Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Hard to believe it but the only candidate who's not offering us relief from the sky-rocketing gas prices this summer is paying for ad time to attack Hillay's plan.

Go figure.

I've said it before and I'll say it again and again and again until it gets through to folks.  Hillary really does understand what working folks and families watching every penny worry about and need from our next leader.  She listens - she knows what keeps us awake at night with worry... the soaring price of food and gas, that unexpected car repair or a trip to the ER with a sick child but no health insurance.  

Her plans to rebuild the middle class, develop green color jobs that can't be off-shored, help young people go to college, and reform our horrendously broken health care system are all designed to help ease those worries and rebuild the economy Bush has neglected for the past 7 years.  So for anyone to pretend that her gas tax holiday this summer is the only thing she's offering up to help folks hit by the skyrocketing price of gas is just trying to pull the wool over your eyes folks.

There are three candidates out there guys and each one has an idea as to how best to ease the pain at the pump for us this summer.

John McCain would eliminate the tax this summer and not pay for it, depleting the funds available for transportation projects.

Hillary would shift the tax from us to the big oil companies who're raking in record profits, keeping the funds flowing to those much-needed projects.

And Obama would do... nothing.  At least as far as this tax is concerned.  He says it wouldn't help us if they reduced the price of gas by 18 cents a gallon.  So I guess he figures it wouldn't hurt us if they doubled it then too right?

The campaign held a press conference this afternoon - I missed this one because we took the kids to the park to enjoy the sunny day so I'm glad they put out the following transcript for those of us who missed it.  

Howard Wolfson and Phil Singer Discuss the State of the Race
Howard Wolfson and Phil Singer made the following remarks on a conference call this afternoon.

Audio is available here.

Howard Wolfson: Good afternoon everyone. Thank you all for joining us today- a beautiful day here in beautiful downtown Arlington.  Howard Wolfson, the communications director for the Clinton campaign, joined as always on the flight deck by Deputy Communications Director Phil Singer. I say that just because he always shakes his head woefully when I do it.

Today we are talking about something very important. We've seen a very important debate over the last several days in this campaign between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton on the subject of the gas tax and it's a debate about policy that says something larger about the two candidates who are having it. On the one hand, Senator Clinton believes that this summer with gas prices so high and middle class families hurting that the oil companies ought to pay the gas tax. Senator Obama says no. He thinks hard-pressed consumers ought to continue paying the gas tax despite the fact that oil is at record cost and people are hurting. That's a critical distinction in this race between, in Senator Clinton, someone who understands the pain that middle class and working class families are feeling, who wants to help bring immediate relief to them and wants to do it in a fiscally responsible way to ensure that the oil companies make up the revenue and Senator Obama, somebody who just doesn't seem to understand that middle class families are hurting, working class families are hurting and that they need relief. He would rather side with the oil companies over the interests of middle class families.

So it's an important policy difference that says something larger about the two candidates and that larger frame is consistent with some of the policy differences we've seen throughout this campaign.

On the issue of health care, Senator Clinton understands that every American needs and deserves quality affordable health care. Senator Obama leaves fifteen million people out, a key distinction between somebody who is committed to helping every single person and somebody who else who says "no, we can afford to leave some people out." On the issue of home mortgages, Senator Clinton says let's freeze rates for subprime borrowers, let's freeze foreclosures for subprime borrowers so we are not having families thrown out of their homes. Senator Obama says no that's the wrong approach. Again, somebody who understands the pain that middle class and working class families are going through right now in this country and somebody who doesn't.

These are critically important distinctions between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. They say something critically important about the differences between the two of them and their approaches and the kind of presidents they'd be. I am asked and we are asked on these calls- why is it that Senator Obama is consistently unable to attract the votes of working class and middle class people and I have to say that middle class and working class people are following this race closely in Texas and Ohio and Pennsylvania, of course now in North Carolina and Indiana and they know that Senator Clinton is on their side, they know that Senator Clinton is a champion and fighter for them and they are voting accordingly.

This is a good substantive debate; we welcome the debate. It's unfortunate that Senator Obama has taking the position that he has but we are debating substance here. We are debating a substantive point that allows voters to draw a larger conclusion about these two candidates, about their priorities and about what they would really do to help hard-pressed, working class and middle class Americans. And with that I will turn it over to Phil.

Phil Singer: This is Phil. I would just add that I think it's clear that the Obama campaign is running scared right now. They've outspent our campaign by significant margins in both North Carolina and Indiana , they've predicated victories in both North Carolina and Indiana , and they're currently watching our candidate catch fire on the stump and generate a significant amount of momentum going into Election Day. Their response to Senator Obama's inability to connect with working class voters is now quickly turning into an attack response. And that is what we are seeing today, unfortunately, with this new advertisement that the Obama campaign is unveiling.

What makes this new advertisement particularly unfortunate is the way it makes misleading claims about Senator Clinton's position, and actually takes a line and uses a column about criticizing Senator McCain's approach to support the gas tax in order to criticize Senator Clinton. I am referring specifically to the line in this latest attack ad that they are putting out called "Boost," where the announcer says, "Experts say it will just boost oil industry profits," and it refers to a column in the New York Times of April 28th. In fact, the column that they are referring to is, where he writes, "The impression that Mr. McCain's tax talk is all about pandering is reinforced by his proposal for a summer gas tax holiday, a measure that would in fact do little to help consumers, although it would boost oil industry profits."

Mr. Krugman was referring to Senator McCain's approach. In fact, in that same column, Mr. Krugman acknowledges that Hillary's plan will not increase profits for the oil industry. So the Obama campaign has put up an ad attacking Senator Clinton's position because it's incapable of embracing Senator Obama's position in a way that actually resonates with voters and tells voters that he is on their side. So they are misquoting a column to make an attack on Senator Clinton.

It is exactly the kind of thing that Senator Obama and his campaign, it's exactly the kind of political tactic that Senator Obama and his campaign have criticized in the past. So it's rather ironic that going into the closing days of this very important election on Tuesday, you see the Obama campaign essentially throwing many of the principles that it has said have guided it throughout this process in order to score political points and attack Hillary. That's unfortunate, but that's the position Senator Obama finds himself in right now, because he is not connecting with working class voters, real people and we think that's a problem in this election but it's also going to be a problem for him going forward if he is the nominee.

When I saw this I got curious as to what the campaign might have put up on Fact Hub and as usual, they're on top of things with the information I'm looking for...

Obama Ad Misrepresents Krugman Quote To Attack Hillary

Sen. Obama has a new ad which claims that "experts" believe Hillary's plan for a gas tax holiday would "boost oil industry profits." Their citation is an April 28 column by Paul Krugman, which discusses Sen. McCain's plan, not Hillary's plan:

The impression that Mr. McCain's tax talk is all about pandering is reinforced by his proposal for a summer gas tax holiday -- a measure that would, in fact, do little to help consumers, although it would boost oil industry profits.

Hillary's plan differs from Sen. McCain's in that it is financed with a windfall profits tax on oil companies. Krugman, who does not support Hillary's plan, acknowledges that her plan will not increase profits for the oil industry.

Krugman adds: "Just to be clear: I don't regard this as a major issue. It's a one-time thing, not a matter of principle...Health care reform, on the other hand, could happen, and is very much a long-term issue -- so poisoning the well by in effect running against universality, as Obama has, is a much more serious breach."

It seems as though Sen. Obama was quite busy misrepresenting Hillary's proposals this morning, especially when it comes to her gas tax holiday.  Here's another one they had to set straight over at Fact Hub...

Fact Check: Hillary and the Windfall Profits Tax

Today on Meet the Press, Sen. Obama claimed Hillary was using the same windfall profits tax to pay for two proposals:

Now, Senator Clinton says that she's going to use the windfall profits tax to fill it. First of all, she's already said she's going to use that for something else, as I have, and that is to invest in clean energy and, and-- other important measures. So, that money she's already spending twice.

This is false and misleading.

To pay for the gas tax holiday, Hillary is calling for a windfall tax on the oil companies' 2008 profits. It's an immediate proposal. Hillary has never proposed a tax on 2008 profits previously.

Hillary would continue the windfall tax on 2009 profits and beyond, and that revenue would go to her strategic energy fund and for renewable energy.

I pointed this out Friday night and I think it bears repeating folks - Obama's attacking Hillary do divert our attention from the fact that he's offing us nothing to relieve our pain a the pump.  Not "nothing better" - nothing.  He's not even trying when it comes to addressing this short term matter of soaring gas prices.  They both have plans in place to address our long-term needs in terms of developing new resources of energy and increase the mileage our cars get etc. and rebuilding the middle class.  But when it comes to our short-term needs...

Crickets.

Frankly, I'm glad someone's listening to us - and trying to get something done rather than point fingers and attack the attempts of others to help us.  Not just in his stump speeches to his supporters, but in spending a lot of money to bring that message to the airwaves in Indiana.

Will he cling to these attacks and take them to the airwaves in North Carolina and other upcoming states?  Only time will tell I suppose.

HELP HILLARY FIGHT ON - CONTRIBUTE NOW!

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Economy, gas, Hillary Clinton, president (all tags)

Comments

301 Comments

Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

She knows we're hurting and is trying to help us out.

And for that she gets ATTACKED?

by alegre 2008-05-04 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

It's not a good way to help people out, and it might not be effective. That's the problem.

There are better ways of providing relief.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:00PM | 0 recs
Might not be effective. No, we can't.

"It might not work" is not bold leadership.

by catfish1 2008-05-04 10:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Might not be effective. No, we can't.

"It might not work" is not bold leadership.

It won't work - except for the oil companies.

by obsessed 2008-05-04 10:50PM | 0 recs
Windfall profits tax works for me

May save me money, may not. But I like it nonetheless.

by catfish1 2008-05-04 11:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Windfall profits tax works for me

Make sure you share your happiness with one of the thousands who will lose their jobs over this.  Or, with one of those who may have to pay more than 30.00 for alignment adjustments due to potholes not getting repaired because the government will not have funds for highway repairs.

Remember, this has been tried before in Illinois and it did not work.  The consumers gained nothing and the oil comapnies made more money.

by igottheblues 2008-05-05 03:16AM | 0 recs
You didn't read her proposal

She will only have a gas tax holiday if it is paid for by a windfall profits tax.

This is shifting the tax from drivers to the oil companies.

by catfish1 2008-05-05 07:06AM | 0 recs
Re: You didn't read her proposal

Who will in turn shift it back to consumers by way of increasing the cost of gasoline.

by sorrodos 2008-05-05 07:43AM | 0 recs
Re: You didn't read her proposal

On top of the fact that it is all pie in the sky since Bush will veto any such tax on the windfall profits, anyway.

by oliver cromwell 2008-05-05 08:27AM | 0 recs
Re: You didn't read her proposal

Indeed.  And thats IF (a mighty if again) it made it past the likely GOP filibuster in the Senate.

by sorrodos 2008-05-05 08:42AM | 0 recs
Re: You didn't read her proposal

by Twin Planets 2008-05-05 09:10AM | 0 recs
Re: You didn't read her proposal

Let me get this straight:

1) Gas tax "holiday" means the oil companies pocket a large % of the savings. (Don't believe me -- ask any  economist w/ "elite" skills: in a supply-constrained market, cost decreases are not passed along to the consumer. The extra $0.15 or so - the consumer portion of the current gas tax - will be mostly pocketed by Exxon, Chevron, etc.) Assume oil companies can only pocket 80% of the reduction and consumers get 20%. (This accounts for the mkt being not entirely supply-constrained.)
Scorecard: Big Oil $0.15/gallon savings, Consumer $0.03/gallon savings, Transportation Infrastructure -$9B/yr

2) Clinton gets Congress to pass windfall profits tax on oil companies.  Say she taxes them the equivalent of $0.18 per gallon sold now. Sen. Clinton wants to allocate the revenues to alt energy development.
Scorecard: Big Oil $0.18/gallon tax, Alt energy +$9B (for now)

Net result:
Scorecard: Big Oil $0.03 tax per gallon, Consumer $0.03 savings per gallon, Infrastructure -$9B, Alt energy +$9B.

I'm an elite product of Econ 101, and will gladly defer to expert opinion, but I haven't yet heard any that contradicts the totals above.

Analysis:

1) The gas tax is mostly passed on to consumers (inflexibility of demand + supply constraints), so why would a windfall profits tax be any different?  After all, the consumer isn't the direct payer of the gas tax -- it's the supplier(gas station) that pays.  The windfall profits tax would also be a supplier tax, and would just substitute for a per gallon tax.

2) What an ass-backwards way to, in net, divert resources from highway infrastructure to alt energy research.  The net savings for consumers, at $0.03/gallon, is pretty pathetic and equals about $6/yr in savings for the 1000 mi/month and 15 mpg driver.  My guess is that Congress would probably fight tooth-and-nail to preserve highway infrastructure projects, so the extra billions cut there would have to come from somewhere. I guess you could tax Big Oil some more, but most of this tax would be passed to consumers in higher gas prices....

3) A gas tax is a pretty damned efficient way to collect taxes. The revenuers check gas pump flow meters, require gas stations to keep accurate records of purchases, etc.  On the other hand, a windfall profits tax is based on accounting figures.... There are quite a few ways for a company to shift assets and expenses to lower taxable profits (and accounting profits as well!), and it wouldn't take long for Exxon, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, etc. to legally minimize their taxable income.

We've had 28 years (arguably minus 8) of voodoo economics, and I'm astounded that a Democrat is forwarding such a crap proposal.  I expect this from John "I don't know much about economics" McCain, but Sen. Clinton??

by Twin Planets 2008-05-05 09:47AM | 0 recs
Econ 101 - next is your Ayn Rand phase

Oil companies pocket the savings? No.

by catfish1 2008-05-05 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Econ 101 - next is your Ayn Rand phase

You dispute that oil companies will lower gas prices less than $0.18?  Why?  If refinery output is constrained and near the level of demand, then there's no incentive for suppliers to pass along tax savings to customers.  Individual suppliers can't capture much more market share by dropping price (because they'll run out of product), so....  And if you aren't personally disputing the result, please point to an economist who disagrees.

While you're at it, tell me why a windfall profits tax would have a different outcome for consumers than the current per gallon tax. (I've outlined one difference, collection efficiency, which would, if the windfall profit tax was set to the same revenue level, quite possibly result in higher prices at the pump, even in the absence of the gas tax.)  And what about the other 9 months of the year, when consumers are paying the gas tax and the portion of the windfall profits tax that is passed on to them?

If you disagree with this, please elaborate.  I'm happy to eat my words, as long as they're thoughtfully and completely cooked.

by Twin Planets 2008-05-05 11:06AM | 0 recs
Put down the dog

Wharton School:

Man walking along a road in the countryside comes across a shepherd and a huge flock of sheep. Tells the shepherd, "I will bet you $100 against one of your sheep that I can tell you the exact number in this flock." The shepherd thinks it over; it's a big flock so he takes the bet. "973," says the man. The shepherd is astonished, because that is exactly right. Says "OK, I'm a man of my word, take an animal." Man picks one up and begins to walk away.

"Wait," cries the shepherd, "Let me have a chance to get even. Double or nothing that I can guess your exact occupation." Man says sure. "You are an economist for a government think tank," says the shepherd. "Amazing!" responds the man, "You are exactly right! But tell me, how did you deduce that?"

"Well," says the shepherd, "put down my dog and I will tell you."

by catfish1 2008-05-05 11:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Put down the dog

Nice joke.  So the economists are wrong about the gas tax?  

Sorry, but I've had enough of folksy anti-intellectualism: eight years of Reagan was more than enough.  Clinton's plan is crap and I have yet to hear a creditable defense.  Keep the jokes coming though.

by Twin Planets 2008-05-05 12:17PM | 0 recs
Sometimes morale affects economy

Krugman said Clinton's plan at worst is pointless. But what economists are famous for is missing the morale, confidence, a gesture that increases trust in government. Gives people (wait for it...) hope. But hope that somebody out there is trying something. Not false hope - they know it may not work.

We need to take the FDR approach because there is so much work to do. I see analysis paralysis going on and it's not helping. Perfectionists would rather do nothing. Perfectionists are often less productive.

by catfish1 2008-05-05 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Sometimes morale affects economy

And FDR looked long term and asked the people to sacrifice for it.  I am willing to make sacrifices so that your children (I don't have any of my own) will have a cleaner, greener future.  Our grand parents did the same for us, sacrificed for our futures.  I think we our grand children the same.

by igottheblues 2008-05-05 03:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Sometimes morale affects economy

Lemmings do something too, but it's not a good policy alternative. I agree that there's a time for "go to the Moon in this decade" gestures, but the gas tax is no such thing. It comes across to a majority of Americans as a pandering bandaid (pandaid?) on a spurting artery.  

And last I looked, FDR wrote the definition of Democratic economic behavior -- he created millions of jobs.  The Clinton/McCain tax holiday would cost thousands of jobs in federal highway and mass transit projects. But no prob -- highways are an entitlement anyway....

by Twin Planets 2008-05-05 04:06PM | 0 recs
Taxes on oil companies cost jobs?

What party are you in?

by catfish1 2008-05-05 04:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

What are they?

by TinaH1963 2008-05-04 11:51PM | 0 recs
"It might not work"

this is why Obama is going to get his ass kicked over this issue.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-05 03:22AM | 0 recs
Re: "It might not work"

Yeah, because being on side of the truth is such a bad thing.

I've explained to you why it won't work before, but lets go over it ONE MORE TIME.

If is actually introduced in Congress:

  1. It has to contain a windfall profits tax or it will drain revenue used for highway/infrastructure maintenance.
  2. The GOP will not let a windfall profits tax pass
  3. It will not likely survive a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
  4. If it somehow makes it past the Senate (extremely unlikely), Bush will most likely veto it.
  5. Once supporters in Congress see this, the only way to save HRC face on it is to pass McCain's version (that doesn't have the windfall profits tax) which then leads us to the big problem described above in number 1.

Additionally, this idea is just flawed to begin with, so even if it were to pass, it won't save people money.

The oil companies will simply pass the cost of the windfall profits tax onto consumers by increasing the price of gasoline.  Hillary may claim that her idea charges the FTC to prevent this from happening, but relying on a federal agency that is led by Bush appointees is about the stupidest thing a Democratic candidate could do right now, given their track record.

by sorrodos 2008-05-05 07:50AM | 0 recs
Obama is in the reality-based community

Clinton is looking more and more like Bush Lite -- attacking the entire community of economists as "elitists." What anti-intellectual, anti-rational claptrap.

by Hudson 2008-05-05 06:38PM | 0 recs
mor stupid

i guess this means he's already getting his "ass kicked." Dumb, dumb, dumb.

A CBS/New York Times poll, conducted by telephone in the first three days of May, shows a majority of voters approving of Senator Obama's handling of his response to the lengthy media campaign, culminating in a stern denunciation of former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, over comments the pastor has made.

On the "gas tax holiday," those polled seem to share the view of Sen. Obama, with 70% saying the idea is being used by Sens. Clinton and McCain for political gain, rather than to help average Americans. A majority, 49% against 45%, think the proposed summer hiatus on the 18.4-cent federal gasoline tax is a bad idea.

by bookish 2008-05-05 09:10AM | 0 recs
Re: "It might not work"

Good policy is more important to me than bad policy that looks good.

by Falsehood 2008-05-05 12:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

The problem is, as soon as the tax is eliminated, demand will go up, raising prices again.  Who knows, prices may even be higher than they were before, making it worse for working people.

Also, when the tax holiday expires on labor day, it will be like a tax raise-at least that's how the freepers will advertise it.

by mefck 2008-05-04 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

You know the advantage?

It focuses attention on the high profits that the oil companies have been making and the subsidies they NO LONGER need. It brings it into the conversation.  If I am correct, it ends up saving about 5% for the consumer, money that they could use.  But then people would pay attention to the numbers, and would say, hey, "why should the oil companies get subsidies and why should they get taxed at a low rate?

by ghost 2 2008-05-04 10:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Do you really think people don't know that the oil companies make obscene profits?  Is that really your analysis of this thorny problem, that nobody has shined a spotlight on this?  

by oliver cromwell 2008-05-05 08:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

hey Alegre

next time you talk to our buddy Howie wolfson

make sure he reads the whole article you linked that stated this about Hillary plans

"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."  

I am starting to like Paul krugeman he sure knows his stuff  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yes, Paul does know his stuff, and next time he talks about healthcare, make sure you pay attention!

For the government, it doesn't make a difference.  For the consumers, it makes a small difference.  But politically, it's really good, BECAUSE it brings the conversation to the subsidies and high profit (and low taxes) of the oil companies.  You know, if you want to eliminate subsidies for the oil companies, politically, that's a great place to start.  

by ghost 2 2008-05-04 10:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Why not simply spend the political capital to focus squarely on the oil company subsidies rather than this roundabout way?

Why? Because it is the height of political pandering season. You'd have a MUCH better argument if you went after the billions the oil companies get in subsidies and fighting them directly than having every economist against you in trying to suspend the gas tax.

Additionally, there is simply NO WAY that this will be enacted this summer anyway. So it comes down to nothing but pandering.

by Yalin 2008-05-05 07:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

what part of POINTLESS and DISAPPOINTING don't you understand??  

Read Paul's whole article please  you will not save anything !!!!

by wellinformed 2008-05-05 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I feel like someone else stole your password ;)

Seriously though, I appreciate the fact that you call a spade, a spade.

Thanks Jerome.

by mefck 2008-05-04 08:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

........I may have been right.

by mefck 2008-05-04 08:33PM | 0 recs
finally exposed

as a mere tool with little to no understanding of where one walks...into dog dooooo.

by SovSov 2008-05-04 08:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Thanks a lot, "Jerome ArNNstrong"

(not to by confused with Jerome Armstrong)

</end snark>

Seriously though, someone should ban this troll

by BGizzle 2008-05-04 09:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Five times, eh?
by Jay R 2008-05-05 04:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

you spelled green collar incorrectly.

by Maize and Blue State 2008-05-04 09:44PM | 0 recs
She's trying to stop her own pain, not ours

Ideal Hillary plan: Suspend the gas tax until the day after the election.  

by kellogg 2008-05-04 10:23PM | 0 recs
Something you said, alegre, needs repeating

over and over:

He says it wouldn't help us if they reduced the price of gas by 18 cents a gallon.  So I guess he figures it wouldn't hurt us if they doubled it then too right?

If suspending the gas tax for a period of time is such a horrible idea, then why don't we double, or triple it, so we can have some more of that good 'ole tax goodness?! Keeping poor folk from buying gas would force the price down, eventually, you know - supply and demand and all that.  

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-05 04:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Something you said, alegre, needs repeating

Speaking like a republican: "if taxes are good to have, why not have 80% taxes? or 100% taxes?".

The fact both extreme are wrong doesn't automatically mean moderation is wrong also.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-05 04:52AM | 0 recs
The argument being put forth by

Obama supporters on this thread is that suspending the gas tax temporarily will increase demand which will raise prices. If this is true, then the logical conclusion is that by raising taxes even further, demand will be curbed and prices will fall. You accuse me of speaking like a Republican?! Hillary has the populist position on this issue, i.e., give the people who need help the most - low income people, truckers - a break, paid for with a windfall profits tax,  while simultaneously working on long term fixes. Where is Obama's plan to provide relief to folks who can't even afford to drive to work - yes $25.00 matters! You have your "speaking like a Republican" backwards.

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-05 05:15AM | 0 recs
Re: The argument being put forth by

Yes if you raise taxes, demand will fall, the price will adjust and it will cut into the oil companies profits.  This is why oil companies want lower taxes and fully support the gas tax holiday.

by catalysis 2008-05-05 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

You sound a lot like a Bush supporter I talked to circa 2002.  I was talking about Bush's repeated attempts to speak, and his failures at those attempts.  I listed off my favorites, ending with, "The problem with our economy is that 100% of our imports come from other countries."  The man said, "He's just breaking it down for common folk."

Now Hillary proposes an idea that will NOT help us, will hurt the budget, etc, and you say, "She's just trying to help the common folk."  This politician of the people schtick is so incredibly, transparently phony.  "A chicken in every pot!"

by proseandpromise 2008-05-05 04:25AM | 0 recs
Did you just respond to your own post?

   Thx for treating us all to another lengthy transcript of EVERY SINGLE WORD out of the Clinton campaign yesterday. That was breathtaking. really. Then you get a little too eager, or something, and reply to your own post, like you'd just read it, and we're shocked! to learn what horrible thing the world is doing Our Lady of Tax-Mercy. You know we can see your name at the bottom of the comment, right?

by Kordo 2008-05-05 04:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Please, he's attacking her plan not her.  Grow up.

by Ellinorianne 2008-05-05 04:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Wow! You impress me in your ability not to be willing to see a side other than your own, and then to paint it is one "antithetical to liberals" because we all must certainly all believe in lockstep, don't you know.

Why aren't you running for President?  You seem to have all the answers.

by cjbardy 2008-05-05 06:21AM | 0 recs
Seriously......

Do you believe $20-$30 over the course of the summer is going to really help consumers?

Additionally, Obama tried this in the Illinois state senate and it failed because the oil companies just raised prices to offset the tax. So consumers got squeezed and the oil companies got their money.

Is that really worth losing $9 billion for our bridges, highways, and roads infrastructure care? Is it really worth it when we have crumbling bridges, literally, like the one in Minnesota?

Is it really worth it to pander like this? I think not.

by Yalin 2008-05-05 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Identitfy thief!

Jerome Arnnstrong

by SHIBAM8P 2008-05-05 08:11AM | 0 recs
Who's hurting?

maybe only those dumb people with cars, I figure.

Us smart folks don't have nothing to worry about.

[and now I run. fear the snark, keep your bloodpressure down.].

by RisingTide 2008-05-05 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
I've said it before and I'll say it again and again and again until it gets through to folks.

And how many repetitions does it take to make your claim true?
by username3 2008-05-04 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Eleventy Gabillion (and she's halfway home).

by fogiv 2008-05-05 10:10AM | 0 recs
No Amount of Spin


   can change the obvious fact. The gas tax is like a broken leg to the average consumer...and Clinton wants to fix it with a band-aid.

  Just doesn't work that way.

by southernman 2008-05-04 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

And yet your guy's offering us nothing.  Or has he come up with something we don't know about yet?

BTW - did you bother to read the diary?  Because I did mention some of her other plans that would address this problem long term.

by alegre 2008-05-04 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

The truth of the matter, and none of the canddiates will admit it obviously, is that there is little to nothing that we can do to lower gas prices in the immediate future (this summer for instance).

This is like deciding to get a flu vaccine after you've already been exposed. Why not just be honest with the American people, instead of pandering?

by highgrade 2008-05-04 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

And yet your guy's offering us nothing.

I'll take "nothing" over "costly pandering" any day.

BTW - did you bother to read the diary?

Let's say "skimmed."  It looked dull and derivative.

by username3 2008-05-04 08:03PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

actually its not dull and boring I think its a good read I am a Huge fan of fiction

ever see that movie "big fish" ?

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:20PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

No, but I'll put it in the queue.

And if you're a fan of fiction, let me suggest (independent of whatever primary-based antipathies) diving into Hunter S. Thompson for the political variety, and Anton Chekhov and George R. R. Martin for the non-political.

by username3 2008-05-04 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

thanks

I never read a Hunter S thompson always wanted to
Anything in particular you can rec?

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

"Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail"  is good stuff, if semi-fiction.

For Chekhov, go for the short stories.

by username3 2008-05-04 09:23PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

MOJO for the rec  

Thanks  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:25PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

Fear and Loathing '72 is an absolutely fantastic read.  I've read it four times.

by fogiv 2008-05-05 10:12AM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin
"Kingdom of Fear" is a good way to get your HST feet wet, since it's mostly his later writings about the current, crappy state of affairs. But I second "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail" as another great way for a politics junkie to get in on the Gonzo goodness.
by Jay R 2008-05-05 04:10AM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin


   I always read your diaries Alegre.

  Her solutions to the problem would amount to the same effect as a band-aid on a broken leg.

  Just my opinion, given what I know.

 

by southernman 2008-05-04 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

Obama worked for the stimulus package - that's something. This is extra stimulus/relief, and its not a good way of getting money back into people's pockets.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin

Of course he's offering nothing. There's nothing to offer over the short-term. Nothing, and I repeat, nothing can fix the gas-price issue right away. Nothing can alleviate the suffering right away. After decades of mismanaged energy policy, your candidate comes up with a half-assed solution to the symptom of the actual problem, a cheap pander for a few extra votes, and now Obama has to go and do the same or else we blame the plight of the American people on him?

Oh, I can give you a non-solution, and let's see who's also offering non-solutions. A non-solution would be to mouth-off one of the largest oil producers in an act of shameful political posturing. Bush, Ahmadenijad, and Chavez have been doing it for a few years now. Senator Clinton just got in on the act.

by lizardbox 2008-05-04 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: No Amount of Spin
First, your diary makes a joke out of simple economics and seems to have been written in a fantasy world where George W. Bush willingly signs a bill increasing taxation against oil companies, who then don't just pass the extra cost onto us at the pump.

But, that aside, you do recognize that Obama is offering a middle class tax cut (you should, since Jerome himself decried it as a pander earlier today) and a shift of the overall tax burden towards the wealthy and off the middle class, right? And you do understand that this would in fact provide a veritable shit-ton more relief for overburdened families than any "gas tax holiday" gimmick so far presented, don't you?

Look, I respect zealously advocating for and defending Hillary, even though I'm still hoping that she calls a presser tomorrow to drop out. But to simply ignore common sense in presenting that defense makes it that much harder for readers to take you, and her, seriously. And this diary left common sense so quickly that I wonder how you could have possibly written it in earnest, considering how laughably illogical the premise and presentation are.

by Jay R 2008-05-04 09:34PM | 0 recs
Economic knowledge and logic

However basic, are like crucifixes and holy water to Hillary's vampire brigade.

by JJE 2008-05-05 11:35AM | 0 recs
Only saves Prius drivers $0.30.

Do any other drivers exist? Pointless! Why bother!

by catfish1 2008-05-04 10:37PM | 0 recs
Its a good move on her part
she is paying attention- someone else is not.
by linc 2008-05-04 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Its a good move on her part

Yes. She's really paying attention (finally) to the score board.

by lizardbox 2008-05-04 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Its a good move on her part

macmcd - TR abuse.  Uprated.

by fogiv 2008-05-05 10:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Alegre,  did you hear BO's latest insult?  He told the people of Indiana that "when you lose your job...you lose your dignity."

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-04 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

And that's when we all become "bitter"?

by alegre 2008-05-04 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I hardly think that's an insult. I would say that people who can't support themselves have lost some dignity, although its not their fault, and they shouldn't be blamed.

It can be used to attack though - so it might have been something of a mistake.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:08PM | 0 recs
I don't get it
how does losing one's job equate automatically to losing some dignity? Now, if someone lost their job and then didn't begin looking for another and instead decided to stay on unemployment or welfare (absent other mitigating circumstances), then I could see how that could translate into a loss of dignity, but I still don't, but it doesn't make it a true statement- it is still a matter of opinion.
by linc 2008-05-04 08:13PM | 0 recs
Re: I don't get it

I think, at this point, Obama could tell you the grass is green and the sky is blue and you would find a way to be outraged...

Ask someone who has lost their job... ask someone who cannot find a job after months of searching.  Ask someone who has to go to friends, relatives, or the state for help....

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-04 08:20PM | 0 recs
Thanks for the interpretation
but that wasn't outrage. It was a comment, on the internet, about a stupid comment made by a politician. If you think that was outrage, I would suggest, for you, a bomb shelter for the real outrage.
by linc 2008-05-04 08:32PM | 0 recs
Is this nonsense...

...and the comparable stuff over at dKos just mass hysteria? Mob mentality? Are you folks gonna be capable of looking back on this in the future and seeing how ridiculous you all sound? Or will pride mixed with some sort of lingering self-consciousness make that impossible?

It's embarassing. You're all so Pavlovian now, you can probably count on a 30 point blood pressure increase at the very mention of the name "Obama." And for what?

Oh well... maybe you all are providing material for somebody's social psychology term paper some where. At least that might lead to something worthwhile for someone.

by odum 2008-05-05 03:32AM | 0 recs
I

did not make those comments.  Someone responded to a rather blah comment by me and told me to watch the outrage.  Maybe you should take some of your own intimated advice?

by linc 2008-05-05 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: I don't get it

Being told that some kid in Malaysia can do your job for $2/day certainly hurts a persons dignity, as does standing in an unemployment line while Republicans use you as an example of our horrible welfare state.      

by freedom78 2008-05-04 08:31PM | 0 recs
Again
only if you believe it to be so- dignity is personal, an opinion about oneself- it is certainly not something for politicians to speculate on... Why is Obama always speculating on the personal self-esteem and outlook of working class America? Its kind of weird... is this his attempt at relating?
by linc 2008-05-04 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Again

Anytime you make a generalization, there will be many exceptions.  But I don't think the idea that losing your job could hurt your self-respect is too far fetched.  Perhaps pride would have been a better word.    

But I'm not sure why we're so caught up trying to create insults by nitpicking candidates' words, rather than getting at what they're saying they want to do, which in this case, I'm guessing (haven't read the comment, in context), is to end tax breaks for companies that outsource and/or to reinvest in creating a greener economy.  The GOP has pursued policies that treat people's jobs like a price to be paid for lower overall market costs.  While free trade may be beneficial in lowering costs, overall, it's a very dehumanizing policy when you consider its effects on real people, some of whom lose their jobs or work harder for less.  

So I have no problem with pointing out that some have their dignity taken.  Relating policies to issues of honor, pride, and dignity is an effective way of making it about people rather than numbers.    

by freedom78 2008-05-04 08:47PM | 0 recs
Well, my husband lost his job back during

the Reagan Administration and, although he has an MS, for three years he mowed lawns, helped move furniture and everything he could posibly do to help feed our family.  He damned sure did NOT lose his dignity.  It is completely assinine and insensitive to suggest that he did.  He had way more dignity mowing lawns than Obama did have writing letters to help his friends get public funds to build low cost housing that then went bankrupt so the money was gone into the pockets of Rezko, Davis, et al and the people were left with no housing.  The audacity of saying that the loss of a job takes away your dignity.  Being buddies with a slum lord pretty much answers the question of dignity.  The reason Sen. Obama doesn't understand about dignity is because he does not even understand the concept!!!!!!!!

by macmcd 2008-05-04 08:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Well, my husband lost his job back during

MOJO FOR SNARK

I am lauging and shot milk out my nose

that was classic

"Sen. Obama doesn't understand about dignity is because he does not even understand the concept!!!!!!!!"

lol hahahaha lmao  ahhhhhhh

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:33PM | 0 recs
Arrogance is a certain invitation

to negative Karma.  Those of us who have honestly lived with dignity through abundant times and times of need feel sorry for those of you who set yourselves up for humiliation when your times come.  And the down times always come.

by macmcd 2008-05-05 04:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Well, my husband lost his job back during

Yeah, how could someone like "him" understand about dignity, right?

He's just so uppity, right?

by Brannon 2008-05-04 09:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
This is so absurd!  Now we are going to analyze 'dignity' for three days???  You know, if I didn't know better, I would have to conclude that you Hillary supporters are acting exactly like the pundits define her most popular demographic:  uneducated or just plain dumb!
If you can't come up with something better to aplaud your 'girl' then just don't comment, okay?  It just makes you look bad
by mariannie 2008-05-04 09:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

ouch!!!
wow you have the courage to say that on a Alegre thread?!!

screw Iron MAN  you are the new blockbuster hero of the weekend

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

In other news, Hillary says, "When you lose your job, you should throw a party, cause it's awesome.  I understand you!"

by proseandpromise 2008-05-05 04:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Thanks for your diary. It's time we started praising the person in this race who is offering solutions--Hillary Clinton. The silence from the Obama camp is deafaning on this issue, critizising the position with absoutley no way to fix the problem themselves. I'm glad that HILLARY is once again fighting for America's middle class.

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

What good is a solution if it is poor and hurts the economy and Americans?

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-04 07:53PM | 0 recs
What?
How exactly, would it hurt the economy and Americans? Did Goolsby tell you that?
by linc 2008-05-04 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: What?

It hurts the economy when we use more gas due to the new subsidized price and we end up with a new price, higher price, eliminating any good from the initial subsidy.

by lizardbox 2008-05-04 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: What?

Removing a tax is not a subsidy, but rather removing a tax elimates the deadweight loss of economic surplus caused by it.

by Neglected Duty 2008-05-05 09:39AM | 0 recs
Re: What?

It might cause prices to go up to pre tax levels, without the tax, causing a spike when the tax comes back into effect.

Also, the Goolsby thing is a horrible, false scandal. The memo that everyone quoted has been called inaccurate by the Canadians.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ the_facts_about_nafta-gate.html

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:15PM | 0 recs
I was referencing
Goolsby as the complete, die-hard neo-liberal economist, something that is completely counter to populism and populist appeal- not NAFTAgate.
by linc 2008-05-04 08:22PM | 0 recs
Won't Even be President This Summer!

so how can John McCain or Hillary really Implement this idea into FACT.. they can't!  It is a gimmick that they cannot produce on...  That is sad!

by bacalove 2008-05-05 04:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I wouldn't mind it so much if he were just silent on this whole thing.  But he's attacking Hillary on the air while offering us nothing - nada - zip - zilch as an alternative.

by alegre 2008-05-04 07:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Of course he's not silent on the issue.  Its terrible public policy, and not a single respected economist has supported it.  Citing facthub and Howard Wolfson just makes it even more obvious that there is no real support for this ridiculous proposal.  

Being silent on a policy that is obviously a poor idea is never a good idea, just look at the Iraq War.

by KevinT 2008-05-04 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

The alternative is to tack on however much voters would save into a broadbased tax cut or such.

You're saying that Obama is weaker because he isn't offering relief - see middle class tax cut. He's not proposing it NOW because it wouldn't go through Congress.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Better a bad policy than no policy? Really, that's the tack you're going with here?

How is Hillary going to get the tax on oil companies signed by Bush? How is she going to keep them from passing that tax onto us at the pump?

It's a pander, and it's not even a very good one. She has a lot of good points to try and use to sell us on her candidacy, but this ain't one of them.

by Jay R 2008-05-04 09:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

He IS offering something. a $1000 rebate to working families via a profit tax on the oil companies. You are just not paying attention.

by telfish 2008-05-05 04:19AM | 0 recs
Huh?!

This may be the dumbest thing you've ever written.

I wouldn't mind it so much if he were just silent on this whole thing.

This must be a snapshot of your perfect world..."don't question my candidate's ideas, just sit there quietly and accept them as inviolate."

I guess we're to assume that you think we should all just shut up and sing when our leaders propose idiotic policy proposals that will do more harm than good.

This site is rife with teh stupid right now.

by bookish 2008-05-05 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
It's time we started praising the person in this race who is offering solution

This mixture of political talking points
("offering solutions") and religious language ("praising") is sickly amusing.  More, please!
by username3 2008-05-04 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Her policy is bad economic policy period.  The last President to so willfully ignore experts was W, let's not repeat that mistake.

Hey guys, ya know i think we should Donate to Obama today!

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-04 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Bad economic policy? How?

Is it the whole reducing gas prices for us over the summer?

Or do you have a problem with shifting the cost to the big oil companies?

by alegre 2008-05-04 07:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Please find one expert who thinks this will lower prices.

All this will do is increase demand and raise prices.  It is bad policy, period.

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-04 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Today George Stephanopoulos asked her to name a respected economist who thought her plan was a good idea.

She couldn't name a single one.

by jdusek 2008-05-04 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

She dismissed them as elitists, I believe....

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-04 08:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

All economists come from caucus states, and therefore their elitist opinions don't count.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I don't know about this.  I'll still be combining trips and filling up as little as I can, but it's hard, and I drive an econo box.  Some people really have to count those pennies, and a few bucks here and there count.  There's a reason payday lenders are doing such great business.

by TinaH1963 2008-05-05 12:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Its bad economic policy because it won't actually lower the cost of gas.  Gas prices at this point are determined almost solely by demand, and suspending the tax will increase the demand for gas, which will push prices back up.  So the most likely result is that prices drop for a day or two and then go right back to where they were, if not higher.

And the extra profits go straight to the big oil companies, so even if Clinton could miraculously get her windfall profits tax passed (which is nearly impossible), the oil companies still end up making the same amount of money.  The more likely result is that our funding for infrastructure is slashed, gas prices aren't effected, and we allow oil companies to take even more of our money.

And thats exactly what every economist has been saying for a week or two now.  And if you're smart enough to figure out how to use the internet, you're smart enough to understand this.  So clearly you understand all of this, and are just ignoring reality  because of your support for Hillary.

by KevinT 2008-05-04 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

its the lowering of the gas prices

we have a problem we feel we don't deserve it
and we feel everyone should be paying more
because big oil is our "friend" and we feel they should have another record breaking quarter

GOD BLESS BIG OIL  and anybody that that for more big oil profits

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Oh yeah, and the best way to stick it to BIG OIL is to totally eliminate all taxes on their product.

/snark (obviously)

by catalysis 2008-05-04 09:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Unless she has a magical way to get a tax on oil companies signed by Bush, AND a way to keep them from passing the price onto us at the pump (hint: she has neither), then it's a really, really, REALLY OBVIOUSLY BLATANTLY TRANSPARENTLY IS SHE HIGH OR WHAT bad policy. And what you're doing now is generally referred to as "pissing on our legs and telling us it's raining."
by Jay R 2008-05-04 09:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

My jaw hit the table after reading this diary. Hillary panders on the gas tax, and you follow suit. What you didn't see Hillary sputter and try and spin her way out of this rediculous pander on George S. this morning. She was made to look the fool that she is on this issue. No experts believe this will have any significant impact on the economy. Setting the record straight, what a laugh!

by venician 2008-05-04 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

HRC supporters dont need experts, they have Hillary, and if Hillary says its true then it has to be true!

seriously what do economic experts know about the economy huh?

by TruthMatters 2008-05-04 07:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

This is damn right. It's funny to me that Obama supporters are considered to be Kool-Aid drinkers on this site.

What are you drinking when you get outraged that no knowledgeable person in the country supports Clinton's stupid-ass gas tax plan?

Plus, it's a lie to say that Obama has no alternative. He said clearly that he favors accelerating tax rebates to get them into homes this summer. That will be hundreds of dollars in voters' pockets, not a convoluted wealth transfer to the oil companies.

We have had ENOUGH anti-intellectualism from W. Please let's not let it infect this site. Can't we go back to name calling and insisting that the hard-working salt of the earth heartland voters will never elect a black man?

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

As the wise and much-lamented username2 said, on MyDD logic flows backwards from the Universal Truth that Hillary Clinton (a.k.a. "Our Girl") is the nominee.  Once you understand this, all else is clear.

by username3 2008-05-04 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Hillary is doing no such thing.

She's offered up a plan to make gas more affordable.

Her plan pays for itself.

She has other plans in place to address our long term needs re rebuilding the economy.

What exactly do you have a problem with?

Oh wait I get it... you're pissed your guy didn't think of this first.

by alegre 2008-05-04 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Why would any Obama supporter be pissed that he didn't think of this plan? Because we want him to be universally ridiculed by the quote-unquote experts and economists and policy wonks and environmental advocates and pundits and educated people everywhere?

It is cringe-inducing to see people try to justify this gas tax plan. It's like they don't even know how ridiculous they look. Hillary has truly brought low her biggest boosters with this one...

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Please forgive my fellow supporters' attacks - they are unkind, and I wish they chose not to personally attack you.

However, the plan might not make gas more affordable, and there are better ways of reducing the burden on the consumer than relief that is biased for high gas consumers.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:19PM | 0 recs
Neither did your girl.

She lifted it straight from the Republican playbook of John McCain.

by you like it 2008-05-04 08:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

alegre MOJO

I am loving the way you put these people in there place keep up the good fight

"Hillary is doing no such thing.

She's offered up a plan to make gas more affordable.

Her plan pays for itself.

She has other plans in place to address our long term needs re rebuilding the economy.

What exactly do you have a problem with?

Oh wait I get it... you're pissed your guy didn't think of this first."

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

An impossible plan to get Bush to sign on with taxing companies that would then simply pass that increase onto us, thus raising gas prices at the pump? Great policy plan, I'm really upset that my candidate didn't think of this first. Really, because it showcases such a deep understanding of basic economics that anyone who hears about it should be instantly comforted by the brilliance of it and the thought of the person behind it leading our country during a time of economic crisis.

You can (and already have) call us Obama supporters a lot of things, but I don't think a single one of us is jealous because he couldn't come up with a ridiculous, ineffective, laugh-out-loud pander like this before she did (or, technically, before John McCain did). Of all the sins we might be guilty of, envy over this idiocy is simply not on the list.

by Jay R 2008-05-04 09:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Answer me this--why won't the oil companies just raise prices to the 'with-tax' level? That's what they always do and it makes perfect economic sense to anyone who understands how the price of oil is set.

And the gas-tax funds a bunch of infrastructure projects--what happens to those?

Do you also believe that we can drop the price of Porsche's by adding a windfall profit tax on the manufacturing and then just giving that money as a rebate to anyone who buys a Porsche? If that worked, then why don't we do that with everything?

by Brannon 2008-05-04 10:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
My favorite part of all of this is the assumption that George W. Bush would sign a bill increasing the tax paid by oil companies in the first place. Even though they could then just pass the cost along to us, he'd want to save them the paperwork.
by Jay R 2008-05-05 04:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

BREAKING:

Hillary Clinton has a newer plan to help with the price of Gas over the summer.

A Unicorn in every garage! That's right, a mythical creature to get you to work every day, and it runs COMPLETELY on Green Energy like sunshine and love!!

Yes, the Unicorn Plan is absurd, but then again so is thinking that you can get a oil company tax increase past Bush, and that all of the respected economists who disagree with Hillary are wrong, because she says so...

by Darknesse 2008-05-05 07:33AM | 0 recs
You forgot.

The unicorn also shits out rainbows.  You are clearly an Obamabot who does not understand the brilliance!!! of Hillary's plan.

by you like it 2008-05-05 08:06AM | 0 recs
Hillary was brilliant on television this morning.

I was hoping she would get tough questions because that is when she shines.  

OTOH, seeing Obama getting the marshmellow tidbits from Russert was a joke.  Russert made him look even more weak and unpresidential than he usually does by going so easy on him.  It was pitiful.

by macmcd 2008-05-04 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary was brilliant on television this morni

Senator Obama could go on live television and break rocks in his bare hands and you would still find a reason to refer to him as weak..

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-04 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
she cannot give her honest opinion because
she is a paid blogger she is own the payroll of the clinton campaign to spread propaganda and spin issues to her favor
by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:26PM | 0 recs
Please prove your allegation

and provide links:

she is a paid blogger she is own the payroll of the clinton campaign to spread propaganda and spin issues to her favor

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-05 04:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Please prove your allegation

sure its easy to prove

ask Alegre to write 1 thing Objective or negative about HRC ?  she cannot because it will violate her contract. just a blogging fundraiser

by wellinformed 2008-05-05 12:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

shrugs someone better tell the voters, in the new CBS poll majority saw the gas tax as nothing but pander

oh well

by TruthMatters 2008-05-04 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Tell us again... what's your guy offering up this summer?

Yeah - didn't think so.

by alegre 2008-05-04 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Why do the voters think its a pander?  If it was such a good idea, wouldnt the people agree with Hillary?

When the people AND economists are against it, i think its time to drop it.

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-04 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

 Well my neighbour owns two trucks and he told me he would save over $3000 dollars during this time frame. Just so happens he hauls mostly food. According to him that saving could be passed on down the chain to consumers. So those so called experts who wouldn`t know their ass from a hole in ground can shill all they want. Action is needed now and Hillary is the one to do it. Any more truckers out there.
by gunner 2008-05-04 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

out of those two trucks of food

and the saving he passes on.... How much would each consumer save on average?  just curious if it would cover the taxes on my groceries  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.

by gunner 2008-05-05 03:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Your neighbor is wrong, unless he knows (like any sane person should) that there's no chance that the oil companies would see their taxes go up one penny under this administration, so that they wouldn't end up passing the cost of the tax increase onto consumers at the pump, saving us nothing.

Or is there some magical method only you and Hillary know of by which we can get Bush to sign a tax increase on oil companies AND keep them from raising prices to cover the difference?

by Jay R 2008-05-04 09:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yeah, Mr. Expert--if that is your real name. Hillary learned her economisizing on the streets.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 10:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I will assume that ignorance rather than intent to mislead drives the failure to acknowledge Obama's plan:

And so what I've said is, let's accelerate a--the second half of a tax stimulus proposal that I had put forward that would put, immediately, hundreds of dollars into people's pockets to get through the summer; let's pass a permanent middle-class tax cut, $1,000 per family, to offset the payroll tax to deal not just with rising costs of gas, but also rising costs of food, rising costs of prescription drugs; and, most importantly, let's invest in alternative fuels, raising fuel efficiency standards on cars, and let's get serious about reducing consumption of oil, which is the only way that, over the long term, we're going to reduce, we're going to reduce gas prices.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

And where does he plan to find $1000 per family in the federal budget?  I know, let's borrow it from the Chinese -- our kids can pay it back.

I'd really like to see someone take the deficit seriously.  If you want to talk about extending unemployment benefits during the recession, or helping low-income people improve their home insulation, or investments in non-fossil fuel energy, OK let's talk.  But this kind of across-the-board tax cut in the face of huge and growing deficits just seems irresponsible to me.

On topic:  gas tax "holiday" = bad idea.

peace,
lilnev

by lilnev 2008-05-04 09:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

He's offering honesty instead of cynical & disingenuous pandering.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 10:07PM | 0 recs
Is that actually an answer?

by phillybits 2008-05-05 04:48AM | 0 recs
Gas tax holiday is wrong, wrong, wrong

The most important issue to our children's future is climate change.  This sends exactly the wrong message.  There are other ways to save money for people who are hurting.  This is the worst of the worst things to pander about, which is why environmentalists are running from her like she's on fire.

by nwgates 2008-05-04 07:55PM | 0 recs
It's a joke

If she wants to provide relief for struggling consumers then offer a big tax rebate. Period. A gas tax holiday will only encourage the oil companies to raise their prices. They will pocket the difference and the highway fund will get ruined.

As for the windfall profits tax, you are forgetting that such a tax would require President Bush's approval. You think Bush is going to approve a windfall profit tax on oil companies right now? Of course not. So she puts it out there as if it has a real chance of passage right now - and yes, this is about right now and not after January 2009 - knowing that it will never come to pass.

It's pure pandering. When asked to name one economist who thinks it's a good idea, she couldn't name one. Sounds like that Austin politician who couldn't name an accomplishment for Obama. Too bad that Austin politician was not Obama himself.

But I'm sure all the paid HRC-shills like Susan Hu, who never actually post around here, will magically help to launch this crappy diary to the rec. list.

by elrod 2008-05-04 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: It's a joke

Ok remind us again - what's Obama offering up?

by alegre 2008-05-04 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: It's a joke

Obama is offering a Windfall profits tax that goes exclusively to alternative energy research. He's not offering it NOW becuase there's no way Bush would sign such a thing.

That's the other problem - her proposal doesn't have a chance of being passed.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:21PM | 0 recs
Re: It's a joke

And she knows it won't be passed, which is exactly why she's taking this ridiculous position. She can promise voters savings that will never materialize, then when the proposal gets rejected on its merits, she can tell voters that she fought for them but Obama and his pals in Washington shot it down.

by jdusek 2008-05-04 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: It's a joke

 And his $1000 DOES ??
by gunner 2008-05-04 09:15PM | 0 recs
Obama's plan

The exact quote straight from Obama's mouth on today's Meet The Establishment is upthread.

The assertion that he is offering nothing is a LIE perpetrated by LIARS who apparently do not fear risking their credibility by LYING.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:50PM | 0 recs
He's offering the chance to not make things worse.

by Addison 2008-05-04 08:50PM | 0 recs
Re: It's a joke

He's offering not to lie to you just to win some cheap political points. Clearly that's not something you're interested in.

Question: How much do you get paid by the Hillary campaign? Is it more than the $30 she's offering us with her magic tax-holiday? If so, then why should we settle for the $30? I'm going to hold out for what she's paying you.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 10:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

It's a bad way of giving out relief - it benefits those who drive more more than those who drive less.  People do need relief, but not though this methodology.

Furthermore, it might not lower prices (companies might raise them right back). Obama mentioned his Illanois experience, where this happened.

From: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht ml?res=9E07E0D7143CF933A05750C0A9669C8B6 3&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

Q. Mr. President, in light of the fact that OPEC has decided to increase production, do you see it as a mistake for the Senate to proceed with a bill that would suspend the gas tax? And if it reached your desk, would you veto it?

A. Well, I don't expect it to reach my desk because there seems to be bipartisan opposition to it in the House, including among the leadership. But the problem I have with it, apart from what it might do to the Highway Trust Fund and the spending obligations that have already been incurred by the acts of Congress, the budgets, is that I'm not sure that the savings would be passed along to the consumers in addition to that. So I think there are a lot of questions about it.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 07:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

When there's an immediate need to fix a bleed, you put a band-aid first. And then you take care of the problem for the long term.

I think thats quite simple to me.

by optimisticBoy 2008-05-04 07:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

It is very simplistic indeed.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

you can't fix a gunshot wound with a small band aid

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yes. Step one is to send a love letter to the Oil companies:

"Dear Oil Companies, we've lifted the gas-tax temporarily and are taxing you to pay for it. Please just go ahead and raise your prices to cover the difference so that in the end there's no difference in final price. Also, we won't actually be able to tax you because Bush will never sign this--so you get to just pocket the money.

Love, Hillary Clinton"

--------

Got it. What's step two?

by Brannon 2008-05-04 10:17PM | 0 recs
Where is Susan Hu?

Why does Susan Hu recommend every Alegre diary? She hasn't posted a diary of her own since mid-March. Does she get an email from Alegre every time she posts a diary so she can recommend it?

by elrod 2008-05-04 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

"alegre" is basically a joke at this point.  I can only assume he/she/it is a joke with either more than one perpetrator, or more than one account.

by username3 2008-05-04 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

Personal attacks don't help anyone. She is giving her time for her candidate, and we should respect that. If Obama is the nominee, every attack you level will make it that much harder for her to give her time to help him.

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

On the one hand, I respect that (a lot, as it's a huge amount of time).  On the other hand, I believe ridicule may help her get through the five stages of grieving faster.

by username3 2008-05-04 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

It is impolite to ridicule anyone, and pointless to ridicule those who seem to be immune to it. Please keep your powder dry -- there are plenty of Republicans to ridicule once this ridiculous fucking primary is finally fucking over.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

Actually, I think you're wrong, and I honestly believe this kind of attitude contributes to the growing percentage of supporters who declare they refuse to vote for the other candidate.

by TinaH1963 2008-05-05 12:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

She has put redundant cheerleading diaries on the very same topic other people have put redundant diaries on. And she offers pretty much no analysis. Just one lil pandering piece of her opinion " oh obama doesn't understand common folk, hillary does". Oh and her pleas for contributions are comical considering she wants hard working people to donate their 600 dollar rebate checks, or parts of it, when she says with a straight face in other diaries that this 30 dollar rebate is so life saving.

by Pravin 2008-05-05 07:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Where is Susan Hu?

Actually yes - all Alegra's diaries are instantly rec'd by a group that are informed every time she posts a diary - I think it's through a yahoo usergroup.  I have always suspected SusanHu and Alegra are the same person.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-05 03:39AM | 0 recs
If she knows that &quot;windfall profit tax&quot;

won't pass under this president, then why push for a gas tax holiday this summer?

Even if it passes, there will be absolutely no savings for one of two reasons (that come to mind):

1) Supply and demand dictates that because of the lower cost of gas, demand will be up, and prices will go up accordingly (basically erasing the 18 cent relief)

2) If somehow our president decides to mess with his party in a tribute to the good ol' frat days and signs a bill putting windfall profit taxes on oil companies, said oil companies will reward us with an incremental price increase over the summer that will sure as hell put their margins where they should've been without this gas tax holiday.

This is one of those times where doing nothing the right thing to do.

by lizardbox 2008-05-04 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

She listens

Just not to economists.

by jdusek 2008-05-04 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I rather have a president who listens to the middle class than a bunch of academics.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

We do. How's that going?

by jdusek 2008-05-04 08:16PM | 0 recs
Well,

it's really the mega-upper class he listens to, but you're right in regards to academics.

by you like it 2008-05-04 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

However, this is a BAD WAY of helping the middle class. Use a proper stimulus or Tax Cut - don't offer a suspension that mostly benefits high gas users.

What about the people who conserve gas?

by Falsehood 2008-05-04 08:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Good idea, let's eliminate the President's cabinet and just poll the middle class every time an issue comes up.

by mefck 2008-05-04 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Remember it was a bunch of highly educated academics who gave us the New Millenium project. Economics is also the most politicized of all academic fields. So you might make snide remarks but I would rather go with temporary relief of some sort than pay through my nose at the pump everytime I go there.....maybe ask the truck drivers parked outside the Capitol what they think of a gas-tax relief?

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

But that's the thing-this will just increase demand and then increases prices.  So, what relief will we actually get?

by mefck 2008-05-04 08:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Psh, yeah. Economists. What the hell do they know about economics??

by Angry White Democrat 2008-05-04 10:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yeeeeeee-Haaaaawwww.

Damn right. And from now on, instead of going to a surgeon, I'm gonna go to my blacksmith. And instead of listenin' to all those pesky climatologists tellin' us about the globe a warmin', I'm gonna get my climatologizin from Rush Limbaugh.

Science is whatever we want it to be. Yeeeeee-Haaaaaaaaaaw.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 10:22PM | 0 recs
It seems every Obama supporter

is a budding economists now. Too bad your candidate's platforms are high on fluff and low on specifics. I read his energy plan and scratched by head at the lack of specifics. Maybe it is good for people giddy with feel-good feeling and tingling sensations in their legs but these are just heading and sub-headings without broader solutions. I read Hillary's plans and I was impressed by the depth and research. So the budding economists here might call the "gas tax holiday" pander but as I see I stand with Krugman it is not evil and entirely harmless. Plus she gives us alternatives to raise money. Now for the bigger questions: if Obama is shocked by oil company profits why did he vote for the Cheney oil-lobbyist bill and even praise it? Also why doesn't his energy plan outline specifics of how he will address issues with individual enegy industries like Hillary's? The reason BO has no plan. His plan is simple attack any Clinton plan and ride on that. That is Bush-lite.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

It is not just an economic problem.  High Gas prices are what pushed Europe to cleaner running cars.  We need to do the same thing here...so that it is not just "latte-sipping, birkensock wearing," prius drivers...but also soccer moms.

by cardboard 1 2008-05-04 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

 Europe has been able to live with high gas prices fr several years because they have an excellent public transport system, which America lacks altogether. Moreover the "cleaner cars" as you call it is bein held hostage here by oil companies. Maybe Obama should take on these companies instead of voting for their bills and pocketing their money.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

Well we do need a better public transportation program.  We need 17 billion to makes Amtrak equal to Euro-Rail in the NE Corridor.  At least in Scotland, where I've lived on and off, folks buy cars with gas prices in mind...during the SUV surge very few did that here.  That would be money better spent than a break from the tax.  It would give folks jobs for a start, and take cars of the road.

by cardboard 1 2008-05-04 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

well you also have to take into account urban sprawl here versus in the UK. My friends in UK live in the city, they use public transport, over here they would have lived 20 miles off in the suburb and driven to work. The plain fact is none of what you say will be done as long as we kow-tow to oil execs. I believe firmly that Sen. Clinton will stand up to them. Obama from what he has said and his many equivocations over the last few weeks gives me pause.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 08:23PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

I'm not sure what statements Sen. Obama has made recently to help out oil-execs.  However, I believe this is a problem which does not really have to begin with oil companies.  It has to begin with getting off of oil and cutting them out completely.  I believe that a short-term spike in gas prices serves us well in the long run.  I do not appreciate Sen. Clinton so readily dismissing the academy.  I don't work in economics, but in religious behavior... The Bush administration dismissed people's opinion in my field when addressing invading countries and 'fighting' terror - that was a mistake.  I'm rather saddened that Sen. Clinton appears to be doing the same on a number of issues.

by cardboard 1 2008-05-04 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

This is Obama equivocating on pollution standards as told by Krugman:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/opinio n/02krugman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

I wrote about it as well:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/27/1242 21/216

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

Gotcha... I would not, in reply, that Friends of the Earth endorsed him this week.  I worked in a number of coalitions with Friends of the Earth when I lived in DC.  They don't endorse easily

by cardboard 1 2008-05-04 08:42PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter

you say you agree with Krugman well are you sure ?? because if you read the article you would have know he said ..........

"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

keywords :POINTLESS and DISAPPOINTING

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:41PM | 0 recs
Re &quot;cheney oil-lobbyist bill?&quot;

From http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ oily_words.html which is neither a Clinton or Obama source.

"Clinton's ad faults Obama for voting in favor of the 2005 energy bill, which she voted against. She misleads, however, by describing it as "the Bush Cheney energy bill." By the time Obama voted for final passage, many of the Bush administration's original proposals had been stripped out, and in fact most Senate Democrats (including some of Clinton's most vocal supporters) sided with Obama in supporting the bill. Clinton was one of only 19 Democrats to vote against final passage. Obama was among the 25 Democrats who voted in favor.

"It's true, as the Clinton ad states, that the bill "was called a piñata of perks." That was from a Washington Post report from 2005, which discussed criticism of the bill. The ad also is correct to say that the bill was called "the best energy bill corporations could buy," a criticism that came from Public Citizen, the consumer advocacy organization. But it's also true, as we've noted a number of times, that the Congressional Research Service later calculated that the oil and gas industry lost more tax breaks than it gained in the 2005 legislation, resulting in a net tax increase that CRS put at $300 million over an 11-year period. Not mentioned by Clinton is the fact that (as we've noted several times before) the $14.3 billion in tax breaks in the bill included large incentives for alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient cars, homes and buildings"

by shalca 2008-05-04 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems every Obama supporter
God, what a crock of condescension. Believe it or not, most Americans (present company excluded, apparently) recognize when someone is feeding them a line and expecting them to accept it without thinking. Do you really believe the gas tax is so incredibly complex that people who manage to complete 1040s every year can't grasp the intricacies of it? Is "instead of taxing you, we'll tax the people who determine what you pay at the pump and let them charge you more to cover it" really so complex a formula that it takes a minimum of 4 years undergrad to grasp, and is it really that surprising when people realize that such a scheme won't provide them any savings at the pump?

Such an attitude about how smart your fellow Americans are when it comes to their checkbooks strikes me as a bit...well, elitist.

by Jay R 2008-05-05 04:28AM | 0 recs
disband OPEC?

Now that's fluff.  How is that to be accomplished? "Hey, guys, stop setting prices".  Is she going to nuke an oil producer?

by reenactor 2008-05-05 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

For a long time we waited for Gas prices to go up, so that people will press the Auto industry to use fuel-efficient cars.  I think we should be thankful for the gas prices, and I'm actually hoping they go further up.  We need economic relief to low-income and middle-class families in the forms of tax-credits, sb loans, financial aid for students, and housing bail out.  But we ought not push relief through the gas-pump if we truly believe in re-greening our country.

by cardboard 1 2008-05-04 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Why is it that so many HRC supporters are anti-Obama, when even HRC says that if he wins the nom, she'll work her heart out to support him?

by RollinsMan 2008-05-04 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Why are all Obama supporters so anti-HRC, since Obama said if she wins the nomination, he'll work for her?

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Just because we Crtiticize just ONE of her policy's does not mean we hate her

and just because you are a HRC supporter does not mean you have to force youself to like her plans
in this policy you have the right to disagree with some of her policies and you can still vote for her. But don't lie to yourself and tell yourself its a good idea when you know its not

considering it may never even get passed it is a small issue .. she has plenty of good policies you can support and you will still be able to sleep at night. just don't fall for the spin  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

When will we all look at this little exchange and realize how silly all the bickering is? Sigh.

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-04 08:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Are we seriously at the point where the exact same comment gets TRed once, and Mojo immediately after?  The only difference being the candidate's names reversed?  The TR abuse is getting really out of hand.

by coronado 2008-05-05 03:03AM | 0 recs
Obama supporters are unlikable to many

Obama supporters booed the Gov. Mike Easley and the Jackson dinner friday night in Raleigh NC. They go to Hillary Clinton events and then boo her while she's onstage.  They boo anyone who disagrees with them.

They are a bit too incendiary and make false accusations... see the accusations of racism against Bill Clinton in SC. Or the claim by the honorable Rev. Wright that black children learn differently than whites.

Did it ever occur to you Obama supporters, that many good life long democrats have really had enough of this kind of stuff.

by o2befree 2008-05-05 04:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Alegre, is there a single Clinton policy or position that you disagree with?

by jdusek 2008-05-04 08:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Don't be silly.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-05 03:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Another diary where Clinton > McCain > Obama?    

I'm forced to wonder...does anyone around here think for themselves, or do we just blindly support whatever our chosen candidate says, even if it's a ridiculous idea, rejected by economists, and an obvious political pander?  

Americans should be insulted that two of our candidates think their votes can be bought for $30 over three months.

She knows we're hurting and is trying to help us out capitalize on it.

And for that THAT she gets ATTACKED? attacked.

Just needed a little touch up.

by freedom78 2008-05-04 08:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Alegre,
I like a lot of what I read from you, but disagree with Hillary (and you) and the gas tax holiday.

First, this idea was first proposed by McCain and she subsequently adopted it, albeit with a technical change as to financing that is likely over most voters heads. She's being spoken of in the same breaths as McCain, while Obama is garnering separate sentences. Mind you, I'm a Hillary supporter.

Second, the cruel hard facts of our nation's oil consumption are that we use way more than we produce and the weaning process has to start someday. The sooner the better and every American intuitively knows that.

Third, this "last summer" of "cheaper" gas serves no good purpose at the expense of sadly tattered infrastructure. Aging freeways, interstate highways and every bridge across America need repair and postponed maintenance. We lose billions for that purpose by this short-sighted "holiday" .

Fourth, any windfall profits tax of big oil should not be even considered or suggested as a "rebate" to consumers. Such a tax should only be partitioned between infrastructure repair and a full-on Appolo mission of research and development focused on alternative energy solutions.

There's no question. We have to move that way, not toward holiday. It's time we went back to work.  

by RickWn 2008-05-04 08:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Fourth, any windfall profits tax of big oil should not be even considered or suggested as a "rebate" to consumers. Such a tax should only be partitioned between infrastructure repair and a full-on Appolo mission of research and development focused on alternative energy solutions.

Agreed on this 100%.  This speaks to the core of why this proposal is a bad idea.

by you like it 2008-05-04 08:48PM | 0 recs
Alegre, thank you for this good diary.

Hillary is a splendid candidate and your support of her with excellent diaries is a tribute.  We all thank you for your hard work and for your support.

I had heard that the Obama people are really scared and nervous these days and they certainly appear to be.  Sorry, they continue to be hateful rather than to have worthwhile discussions.  It will be a relief when they finally get all of their venom expended so they can go back to their pits.

by macmcd 2008-05-04 08:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Alegre, thank you for this good diary.

Hateful? No worthwhile comments?  Have you read this thread at all - it is full of well reasoned objections to the diary.  I notice Alegra has not responded in any way to the substantive objections raised - only a puerile "yeah, so what is your guy doing ... you're just jealous.." sort of thing you would expect from a 9 year old.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-05 03:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Gas prices need to go higher actually-the federal government needs to tax gas more to discourage driving and then offer bigger rebates to lower income people.

Of course, I would want some kind of exemption for those who drive for a living.

by mefck 2008-05-04 08:30PM | 0 recs
I think I am starting to get it now
The democratic party split between those that have benefited most from our neo-liberal, deregulated economy and those that have not- its so weird how this issue is pointing that out. You cite liberal economic principles as the basis for your argument- it completely neglects any sort of regulated fuel market- which is what HRC is truly getting at with her proposal.
by linc 2008-05-04 08:44PM | 0 recs
huh??????

You cite liberal economic principles as the basis for your argument- it completely neglects any sort of regulated fuel market- which is what HRC is truly getting at with her proposal.

What?!  How is eliminating a tax on gas regulating the fuel market?  You're not making any sense.

by you like it 2008-05-04 08:54PM | 0 recs
You don't know what she proposed
She isn't suggesting eliminating the tax, but shifting it from the consumer to the producer- it is the language of a populist regulator.
by linc 2008-05-04 09:16PM | 0 recs
Oh it may be populist.

In that it's popular.  Income tax cuts are populist too.  That doesn't make them good policy, or particularly progressive.

Her plan isn't either.  Unless encouraging gasoline consumption has suddenly become a progressive goal.  What would Al Gore say?

by you like it 2008-05-04 09:20PM | 0 recs
When did all democrats
suddenly turn into neo-liberals? Is it because all Obama's econ advisers are?
by linc 2008-05-05 07:01AM | 0 recs
Re: When did all democrats

What's so neo-liberal about wanting to stop global warming?  

by you like it 2008-05-05 08:03AM | 0 recs
Its the method
somehow letting the markets control our destiny? That's ridiculous. HRC is advocate and talking about shift the burden to oil companies- every single one of us should be cheering her on. Again, she is ahead of the game, laying the ground work for what will need to happen in the next couple years- brave enough to stick it to the oil industry during an election.
by linc 2008-05-05 08:13AM | 0 recs
There needs to be a WF profits tax.

If that was all that Hillary proposed, I would be in agreement.  

Eliminating gas taxes however, is not brave at all.  It is a pander, and it will deprive us of needed revenue to work for green energy, and repair infrastructure.  What do we get in return?  A few dollars saved (maybe?) and increased incentive for gas consumption.  Forgive me if I'm not jumping with joy.

When did you stop caring about fighting global warming?

by you like it 2008-05-05 08:40AM | 0 recs
It is what she proposed

however, you like the rest of the Obama campaign, are only focusing on the benefit for consumers rather than the burden for producers.

by linc 2008-05-05 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: It is what she proposed

How does eliminating tax on their product and increasing demand burden oil companies?

by catalysis 2008-05-05 02:57PM | 0 recs
windfall profit tax?
did you not see that part of the proposal Clinton supports or are you just listening to Obama ads?
by linc 2008-05-05 03:47PM | 0 recs
either...

you did not read my comment, or you misunderstand me.

She does propose a WF profits tax, as does Obama.  So whoop-dee-do for that.  However, Obama wants to use the money gained to develop alternative energy sources.  Hillary wants to use that money to eliminate the gas tax.  If her plan were to succeed in lowering prices (unlikely) she is essentially encouraging gasoline consumption.

My problem with her plan is the elimination of the gas tax.  So don't try to make this about the WF profits tax.  I'm all for that.  It's the elimination of the gas tax that I disagree with.  That, coincidentally, is the part of her plan that she has been trumpeting.

by you like it 2008-05-05 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: I think I am starting to get it now

what?  How is a gas-tax holiday equated to regulation or de-regulation?  How is putting more federal taxes on gas also?

My comment has to do with a far more over-reaching issue with our energy policy.  We need to encourage development of alternative energy and we need to discourage driving large low mpg SUVs asap.  Otherwise, we'll forever have a screwed up mideast policy based on the availability of cheap gas and oil.

Unfortunately, this is more important than keeping gas prices low for struggling families.  Instead, offer tax rebates so money gets back to them, but not in a way that encourages driving.  

by mefck 2008-05-04 09:07PM | 0 recs
A 200+% increase
in fuel costs hasn't deterred anyone from not driving their SUVs. What HRC is getting at is what needs to happen, a shift from a focus on consumers to a focus on producers- shifting the burden of the environmental/economic impact. Its in the right direction and as much of a pander as it might seem, it is the language and mode of thinking we will need to adopt if anything substantial is ever to occur regarding the oil economy.
by linc 2008-05-04 09:15PM | 0 recs
Re: A 200+% increase

But it has - SUVs are selling at a much slower clip now than before.  This is the right direction.

I look forward to the day when gas is $6/gallon or more.

by mefck 2008-05-04 09:36PM | 0 recs
Re: A 200+% increase

That's going to be really comforting to people like me, who live 50 miles (100 miles roundtrip)from my workplace--for the record, I live in Southern California, where affordable and safe housing, with good schools, is often inversely proportional to good jobs.  I take public transportation every day, but it isn't easy, and it's hard on my family.  

by TinaH1963 2008-05-04 11:48PM | 0 recs
They are still selling
neo-liberalism isn't going to save planet earth- no matter how high gas prices get.
by linc 2008-05-05 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Thanks for your diary and I agree with Hillary on this one.

Obama and his supporters offer no short term solutions to relieve middle class. They look at this as pandering and yet Obama himself voted for holiday tax relief 3 times in IL.

Hillary has stated that as much as 2 billion dollars can be saved over the summer for truck drivers alone. This is significant in providing relief to what is quickly eating into our ever-shrinking incomes.

Hillary is certainly not claiming that this is the long term solution, but it can help.  Here in Cali, it is now over $4 per gallon - I'll take all the help I can get. As a person that travels hundreds of miles visiting branches, my reimbursement coverage is not enough to keep up with the rising gas prices.

Do I wish I had a hybrid? Yes. Do I wish cars had to have a min. of 48 miles to the gallon? Yes. Can this happen over the summer for me? NO.

As she stated today at her TownHall meeting, when the Gov't paid $30 billion to bail out Bears and STerns NO ONE blinked an eye. She wants to help out middle class America and you'd think she was proposing to RAISE taxes for the Oil Co's!!! The way Obama's campaign is reacting.

It really does prove to me just how out of touch Obama and his campaign are with the middle class.

by nikkid 2008-05-04 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

do you receive payment from the Hillary campaign
like Alegre ? are you coworkers?  do you have a number I can call and get a job? I need a work at home oppurtunity? I am really interested please

thanks

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 08:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yes, the Clinton campaign pays me about $3million per month to blog for them.

They do have 2 positions open at this pay, but it doesn't look like you fit the criteria. Sorry.

by nikkid 2008-05-04 09:01PM | 0 recs
:( too bad

I guess I will have to wait all the way until 2016 to apply again to HRC campaign  maybe she will be 45??

hope its ok to use you as a reference then  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

No one lost their jobs with the Bears and Stearns bail out.  There will be job lost with the McCain gas tax holiday.

So is this short term benefit or short sightedness?

by hienmango 2008-05-04 10:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Gotta love the persistent idea that the working and middle class voters are too stupid to understand that this is simply a bait-and-switch gimmick. Us naive rubes simply aren't smart enough to figure out something so difficult as the gas tax, is that it? It doesn't take an economics major to know that a direct tax and an indirect tax both cost the consumer money, and this whole scheme is predicated on the idea that it does. That's pretty damn insulting.
by Jay R 2008-05-05 04:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Someone around here gets it.  Like the oil companies are just going to eat .15 cents a gallon in taxes as a favor to the consumer. And frankly, even if they did, gas prices would probably spike right back up to the previous price levels due to demand.

by belicheat 2008-05-05 06:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Well, that's the other reality at play: gas prices ALWAYS rise in the summer as consumer demand increases, just as fuel oil prices spike in the winter. So not only are gas companies already planning a price increase, but raising their taxes without some form of price control just makes it more likely that they'll raise prices even higher to pass the cost onto us at the pump.
by Jay R 2008-05-05 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Eliminating the gas tax is poor policy and that's that, especially when it comes to helping the middle class.

Numbers figure that this policy would cause the government to lose 9 billion in revenue. A windfall tax sounds like it would pay for it, but that would mean oil companies would have to pay for that 9 billion. That leaves a few options open:

a) Oil companies pass that cost back onto you guys, the people who need it most. Nothing would be achieved. To assume that they wouldn't would be naive and history consistently proves that train of thought wrong.

b) The costs would not be completely covered. If the costs are not completely covered, then the infrastructure budget would HAVE to make cuts. That would be A LOSS OF BLUE COLLAR JOBS. You heard me. People who need financial help the most, hard working Americans, ARE GOING TO LOSE THEIR JOBS.

c) A mix of a and b.

This policy AT BEST will do nothing for the American people and AT WORST cost thousands their blue collar jobs; and that's assuming the wind fall tax even passes through Congress. All signs point to no.

And to say Obama is doing nothing is baloney. Clinton is merely proposing a bill that's getting a lot of media coverage. What about the bills Obama's proposed? Here's a sample:

* S.1151 : A bill to provide incentives to the auto industry to accelerate efforts to develop more energy-efficient vehicles to lessen dependence on oil;

Ignoring his bills and stating that he has done nothing/is doing nothing challenges the fairness of your diary. Both these candidates produced legislation to help out ordinary people. One just had better political timing. To say that the other is not trying at all is unfair on all grounds.

by Mokumi 2008-05-04 08:43PM | 0 recs
And off to the rec list again!

Hilarious. Another silly Hillary candidate diary gets recced even though 2/3 of the people posting vehemently disagree with the diarist.

by elrod 2008-05-04 08:47PM | 0 recs
Re: And off to the rec list again!

well  to be honest I just rec it just so I can trash it along with everyone else and I want to keep this one at the top of the list so everyone can see How serious people take alegre

we DON"T  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 10:05PM | 0 recs
Re: And off to the rec list again!

good point

by hienmango 2008-05-04 10:19PM | 0 recs
It's very simple

Hillary would shift the tax from us to the big oil companies who're raking in record profits, keeping the funds flowing to those much-needed projects.

Is that going to pass? Is that going to get past Bush's desk? No. So Hillary's plan is phony, it's not real, it's as much of a plan as an travel route that has one walking to the moon.

If she wants to help Americans pay for gas, and wants to pay for the roads with windfall taxes on oil companies, her "plan" WON'T PASS, so it WON'T help Americans.

If she wants to help Americans pay for gas, and DOESN'T include the windfall taxes on oil companies, her plan WILL PASS, BUT the roads, bridges, etc. will deteriorate, the states will go bankrupt making up the missing transportation budget, and hundreds of thousands of construction workers will be laid off, (or we'll be in so much pointless deficit spending it would cripple us long term) so it WON'T help Americans.

It's really very simple.

And none of that even begins to touch the fact that the "savings" will be nibbled away immediately by everyone with a hand in the oil cookie jar.

by Addison 2008-05-04 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: It's very simple

The windfall profit tax she is proposing for the summer has nothing to do with the strategic energy fund that she is proposing. Watch her explanation here on This Week:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kChSNgB7e 8c

by nikkid 2008-05-04 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: It's very simple

The windfall tax she is "proposing" for the summer won't pass, because Bush won't sign it. So how is she going to make up the gas tax revenue?

Your comment is an out-of-nowhere non sequiter.

by Addison 2008-05-04 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: It's very simple

So? He's not gonna pass universal healthcare either - does that mean you don't propose it?

by nikkid 2008-05-05 06:24AM | 0 recs
Setting the Record Straight?

alegre, compared to some of the crap spewed across the intertubes, I think you're an excellent writer, but forgive me if I don't see cutting and pasting from Clinton campaign conference calls and HillaryHub as "setting the record straight." It's not impartial, nor is it intended to be impartial.

I don't have a problem with reprinting (any) campaign talking points--they publish them because they want people to hear about them--but let's not treat them as the absolute truth, regardless of which campaign they're coming from.

This isn't setting the record straight, this is tilting the record back in their favor. I fully expect the Obama campaign to send out emails and make ads doing the same.

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-04 08:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I don't get this idea that this tax break will cause a rise in prices. First, the rise in prices has not been based on increased demand for some time. Second, if the windfalls tax is based on profits then should the oil companies raise prices it would result in more taxes which would not help them in the long run.

Also, I don't get the argument that it won't save enough to be worth the effort. It may save the average driver only pennies, but it would save the truckers who drive the average drivers food in a great deal more...get my drift here?

Lastly, the idea that we shouldn't even go there because it cannot be done...'the Repubs will never let it pass', I hear. That is crazy! Why not put them on the spot? Are we to the point where we only fight the fights we can win? That is not the Democratic party I grew up with!

by DemMom 2008-05-04 09:22PM | 0 recs
Not quite accurate

First, although a portion of the rise in oil prices can be attributed to the insecurity in the middle east (see Iraq war and Iran saber rattling), and some of it can be blamed on speculating, a significant portion of the increased price is due to increased demand in both India and China whose economies are growing at a frenetic pace.  People sometimes forget that the oil market is a global one and our gas prices are directly proportional to the price of oil.

As for gas itself, in the short term, the demand generally increases during summer months and our refineries (no new ones have been built in over 30 years) are producing gas at capacity during the summer.  Any decrease in taxes with supply pretty much constant may result in an increase at the pump simply because the market was able to handle the price before the tax was reduced.  In any study done on this type of "tax relief" by the states was inconclusive on whether any savings were actually passed on to the consumer.

As far as a windfall profits tax, take a look at your own income tax.  It's not a flat tax.  The higher your income, the higher your tax rate.  But it's a progressive tax, if you get a raise that puts you in a higher tax bracket you will still make more money after taxes.  Similarly, unless you make the windfall profits tax 100%, the oil companies will make more money by charging more money.

Also, you can't put the republicans on the spot with this.  They also support the temporary repeal of the gas tax, just with no windfall profits tax to make up for it.  So in the end, the issue will be framed as Clinton is framing it now, that democrats are against saving the middle class money.

by shalca 2008-05-04 10:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Not quite accurate

Good points and thanks, BTW, for making them so informatively and free of attack!

I can agree with you on he global increase in demand, however, based on reprts I heard the other day, the increase in demand cannot account, proportionately, for the rapid rise in gas prices. I believe this is why Clinton is pushing the idea that investigation into speculation and investment strategies needs to be launched.

Also, I envisioned the  windfalls tax to be set up as a tool for restricting prices. With appropriate taxing regulation, it seems possible to curb price increase. Limits with increased tax based on prices for instance.

Lastly, I believe that it would be fairly easy to paint the Reblicans as unwilling to support the idea that the oil companies pay the gas tax for the summer. By making the windfalls tax part of the legislation media speak and pushing it in, it would be evident if, the Republicans say they support the gas tax break, and yet they refused the legisation based on the oil company tax, they are soft on oil companies.

by DemMom 2008-05-05 04:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Not quite accurate

We just disagree on the windfall profit tax.  I believe we should have it when it can pass congress, but I just don't believe that it will curb price increases.  The oil companies have their hands tied when it comes to oil prices and refineries aren't cheap to run (the reason we haven't built a new one in 30 years).  Still, we have some of the cheapest gas prices outside of the middle east.  Big oil will simply pass on any increase cost in taxes to the consumer up to the point up to the point the market will bare it.  If at that poing they're not making a large enough profit, they'll simply go out of business.

I also disagree that the Republicans care how they're painted with the oil companies.  The last 8 years shows they're pretty much in big oil's pocket.  Watch how many Bush administration officials just happen to find very lucrative oil company and oil lobbying positions next year.

by shalca 2008-05-05 09:51AM | 0 recs
By the way. . .

I'm shocked that this diary made the rec list, even though I know I shouldn't be.

by shalca 2008-05-04 10:10PM | 0 recs
Hillary Steal's McCain's Idea

Please stop taking credit for the gas tax holiday.  It was McCain's idea and now Hillary is echoing it.

Hillary was asked by George Stephanopoulos to cite an expert who supported the McCain gas tax holiday and she demurred the question and instead went into a diatribe about nothing.

If Hillary couldn't explain how this gas tax holiday really helps the American people, what makes you the expert, Alegre?  Care to cite an expert on this issue?

by hienmango 2008-05-04 10:17PM | 0 recs
Pandering that barely saves $30 for the summer,
if that, and is potentially bad for the environment. Pure, unbridled pandering is all that this "holiday" is.

Gas Tax Math:

  1. An average car is driven about 12K miles per year. That's 1K miles per month. According to answers.com, the average mileage for an average car is 17 miles per gallon. That gives us 58.8 gallons per month for an average car. At 0.184c tax savings/pandering per gallon,  savings from the summer gas tax suspension comes to $32.5 for 3 months. For cars that get higher mileage, say 25 mpg, the figure would be around $22 savings for the summer.

  2. Economists think that the increase in demand is likely to push up gas prices and hence even these small savings may come to naught at the end of the day. Several economists (including Nobel prize winners Heckman (2000), Stiglitz (2001) and Kahneman (2002)) issued this statement (pdf) opposing the proposed tax suspension pandering by Clinton and McCain.

  3. Any increase in consumption is bad for the environment. Al Gore probably doesn't agree with it.

  4. A Gallon of Truth: Obama's gas tax math is correct.


by NeuvoLiberal 2008-05-04 10:23PM | 0 recs
My favorite quote from this diary:
When I saw this I got curious as to what the campaign might have put up on Fact Hub and as usual, they're on top of things with the information I'm looking for

Because the best place to go for facts is the campaign itself.  Right.
by kellogg 2008-05-04 10:25PM | 0 recs
Re: My favorite quote from this diary:

I like this one better:

He says it wouldn't help us if they reduced the price of gas by 18 cents a gallon.  So I guess he figures it wouldn't hurt us if they doubled it then too right?

Truly airtight logic from a dizzying intellect.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 10:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

This whole issue is a political gimmick.

Let Hillary push the McCain gas tax holiday.  Let's see if she can deliver on her promise.

In any case, looks like she is contradicting her pledge to fight global warning with this gas tax holiday gimmick.  

by hienmango 2008-05-04 10:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Wow, some of you have completely gone off the deep end.

Do you realize how fucking ridiculous you look? I am honestly embarrassed to be lumped together with any of you.

NOT A SINGLE ONE OF YOU IS IN A POSITION TO DEFEND THIS HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE IDEA.

NO ONE who KNOWS about how the ECONOMY WORKS supports this! Nothing ANY of you can say makes it a better idea! IT WILL NEVER BE A GOOD IDEA.

Coming here and writing this diary/posting comments agreeing with it is NO DIFFERENT to saying:

"Hillary's cured STREP THROAT!"

....But every person who understands bacteria, viruses, humans, biology, and medicine on any real level has confirmed that she has in fact not cured, and is nowhere close to curing, strep throat.

"It doesn't matter! Fuck all those people who "know things!" Strep throat is cured!"

THIS IS EXACTLY HOW YOU LOOK.

Fucking awful.

by AlexScott 2008-05-04 10:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Oh, so I guess you don't care about all the people out there suffering from strep throat? Don't they deserve bold leadership from someone who won't cave to elite opinion? After all, it is elite opinion that is always keeping hardworking Americans under the thumb of strep throat.

And what is your candidate doing to cure strep throat? Nothing! That's why you're so upset, because Obama talks about hope but does nothing to cure strep throat for those people who have it right now.

Leaders don't wait for permission from experts. Leaders don't need educated people to tell them if their plans are likely to work. Leaders listen to what the people want, and they deliver. The people want strep throat cured. Boom, done. That's our gal.

So call us ridiculous if you want. As James Carville says, Hillary Clinton has three testicles. Apparently you, like the quote unquote experts, have none.

by alvernon 2008-05-05 02:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Hillary's plan to cure strep throat is to hand you a lozenge and then accidently give you her cold.

by jdusek 2008-05-05 03:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Ha, exactly. It's so funny how truly "Stephen Colbert"-ian this all is.

From the famous
White House dinner:

"I'm sorry, I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist, telling us what is or isn't true or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914? If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American! I'm with the President. Let history decide what did or did not happen."

What's terrible is that with this issue, Hillary Clinton has made herself look so bad by essentially saying the same thing. Makes a little ill.

by AlexScott 2008-05-05 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Me*

by AlexScott 2008-05-05 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
What really gets me is that this isn't a very complicated issue. Screw economists, Hillary's supporters are basing this argument on the idea that AVERAGE FRAKKING CITIZENS can't figure out the incredible complexity of "we shift the tax from the consumer at the pump to the people setting the price paid by consumers at the pump, who then raise prices to cover the tax." Does HRC really think that indirect taxation is so elevated a concept that only people who have taken graduate-level economics can understand it, and that someone who does their 1040 at the kitchen table every year will be hopelessly confused?

I took governmental economics courses in college; my wife never took a day of econ after we graduated from our public high school--both of us could understand how laughable this scheme was without a problem. It's just not that complicated.

by Jay R 2008-05-05 04:36AM | 0 recs
Steve Clemons on HRC's gas proposal

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archive s/2008/05/clintons_gas_ta/

It's a bad idea. It's an unforced error. Why?

by obsessed 2008-05-04 10:45PM | 0 recs
The most galling part

...is that Hillary's plan gives a tax break to big oil, not the consumer. What's up with that? This is insane.

by obsessed 2008-05-04 10:48PM | 0 recs
Environment ???

Is anyone bothered by the fact that this stupid gas-tax holliday is helping the idiots that drive Hummers to work ten times more then the responsible people that are driving fuel efficient cars ???

Hillary probably thinks that such a point of view is typical for a silly elitist latte drinking Obama supporter, but how about progresive thinking bloggers on this website ?

by hebi 2008-05-04 11:03PM | 0 recs
Hillaryhub

Couldn't you just link there and save yourself some typing?  Seriously, it's like the Clinton campaign has their own Pravda.

by mikeinsf 2008-05-04 11:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

None of the candidates are offering us "relief" on gas prices.  To be able to offer us relief the government would need some mechanism to control gas prices (regulation), none of the candidates have so far made any statements regarding that.  So none of the cadidates can offer us relief at the pump.

And it is rather absurd, until just recently overall we were reducing American fuel economy by going with less efficient, heavier vehicles.   We have not adjusted our lifestyles to improve the way we use gas, we act like gas prices should be changed to fit our lifestyles.  American's could give themselves relief, by using public transportation, carpooling,  making a decision to live close to work, and walk or ride a bike to get there.

As absurd as the gas tax pander has been. And I certainly agree with every negative thing said about it, what was just as bad.  Clinton chose to "promote" herself by riding around in one of the least fuel efficient vehicles in America and then bemoans the cost of half a tank of gas.  Let us confirm and enable Americans in their wastefulness.  Which  is like showing your "support" of hunters, by showing yourself running around with an assault rifle.

But in the end I do not care much about the price of gas.  I want to know where the ** the affordable electic car is, not some hybrid.   And why it appears the free market has been suppressed in regards to the availablity of non-fossil fuel vehicles.  And if we are fighting wars, and funding terrorists by our reliance on fossil fuels, why arn't the people that keep us dependant treated like the treasonous dogs they are.  And why is Hillary trying to enable by promoting a gas tax holiday? If anything we need to raise taxes on gas, I am tired of the sorry state of the infrastructure in this country.  Why havn't any of the candidates told us the wear and tear from poor infrastructure, and the unwillingness to change our lifestyle, costs us more than higher taxes would?

by Tumult 2008-05-05 12:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

There are two concerns I have with Senator Clinton's current support for the Gas Tax Holiday:

1. Senator Clinton, along with the vast majority of other Democrats, denounced the plan the Republicans put forth a year or two ago to give people $100 to quell the strain of rising gas prices. Remember how it was dismissed as merely throwing money at problem and not helping solve it?

2. Dismissing the experts as "elitists" is the same thing as Republicans dismissing the experts on Global Warming. Senator Clinton will, some day in the future, cite the experts in defending the need to address Global Warming and such attacks on "experts" now will only damage the efforts that so many scientists have made in bringing this vital issue to the forefront.

by GrahamCracker 2008-05-05 02:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

30 dollars is such a huge difference maker , yet you have no problem pleading every single time for people to donate more than once.

by Pravin 2008-05-05 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yep - "Send your refund checks to Hillary (so that she can pay off her debt and pay herself back for that loan with YOUR money)'

by proseandpromise 2008-05-05 04:34AM | 0 recs
Big city liberals like the gas tax where it is

IF you live in a large city the gas tax may not affect you. Chances are you take the subway, bus, or streetcar to work each day anyway. You may not even own a car.

Conservative democrats know better on this issue. WE realize that the price of fuel not only affects the cost of transportation, but it also adversely affects the cost of distribution, and production... i.e. rising fuel costs cause inflation.

Why do people on this site argue in support of the gas tax? Do you want to guarantee a loss in the fall?  Maybe Obama supporters overall are too naive to understand how to win a general election. They only seem to be interested in the primary.

Rising fuel costs are a problem, and unless I'm missing something here, Hillary is the only candidate who has proposed anything to help lower prices. Obama is defending the status quo.

by o2befree 2008-05-05 04:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Big city liberals like the gas tax where it is

You are missing something.  Hillary has proposed a solution to the problem of high gas prices that won't do anything, and may in fact RAISE gas prices.  Obama is not "defending the status quo," he just isn't insulting your intelligence by proposing something stupid.  

This might shock you, but the President has no control over the price of gas.  It is controlled by three factors, supply, demand, and speculation.  As long as demand continues to outstrip supply, prices will go up.  As long as our domestic refineries are running at 100% capacity, prices will go up.  As long as global turmoil (read: IRAQ WAR) continues to unease investors, oil futures will continue to rise in price.  All of this leads to high gas prices at the pump, and almost none of it can be controlled by the President.

And to be honest, this is a wake up call for America.  We have enjoyed artificially low gas prices for a long, long time.  This is the true cost of oil, get used to it.

by belicheat 2008-05-05 09:44AM | 0 recs
Give me a fucking break

$30 this summer is not going to make or break it for me and the loss of jobs is just not worth it.  

http://www.calitics.com/showDiary.do?dia ryId=5775

That's the claim from the American Road & Transportation Builders Association, which has a study showing how the gas tax cut will affect jobs in each state.

The assumption the AR&BTA is using is that the tax cut would blow a $9 billion hole in the federal transportation budget. Based on FY 07-08 expenditures CA's share of that would be $664,406,924. The association then estimates that 23,107 jobs would be lost here in California - roughly equivalent to the proposed school layoffs - over the next three years.

It's bogus and it is ridiculous.  I understand that she plans to tax gas companies for their "windfall" profits but at the same time, yes, it makes me angry that she's echoing a proposal from the fucking Republican, again.

by Ellinorianne 2008-05-05 04:50AM | 0 recs
How do you spell relief? P-A-N-D-E-R.

Hillary's gas tax relief proposal amounts to paying about $25 for votes. That's what the relief amounts to, and in return the funds for this vote-buying scheme will be taken from the highway trust fund, decreasing public safety and putting off needed infrastructure repair.

No matter how much Hillary rails that she'll pay for her pandering with a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. She has zero chance of passing a windfall profits tax before becoming President, so this amounts to $25 for your vote now, which which she may pay for sometime in the future.

Reminds me of Wimpy, in the old Popeye cartoons. "I'll gladly pay you on Tuesday, for a hamburger today."

by Travis Stark 2008-05-05 04:52AM | 0 recs
Her Gasoline Reduction plan won't be passed

before she's sworn -in next January either.

Politics is a Rough Game.

Mr. Stark, what's your Experience running for Office, or Operating a Campaign?

by ROGNM 2008-05-05 01:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Her Gasoline Reduction plan won't be passed

Actually, I have run a campaign, and run for and won local elected office, in which capacity I served for 6 years. You?

But that assumes your question is relevant. What's relevant is a candidate running using the Republican assumption that all voters are stupid, and that you can show them a nice shiny quarter a day for 3 months and in return they'll vote for you. Normally that's a Republican tactic, but this time Hillary's joined with McCain to not only use the same tactic, but for her to validate McCain's nonsensical pandering policy.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-05 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Anyone, Mr. Obama, who misrepresents the facts and distorts the truth to win a point, as you do, deserves to lose. Obama, go home and try to be a senator, though it's questionable that you won that job fair and square any more than you're trying to win a new job fair and square.

by LA 2008-05-05 04:57AM | 0 recs
Obama gets the award for pandering

His idiotic college tuition tax credit is $5,000 right?  Talk about buying votes -- here's the reason younger voters skewed so heavily toward Obama over Clinton.

So people don't want to pay college loans anymore huh?  
If you don't want to pay for college, then don't go to college! Its pretty simple.

by o2befree 2008-05-05 05:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama gets the award for pandering

I hope that's a joke.

by belicheat 2008-05-05 06:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

It will never happen, and Mrs. Clinton knows it. I really do think she made a big mistake calling out other Dems on this issue.  It won't help her with the superdelegates to force the elected officials to vote on something they know George Bush will only veto if it ever gets out of committee.

by Kyrial 2008-05-05 05:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I have lost so much respect for this site.  It's one thing to support Hillary Clinton.  It's another thing to follow her so blindly that you jump to get in line behind even the stupidest of policies.  The gas tax is a stupid policy, everyone knows it.  Even a majority of Americans are smart enough to realize it's a political stunt that won't benefit them in any meaningful way.  

It's fine that you support Hillary, and it's fine that you want to back her up.  But don't just go repeating Howard Wolfson's talking points as gospel.  At least dignify us with an attempt to show some separation from the mouthpiece of her campaign.

by belicheat 2008-05-05 06:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight

Thank God some Obama supporters haven't lost their everlovin' minds in the blogosphere, because God knows, the vast majority of them have doused their brains in the inflammable Kewl-Aid and set those cells on fire and danced around the flames in frenzied delusion.

Big Tent Democrat isn't one of them.  

Thinking is no longer a part of the Left blogger process anymore. Inflammatory false smears are all the rage. Three points: First, is Obama NOT going after "conservative" Democratic voters? Heck, "conservative" voters period. Isn't that what the Unity Schtick was all about? Second, it's wonderful that the gas tax holiday, a stupid political gimmick to be sure, is now intended for "conservative" voters. Is there any basis for that statement? Of course not. And we all know that the $600 "stimulus" rebate that ALL Democrats supported was a pure policy initiative. My gawd, did all Left bloggers just fall of the political turnip truck?

http://www.talkleft.com/

by Tennessean 2008-05-05 06:30AM | 0 recs
False generalization by Armando.

"ALL democrats" did not support the $600 pander, though it passed Congress fairly unanimously.

For example, this Democrat sees it for what it is, a meaningless short-term and overall unhelpful election-year gesture.

However, the two measures are quite different in nature.  A "gas tax holiday" is guaranteed to run up the price of gas so that after it's over, consumers will pay more, and Bush will never sign a windfall profits tax on oil companies to compensate the highway trust fund.

I would have been less critical of a direct per-person subsidy in the form of an additional "tax rebate" calculated to offset 90-days' worth of an average driver's Federal gas tax, as it 1) wouldn't open the door for oil companies to raise the price in a hidden manner, 2) wouldn't drain the highway trust fund, and 3) would be immensely less expensive to execute, as it's cheaper for the IRS to just print checks for everyone than to impose upon thousands of fuel distributors the cost of adjusting their systems TWICE in 90 days, and on the IRS to adjust its collection systems TWICE in 90 days, to accommodate a temporary holiday.

by tbetz 2008-05-05 03:58PM | 0 recs
This time I disagree with Alegre

I like Sen. Clinton, I support her long term energy initiatives, and I respect the hard work Alegre brings to her/his usually effective advocacy in diaries.  On this issue I disagree with the diarist and with Sen. Clinton.  This pander disturbs me greatly but is not sufficient to result in withdrawing my support for her nomination.

First, Clinton is incredibly smart and knows that the funding mechanism for her tax holiday, sticking it to the oil corps, has precisely 0.00% chance of passing this year given McConnell and Bush.  Therefore her plan is either a total sham and she knows it or it is really a plan to implement a cut without identified funding, aka the McCain plan.

Second, this plan is pander not relief.  Two reasons beyond the fact it will not become legislation.  The first is most poorer folks, a group that includes me and those in my community, need relief beyond the scale provided by this plan. I am poor enough that 20, 30, 40 dollars would definitely make me happy.  But it is not going to change my life.  It does not rise to level of "relief" even if it were implemented.  My vote and our future cannot be bought so cheaply.  The second reason is that the relief will not be realized at anywhere close to even these levels because the oil corporations will consume most of the "cut" by failing to drop prices, especially if it is paid for by tapping their profits.  Thus the Clinton plan at best is to take away and give back to oil corps, all while parading about as the second coming of William Jennings Bryan.

Third, it is bad policy.  This has been covered so I won't revist familiar terrain.  But it is really, really bad policy on both economic and environmental grounds.

Fourth, how bad?  Well what would we think of a plan to parade around extolling the virtues of a "relief" plan to send 50 bucks to every American, a la a mini version of the Bush rebate?  We would think that plan pretty silly in terms of the rhetoric of "relief".  As we should.  And that plan is better than her actual plan.  Should tell us something.

Five, I think Clinton is overplaying this elite-vs-common person narrative she spun yesterday morning.  I believe the underlying point and strongly believe the "average American", whoever we are, has been ill-served by policy and political elites insulated from our reality and who as a group will never experience the pain their decisions cause.  However, when not a single so-called expert from anywhere on the political spectrum finds merit in the proposal, to proceed not just without pause but at greater intensity in the name of populism crosses over the line into extreme anti-intellectualism.  And to equate elite unanimity on this issue to the last seven years of Bush rule is patently offensive because, among other reasons, there was not uniformity of elite opinion across the entire academic spectrum on the key Bush initiatives.  If anything on issue after issue after issue, Bush has explicity rejected or suppressed oppositional perspectives from experts in their respective areas.  At the EPA, at FDA, at Treasury, at DOD, at CIA, at NIH, and on and on and on in favor of a tiny self-interested few.  The signature character of the administration is not to embrace the educated elite en masse but to reject them in favor of a few when it comes to questions of policy evaluation.  I am of course not claiming Bush is anti-elite or a populist.  I am saying he is anti-elite opinion on policy when it differs from his political and policy objectives.  In that respect, on this issue alone, Clinton's approach echoes that of Bush.  That, too, should tell us something.

by Trond Jacobsen 2008-05-05 07:12AM | 0 recs
I Didn't Know About the Windfall Tax

...but that actually makes this a worse idea than it was before.

If she were simply eliminating the gas tax and not paying for it with anything:

1) The government would suffer the lack of revenue
2) The decrease in cost would increase demand, causing the price to increase again (although probably not quite as high as it was)
so
3) The government would have a money shortfall BUT people would pay a slightly lower price at the pump for a short time

If however she's passing it on as a windfall tax, the oil companies will just raise their prices to make up for it so:

1)  The governments revenue will not change

  1.  The price at the pump will not change (again the oil companies will simply increase their prices to offset the windfall tax)
  2.  The oil company's profits will increase slightly on the margin

Nobody wins but the oil companies.  I appreciate that the Senator is trying to champion people who are hurting from energy costs... but this is just a non-starter.  She needs to find a more logical way to make herself stand out.

by TooFolkGR 2008-05-05 07:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax
Thanks Alegre- I could use the extra few bucks! I can not imagine trying to decide between milk for the kids and gas to get to work! All our kids are grown and gone and we go NOWHERE except to work. If there are errands they get done on the way to or from work.
We are at the point where soon we will be going to a church closer to home because of the price of gas. SAD, we have been members of our parish since moving to PA ten years ago.
by ProudMilitaryMom 2008-05-05 07:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

You realize that prices will not go down if you charge oil companies the gas tax instead.  They will pass the tax onto their distributors, and the distributors will pass it along to you, the consumer.  It's a giant shell game.  You won't even save a dollar in all likelihood.

by belicheat 2008-05-05 09:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

It doesn't fix anything though.  Gas prices will go right back up at the end of summer only IF they don't stay the same anyway which most everyone agrees they will.  I mean, how is this any different than McCain saying "I will mail you a check for 30$ if you vote for me"?

by kasjogren 2008-05-05 12:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

well maybe you need to get get rid of the internet  first before you file for bankruptcy.

by wellinformed 2008-05-05 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

I hope when you're driving doing errands the bridge you're driving over doesn't collapse because there's no money to fix it and no money to pay someone to fix it

by feliks 2008-05-05 01:46PM | 0 recs
all of these pro clinton diaries

prove that there isn't one good point beyond the very superficial "she's trying to save us money."

not one piece of evidence that the oil companies won't jack up their prices.  not one piece of evidence that the windfall tax will pass.  sad.

by ab03 2008-05-05 10:34AM | 0 recs
The gas tax holiday is a con.

Hillary's cynically promoting this con job, but she hasn't proposed any legislation to enact it.  Why?  Because she knows it's a bad idea.

She's playing the rubes for all they are worth. It's pure pandering to the economically ignorant.  Her smarter supporters know that's what she's doing, and are ashamed to admit it, or are willing to go along to avid her wrath for disloyalty.

I will predict that Hillary will not introduce gas tax holiday legislation in the Senate before May 25, one week before Memorial Day, and she'll blame the Democratic leadership for blocking it when it fails to get voted out of committee.

by tbetz 2008-05-05 10:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Can someone help me? I would like to post something with a pic...but dont know how to make the picture come up in the diary. how do you do it?

by boxer4hrc 2008-05-05 10:50AM | 0 recs
To reiterate

"I'm sorry, I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist, telling us what is or isn't true or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914? If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American! I'm with the President. Let history decide what did or did not happen."

I posted this above just now as a reply to someone else, but I wanted to post it again so its clear how ridiculous Hillary Clinton is being with this.

That quote is from Stephen Colbert.  The parallels are astounding and sickening.  I wish Bill would step up and do something about this.

by AlexScott 2008-05-05 11:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

It makes me kind of sad that any Democrat would be behind this idea.  Especially one of Senator Clinton's caliber.  I am half expecting the MyDD crowd to get behind repealing the capital gains tax and capping income tax at 150k per person.

by kasjogren 2008-05-05 12:34PM | 0 recs
The good news about voters

A CBS poll asked "Why do some candidates want to lift the gas tax?".

The good news is that the voters replied:
To help average Americans - 21%
To help themselves politically - 70%

I reckon that outside of the bunkers in the blogosphere the voters can see things very clearly.

by My Ob 2008-05-05 12:39PM | 0 recs
Scientific Poll, Or Web-Pole?

Hah!

by ROGNM 2008-05-05 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

"Hillary really does understand what working folks and families watching every penny worry about "

If that's the case, why did she vote for a war that is costing each and every one of us $1721/day?
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costof war_home

and why, in 2005, did she agre with McCain on a long-term presence in Iraq?  Her words:
"Senator McCain made the point earlier today, which I agree with, and that is, it's not so much a question of time when it comes to American military presence for the average American; I include myself in this. But it is a question of casualties," said Clinton. "We don't want to see our young men and women dying and suffering these grievous injuries that so many of them have. We've been in South Korea for 50-plus years. We've been in Europe for 50-plus. We're still in Okinawa with respect to protection there coming out of World War II."

Yeah, she understands.

by haystax calhoun 2008-05-05 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Using a conference call By Wolfson as your MAIN source is kind of funny. Now he's UNBIASED!the gas tax holiday is PANDERING....no 2 ways about it..the candidate herself can't even produce ONE UNBIASED economist who agrees with her on the merits of the proposal.

by feliks 2008-05-05 01:44PM | 0 recs
What's to Stop Big Oil from Raising Prices??
Nothing. They will, and consumers will see no real benefit from this pander as a result. That's exactly what economists predict, and exactly why they don't support this ridiculous McCain idea. Clinton wants to tax oil companies to pay for a tax break that will benefit oil companies. It will accomplish nothing, and will spend billions of dollars of windfall profits tax that could have gone for something meaningful, like alternative energy investment that could REALLY reduce gas prices.
by OaktownDad 2008-05-05 02:24PM | 0 recs
Hillary says that the experts don't matter.

I've heard that from Bush's admin for far too long.

That alone should give people pause here. She would have gained a gret deal of cred had she abandoned the idea. But then she wouldn't have a fake club to hit Obama with.

by Mike S 2008-05-05 02:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Incredible, unfathomable amount of pure fucking bullshit in this post.  Every god damn economist says it's a bad idea.  Should we seriously believe a politician over a scientific expert??  This raw, naked pandering for votes is (almost) right up there with scaring Americans by showing bin Laden's picture.  It's just about that pathetic.

Unfortunately, Hillary knows that many voters (but probably not enough in this case) are completely dumb and will not be able to figure out what a scam this is.  THOSE are the voters who she goes after.

You really have to ask yourself why Barack Obama continues to blow Hillary away in the category of college-educated voters.  I'll give you a hint: it isn't because they're "elitist" or some other equally worthless excuse.  Maybe their edumacation really did make them smarter/wiser.

Think about that for a minute.

by 08AMA 2008-05-05 03:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Yeah, it's one thing to support the pandering tactic - ALL politicians do it.  But to shine it up and try to sell it to the savvier netroots is sort of idiotic, to say the least.

Here is a legitimate question that I have:  Even if Hillary has her way, what makes folks think that the Oil Co's won't just pass the tax through to the customer?  This is still a capitalistic society, ya' know!

by ILean Left 2008-05-05 03:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Setting the Record Straight on the Gas Tax

Hey, I have an idea.
Learn to spell.

I can't wait to save a whole $18 dollars this summer from Hillary's plan!
What a great long term fix!

Pull your head out of your ass.

by broncoelway 2008-05-05 03:43PM | 0 recs
What us white working class voters really need.

We should pass a law setting the price of gasoline at $1.40 a gallon.  Why?  Because that's a nice price for gasoline.  I liked it when gasoline cost that much.  Sure, some pointy-headed E-CON-OMIST will try to tell us that wouldn't work, but I say, balderdash!  

I eagerly await Obama or some other candidate to be first to rush to my alternative plan, the cheap gasoline for everybody plan.  

"Every gas-guzzler a KING!"

And, oh yeah, I want to ABOLISH global warming.  From henceforth, it is illegal to warm the globe.  Anybody found warming globes by the fire will be horsewhipped and forced to pump $1.40 gasoline for FREE.  I want a law saying so on my desk FORTHWITH or it's balderdash to all of you.  BALDERDASH I say!

by Dumbo 2008-05-05 07:23PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads