions the "holiday" will "save" come directly from the agencies that keep our country moving -- what'll be preposed then?

Wow, that was an idiotic post Jerome.  Just because Hillary does something doesn't mean you have to trip over yourself trying to justify it.  Take for instance, Obama's appearance on Fox News that you roundly criticized, you might note that a good number of Obama supporters (mostly notably Kos also joined you in your condemnation).  You're not repaying the favor of intellectual honesty though, between this shrilling for the "gas tax holiday" and you're refusal to comment on Hillary's decision to go on O'Reilly, you're losing what little credibility you once had.  

Krugman and other economists say it's stupid and that the gas prices will shoot right back up.

"First, by making the claim that this only saves individuals $20 bucks a month, Obama doesn't realize how out-of-touch and elitist that sounds to the average low-wage earner who would view it as their 'best day in weeks' to find a Jackson laying on the sidewalk."

That's the most out of touch and elitist take I've seen in weeks. How condescending. Jerome, you actually envision in your mind a bunch of "low-wage earners" walking down the street and finding a $20 on the sidewalk, proclaiming, "Duh, this is the best day I've had in weeks. Guh-huh!"

People are smarter than you are giving them credit. If someone explains their reasons for choosing a certain path, and those reasons uncover hidden problems behind the initial benefit, people appreciate it. They like the idea that someone is cutting through the marketing to show what's behind it.

What hasn't been said yet, is that the Clinton plan is half right. The profits from the oil companies should be heavily taxed, but rather than a superficial gas tax holiday, that money should be used to create green jobs that put people to work and give them "their best day in weeks."

so jerome would rather have clinton play good politics than have a sound policy decision, i thought she was supposed to be a policy wonk...the gas tax has been heavily criticized by pretty much any one who knows economics (see krugman and todays thomas friedman piece in the times)

Jerome, you know as well as I do that no "oil company windfall tax" will fly as long as George Bush has access to a red pen.  Even should it pass, the oil companies are completely in collusion with one another and would assuredly simply raise the price of gas.

Lowering gas taxes deprives large amounts of money from the repair of the nation's infrastructure, which is already in sore distress.  In my own city, people died when one of our interstate bridges collapsed.  A trucker sacrificed his life by swerving away from a bus full of children when they plummeted into the river below.  Real heroes, mostly injured themselves, arose and evacuated the bus.  Did these heroes do it for the credit?  No, they mostly denied interviews because "anyone would do the same."

These are the people that really deserve credit.  Out-of-touch politicians like McCain and Clinton think that the common man would sell out the safety of our children and our children's childrens for enough money to take the family out to the movies... once.

People are willing to make sacrifices, if only they are asked.  Are you willing to sacrifice your blind loyalty to a professional panderer to be in the right?

Holy moly, the Obamans are out in full force this morning Jerome.  

Don't pay no heed Jerome - the Army of Obama is a tough crowd, but you're RIGHT ON with your main thrust.  Repubs have beaten us bloody with respect to the Reagan democrats and working class where pocketbook issues and liberal taxation have creamed us in the past.  

She won't let them this time.  Clinton ever the meticulous planner differentiates herself from McSame by responsibly paying for the summer hiatus by taking it from the nasty oil companies. . .

Clinton is taking this issue and really running against McCain not Obama.  

Obama is only in mind to the extent that he's so out of touch with middle America . . . that he successfully marginalizes himself on this issue. . . as the standard tax-loving liberal. . . Right or Wrong that's whats happening.

This diary actually sounds "out of touch and elitist" by pretending that it has its hand on the pulse of the Everyman.  For the record, Obama noted that, by the end of the summer, savings from a tax holiday would be about $30, enough for half a tank of gas.  The people in the arena where he said it seemed to understand what he said, though perhaps some around here should verify that since, you know, they seem to have a better understanding of these things.

Bill Clinton campaigning across Southeastern North Carolina with openly lesbian State Senator Julia Boseman.

www.politcalamnesia.blogspot.com

Keep hearing I just don't get it ( what "it" is )
Keep hearing about her experience
Keep hearing what a great campaigner she is

What I see is a campaign relying on and fostering the worst divisive tactics it can.

Demanding rules changes months into the processs

Pandering to every lobbyist and election year gimmick to try to wear down the likely nominee.

A sleazy cadre of Washington power brokers who have wrecked the Democratic party by corrupting the process. Examples Penn, Ickes, McCauliffe

If she is so great  is this the best she can do?
This is what I can  look forward to if she becomes president. No thanks

I had to read this entry twice, Jerome. You are actually arguing that the best political move is to follow the lead of the Republican candidate. Then you suggest that to do otherwise is elitist.

I'm baffled by this post. Weren't you arguing recently that Hillary is the better candidate because she will do a better job of standing up to bad Republican policy? Hillary just proved you wrong and you're praising her for it.

You are either completely out of touch with Democratic ideals (which I don't believe) or this is the worst kind of back-peddling you've done this season.

Well, at least most Obama supporters are trying to make a rational argument, rather than simply attacking Jerome. And it is nice to see that Paul Krugman is suddenly their hero. But they might want to read him more carefully:

The Clinton twist is that she proposes paying for the revenue loss with an excess profits tax on oil companies. In one pocket, out the other. So it's pointless, not evil. But it is pointless, and disappointing.

What Krugman misses, of course, is the politics. This kind of progressive tax relief would not have much broader economic impact, contrary to the shrieking above, but would have an impact on people who have to drive to or for work. In other words most working people in this country.

"This kind of progressive tax relief would not have much broader economic impact, contrary to the shrieking above, but would have an impact on people who have to drive to or for work. In other words most working people in this country."

Yes, it would have an impact. Crumbling roads and bridges. More unemployed workers selling oranges on the side of the road to support their families. But, people would get that juicy $10 back. Sweet.

Yes, correct.  Thank you Jerome.

AND....it hardly is just $20.00 a month anyhow.  Hasn't Senator Obama realized the long drives people are faced with right now.  AND, btw, I cannot tell you how most peoople in work in Santa Fe, commute up from Albuquerque.  As much as I hate that realization, it is true.  They spend MORE than that on the gas tax just with the commute to work, let alone all their other driving and weekends.

Shorter version of Jerome's post:  "Great pander by Clinton.  I still hate Obama."  

Jerome, can you address the issue about jobs?  I keep hearing that this tax holiday is going to cost us jobs and infrastructure funding.  But my understanding is that Clinton is going to replace the tax revenue from consumers with tax revenue from oil companies via a profit windfall tax.  If this is so, then how will this affect jobs and infrastructure funding?  

Obama doesn't realize how out-of-touch and elitist that sounds to the average low-wage earner who would view it as their 'best day in weeks' to find a Jackson laying on the sidewalk.

You apparently have no idea how out of touch and elitist that sounds.

LIttle  hint, especially for the HRC-supporeters out there - not everyone that makes less than $35,000 is stupid enough to fall for a horrible idea like the gas-tax holiday. Not everyone who makes $35,000 dollars a year is a raging drunk that swoons just because a some rich lady comes by and pretends to enjoy doing a shot. Not everyone that makes under $35,000 a year is wallowing in such misery that finding a $20 bill would be their "best day in weeks?"

The biggest negative effect of this campaign so far (imho) is the constant parade of out-of-touch elitists telling me why i should be offended and who I should consider to be out of touch with me, and the constant portrayal of working class people as bumbling drunks that care more about trivia than issues. Every time I hear about flag pins, it almost always come up as "how will this play among Joe Six-pack." The media focuses on meaningless crap and use the excuse "We're just giving those hicks what they want?"

Between the blogs and the traditional media, I keep getting the impression that none of you has a clue what working class people are actually like. But don't let that stop you from carrying GOP water and making self-rightous proclamations about Obama being an elitist.

I don't always get Krugman and I certainly don't respect Friedman but....

I always thought we were strongest when we fought against Republican ideas and policies and offered smarter and tougher alternatives.  There is nothing smart or tough when it comes to job loss and infrastructure loss for thirty dollars.  Trying to convince people that it is both tough and smart is just dumb and wrong..... Especially from Democrats.  

The fact that Obama voted for Cheney's energy plan gives him little cred on the subject, in many personal voting opinions, including my own. Talk about pandering to the right Big Time!

McCain is more passionate about the environment than Obama, AFAICT, and that isn't saying nearly enough.

sure is a nasty bunch.

Would I love to see an extra $ 5 a month? Sure. I don't drive that much, so that's likely what I would see. Lord knows I can use it. But I'm not stupid ... this is a gimmick. For 3 months? That's it?

I'd like to see the government declare all new autos for sale must be hybrids by 2010. No more gas guzzling Hummers or SUV's. Minimum 40 miles a gallon. PERIOD.

The technology is there for this, but no one wants to tell Detroit and OPEC that the party's over. Well, this American will gladly tell them that.

I seem to vaguely remember you teaming up with this guy named Markos and writing a book together. As I recall, you guys seemed to think that one of the problems Democrats had was caving to Republicans or letting right-wing frames define us. So when I read this:

Now the difference has extended to the gas tax holiday. It's the type of popular idea that Republicans continually cream progressives on with the working class.

I expected you to then proceed to explain why it was a terrible idea, rip apart John McCain, criticize Clinton for going along with it, and then give us a better way to frame the issue.

Instead, you basically propped up John McCain. I'm pretty sure he's a Republican. Or did you buy into all that "moderate" bullshit too?

The problem with the gas tax holiday idea is that it assumes working class people are stupid. It assumes that they'd rather get a half a tank of gas now than have roads to drive on a year from now. Trust me, we're smarter than that.

By the way, I'll send $2,300 (which is more money than I have right now) to the first major-party presidential candidate who calls for a significant increase in the gas tax. It's the sort of thing that'll hurt me, but it'll spur on efficiency, push us to eliminate fossil fuels, and might build us better roads and bridges that don't collapse.

Hillary Clinton can keep my $28. I'd probably just blow it on lattes and Volvos anyway.

Just said that the tax holiday is a gimmick on CNN!  Good going, Hillary.  Buying into spin and gimmicks.  And selling that to the American people.  

And he states the windfall profit tax that she's pushing will likely increase gasoline prices, as the oil companies pass off the cost to the consumer.  

Interesting ...

I have been a fan throughout these primaries of Obama's political skills. In this case I believe the point Jerome is making that Hillary might have out-gamed him on this one. Like it or not - it is not only policy - but also perception that determines how people vote. Do you remember the gas tax ads against Kerry in '04? The Repubs beat us over the head with this stuff.

Some weekends I drive 200 miles. I am extremely aware of gasoline prices and go out of my way to purchase where I know the price is lower. I'd be delighted if I knew of a station that was 18 cents cheaper. Having said that I am enough of an elitist egghead to realize the gasoline tax is a good thing - but there a lot of bread and butter people out there that might beg to differ.

If she presents a plan to substitute a windfall profits tax for the money lost to the gas tax holiday so the jobs are not lost and infrastructure work is not stopped that might sound OK to a lot of folks. I do not see why that is so hard to understand. Is it politically possible. Who knows? But we can ask that same question about the health care plans, the Iraqi withdrawal plans etc....

Now, there is some hand-wringing done by some liberals over Clinton's proposal to "use the windfall profits of the oil companies to pay to suspend the gas tax this summer." To me it sounds like a good way to take off the table a popular idea and sync it with an equally popular idea, and maybe even make the tax code more progressive while we are at it.

Has she proposed this legislation that needs to get past the Republican filibuster threshold and signed by Bush? Cause until she does, this is all just pandering.

The average liberal arguing rationally about this issue just does not get how powerful a political issue that gas prices are right now, and how damaging it is for Obama to be on the wrong side of the issue. This isn't a rational argument.

Well, actually, Obama is making the rational argument. Clinton is making an emotional argument, and that, especially considering, as I pointed out above, that she hasn't actually gotten the legislative process started for something she wants to do this summer, is just demagoguery. Pandering. Same ol' same ole from Lady Obliterate Gimmeashot DuckHunter.

Jerome got it right.  Initially I thought this was another "me-too" pander but Clinton would pay for this proposal.  

McCain wouldn't.  And I think the real reason for Clinton's rise lately is the economy, not Rev. Wright or Bittergate.

of disingenuous posts by Jerome.  I simply do not believe that Jerome thinks the gas tax holiday is a good idea.  It's a terrible idea and anyone as informed as Jerome knows that.

I am an Obama supporter but I at least have the honesty and integrity to acknowledge when he supports really bad policy ideas like subsidies for clean coal.

What the hell happened?

This site has become so anti Obama and so pro Hilary it's ridiculous.  I used to love to come to this site for insightful political commentary.  Now it just parrots Clinton talking points.

The gas tax "holiday" is bullshit.  And Hillary's health care plan is superior.  There.  I just gave an accurate and fair assessment that is in total agreement with Paul Krugman, BTW.

You guys are just as bad as Daily Kos being anti-Hillary.

Truth is, one of them is going to win it, and we are going to have to join forces to beat McCain.  And I don't want to hear whining about how you won't vote for the other candidate.  You really want Mr. 100 years of war in Iraq as President? Or how about Mr. A Woman Shouldn't have the Right to Choose?  Like both of those?  Then ask yourself if McSame is the best candidate for the environment, health care,  and social security?

Shut the hell up already with the bashing of either candidate.  I have a preference of the two Dem candidates, but they are both 1000X preferable to McSame.  The infighting has gotta stop.  I'm sick of it.  Keep your eye on the prize: defeat McSame in November!!

issue that is relevant to many Americans.

I find the ad fair and smartly done. Dropping the tax (especially to businesses) and replacing it by a windfall tax on oil companies and watching them from jacking up the prices at the pomp, is a smart short term solution that should go along with a longer term solution, and Senator Clinton has both.

Now, we need to find a fair reply to this ad. Senator Obama has a long term energy plan, but he lacks a short term one. He needs to adapt and think fast on his feet. That's what campaigns are about. I think dropping the tax and opening the reserve would have a significant impact on gas price...and i think we should not be against this solution just because Senator Clinton is for it.

People are hurting at the pomp. My wife has 90 minute-drive every day and i have an hour-drive and we are considered to be very well off, income-wise. However, last night while i was looking at our last month gas expenditure and its impact on our budget, i almost fail of my chair. I can only imagine that people who are less fortunate than us are seriously struggling and this could give them a little relief, even if it is only psychologically (economics is a bout 80% psychology).

So, i say Kudos to the Senator from New York. We need to come up with a fair reply and solution, not just criticism.

I'm a big Clinton supporter, but the tax holiday isn't very good policy. A better policy is to suspend the build up in the strategic oil reserve,  or may be even draw down the reserve.

The tax holiday will provide incentive for people to drive more, and the resulting higher gas prices will at least partially offset the savings from the suspension of the taxes. Then when the tax is put back into place, with lower oil supplies, there will be a rebound effect that will cause gas prices to temporarily be higher than what it would have been without the tax holiday.

However, the tax holiday idea may be good politics. There is little risk because Congress is unlikely to touch the issue this year.

its Clinton's idea. If Obama had been the one to support the gas tax holiday, there is no doubt that you would be tearing him apart.

I can't believe this. One of the clearest instances EVER of McCain's complete lack of ideas and you treat it like it's brilliant. There ARE some people who would be thrilled to find a $20, yes. But we aren't talking $20 at once, we're talking $20 over the course of three months.

And let's be honest here. The people for whom $20-40 would be great for are not driving that much anyway. In reality, this is going to work just like every other tax cut. The jackasses driving SUVs and filling up their tanks three times a week get three times as much as the people who drive cars or, better, the people who have to take the bus.

Meanwhile, you show your own contempt for the working-class by happily selling out thousands of sorely-needed jobs to give everybody at most about 3.5 hours pay.

Clinton-McCain gas tax holiday slammed as bad idea

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A gas tax holiday proposed by U.S. presidential hopefuls John McCain and Hillary Clinton is viewed as a bad idea by many economists and has drawn unexpected support for Clinton rival Barack Obama, who also is opposed.

Clinton copies McCain's inanity.

He didn't say $20 a month, and you can do the math yourself.  The gas tax is 18 cents.  In every 15-gallon fillup, that would be $2.70.  If you filled up 8 times a month, maybe you get to $20, but who outside of a trucker does that?  $20 is the likely savings over the life of the suspension.  Maybe $25.

Also, there would actually be no savings in practice.  As Krugman noted, her proposal is pointless.  The windfall profits tax would fill the highway fund, the oil companies would raise prices to recoup the windfall profits tax, and consumers would pay the exact same price at the pump, and so a bunch of legislation would be passed to the benefit of nobody.

Brilliant fucking idea.  You have a huge future in progressive politics.

Obama supporters shouldn't get too fixated on this either, as I've little doubt that he would vote for Clinton's proposal in the US Senate.

Clinton supporters shouldn't get too fixated on this either because, since Obama has a mathematical lock on the nomination (click signature line below), the only place Obama will be voting on any proposals of President Hillary's is in their ongoing fantasies.

This is a prefect example of the type of leadership we can expect from a President Clinton. At all times, say things that make people feel good while pushing policies that you know full well will have very little impact on peoples every day lives. Lets not pretend that the difference between $4/gal and $3.82/gal is somehow going to provide people with the relief that they really need right now. This is political pandering at its absolute worst. Something that Hillary has made a habit of since Ohio where she claimed to have opposed NAFTA.

This is exactly what needs to end folks, talking to people like they are f---ing idiots and using the issue as some sort of wedge between yourself and a political opponent. Again, this is EXACTLY what turns people like me off from Senator Clinton. Without any hesitation she pushes this line that Obama doesn't care about working class people because he won't support a measure that she knows full well sounds better than it is. This political posturing is disgraceful. Whats worse is that it is transparent and feeds the notion that Hillary is not trustworthy. How many times can she embrace a conservative position at the expense of her primary opponent?

Look, this is very elementary economics. A revenue neutral gas tax holiday is revenue neutral for the government and for the Average Joe alike.  It's a complete and utter sham.  Why?  Because the market ultimately decides who pays what share of every tax, not the government.  It doesn't matter if you nominally take the tax from the oil companies or if you nominally take the tax from the consumers, the result will be exactly the same (as the cost of the latter tax will be passed on to consumers until we reach the same equilibrium price we were at before).  

In the mean time, we've got a new tax on oil companies (a good thing), but we're spending it on putting more greenhouse gases into the air rather than investing in clean energy R&D.  This is as dumb as Washington gets, and we're supposed to celebrate because it makes a good soundbite? Tell me, why are we even worried about electing progressives if not to promote progressive policy?

"This isn't an idea designed to get you through the summer, it's an idea designed to get them through an election."

beautiful commercial, just beautiful

More breathtaking analysis.

Here, have a treat.

So let me see if I get Jerome's postion right:

A) This is poltically smart, so its good regardless of the consequences

B) Obama doing the politically smart thing on Healthcare (opposing mandates) is wrong and immoral since it buys into the Republican frame

Yeah no, contradiction there in favor of your canidate Big Gunner, I mean how could anyone think your a hack in the tank for Clinton.