epistrophy

Only in Hillaryland, where being greeted on a runway by an 8-year-old girl is portrayed as landing amidst sniper fire, could Obama's "bitter" comment, taken in context, be interpreted as showing a lack of concern; if anything, it demonstrated just the opposite.

Here's what immediately led into the "bitter" line, which idad, reading from the Hillary camp's talking points, has distorted beyond recognition (sniper fire, anyone?):

Novelisto

Thanks for keeping on raising the tone, there, I-dad.

Well, as for me, Sen. McCain's plan sounds pretty much the same as the usual Republican line of 'buy it now, pay for it later...or better yet, have the grandkids pay for it." Sen. Clinton sounds as if she's echoing McCain but, in her usual wonky fashion, adding a ton of baroque embellishments to obscure the fact that she is echoing the Republican talking-points yet again. Sen. Obama is saying 'no, that's not what the country needs right now.' Gosh, nice to see somebody who doesn't pander or jump on bandwagons but who takes a thoughtful, long-term view.

A $30 dollar a person gas-tax break isn't going to buy my vote any more than the $300 tax rebate did. Besides, I've got a Prius which is getting between 45 and 50 mpg when I drive it, which isn't often.

poetsheart

I think the purpose of this thread is to (hopefully) have a civil, substantive discussion on this issue. Repeated postings dripping with sarcasm, and which are obviously meant to antagonize, are frankly counterproductive. Once someone feels they have to jump in to "defend" a candidate's character, the discussion is sure to veer away from topic, and devolve into yet another snipe fest. Is it possible to have just one thread that refrains from vitriol? It's going to be a looooong election season, no matter who the two candidates facing off in the fall happen to be

poetsheart

What about her proposals merely echo Republican talking points? Which points would those be? I have to give her props for outlining specific proposals. It shows she's put considerable thought into the problem (which is an admittedly complex one).

btw, I've never seen where providing fuel cost relief for low income families has ever been any kind of "Republican talking point". Have you?

interesteddad

Of course, here we have a candidate fudging the truth...and even more disturbing...undermining the record of the only two-term Democratic President since Franklin Roosevelt.

Job growth was significant in the United States under the last Democratic President. Real wages for the middle class increased.

interesteddad

Really? When was the last time a Republican proposed taxing oil company profits?

We are paying the price for the 2005 Cheney/Obama energy bill that was loaded to the gills with giveaways to the energy companies, including Exelon, the country's biggest coal/nuke outfit, whose water Obama was carrying when he voted for the bill.

poetsheart

I give up...

epistrophy

Idad, trying to keep the tone here civil and sarcasm-free (per previous requests), Obama wasn't "fudging the truth." You are changing the subject, conflating two different topics.

Clearly, Obama was focusing here on a specific sector of the economy - small towns in the Midwest and the East, where many residents had long relied for employment on jobs, in industry and manufacturing, that no longer exist. Your response? To offer statistics concerning the country as a whole.

Even assuming that your statistics are correct, it's of little comfort to an unemployed factory worker in Pennsylvania that someone who answers the phone for a living in Arizona just got a raise.

And Obama cannot be faulted, much less accused of "fudging the truth," because his apples don't look like your oranges.

1sokkermom

I think Interesterddad is very very bitter. He was silent for a long time and now he is back with a vengeance as the end is in sight for his candidate.

As for the gas tax issue, I agree that the proposed temporary "relief" is just a campaign talking point for McCain & Clinton and will really do nothing in the long run to solve the problem.

originaloog

JM and HC both pander bears on this one.

Novelisto

Did she come up with the 'gas-tax holiday' thing before or after McCain? If it's after, then she's jumping on a band-wagon with him. She's already said he'd make a better president than Obama and has borrowed language heavily from right-wing attackers, including those who have attacked her viciously in the past. O'Reilly? Scaife? Please, Sen. Clinton, find some dignity!

And those who will benefit most from this 'holiday' proposal are the oil companies (artificially lowered prices equals higher use which puts more money in Big Oil's pockets), not the poorer among us. And that, sir, is a most beloved Republican activity, not merely a talking point.

vicariousparent

Obama supported the gas tax holiday in IL, but when it didn't work, he realized that it was folly. I want a President who is willing to learn.

Obama denounced Wright's statements while giving Wright himself the benefit of doubt. When Wright came out this week repeating ludicrous claims including questioning Obama's rejection of Wright's statements, then Obama had to take the gloves off.

I liked Obama's handling of both those moves, and apparently so did some key superdelegates.

Hondu

Idad, I agree with another poster that you sound rather BITTER. Try to look at the Big Picture. By removing the federal tax, gas prices will be lower and consumption will go up. That's not the direction America wants to go in. We want to reduce consumption.

interesteddad

Hondu:

Ha. You assume that I care about a gas tax, vacation or not. Good luck to Obama hitting the airwaves with advertising that he's opposed to lowering the cost of $4 a gallon gasoline the weekend before the NC and IN primaries.

Another classic example of beltway Democrats being tone deaf about the struggles of average Americans. As if Americans are going to run right out and buy MORE gasoline at $3.80 a gallon instead of $4.00. Hopelessly out of touch. Windsurfing? Or take a ride in the Army tank again?

At least Michele is in touch with struggles of the working people. I understand she spent yesterday talking about what a hardship it is for her family to spend $10,000 a year on extra-curriculars and summer camp for her kids.

Bailey21

Take a look at the taxes these oil companies are paying -- another beloved Republican activity? They actually have rather modest profit margins (far less than Microsoft for example) and have the highest tax rates. Exxon just paid $9.3 billion in worldwide income taxes in the first quarter of 2008, representing a 49% tax rate on its gross income of $20.2 billion.

Exxon: Profit Pirate or Tax Victim?