Political Courage - WashPo Editorial
In this morning's editorial from the Washington Post there is a frank discussion of the Political Courage required to actually oppose a measure that tactically and reflexively makes sense during the $4/Gallon Gas "crisis" in favor of a strategic and pragmatic approach to solving the root problem.
In short:
Mcain/Clinton = Tactical, Reflexive, Short-sighted
Obama = Courageous, Visionary
Makes me wish that we would stop talking about electability and more about the character and disposition necessary to be a good president. I realize that this is impossible given the state of political discourse... but what a difference that would be.
In short:
Mcain/Clinton = Tactical, Reflexive, Short-sighted
Obama = Courageous, Visionary
The best we can hope for is that politicians, especially presidential candidates, will avoid exploiting the issue for short-term political advantage. Alas, that hope was not warranted in the case of Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has followed Republican John McCain in recommending a suspension of the federal gas tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
We have to agree with Sen. Barack Obama, the only candidate who has refused to play this game. "It's not an idea to get you through the summer," he said. "It's an idea to get them through an election." His opponents no doubt hope that Mr. Obama's stand will prove to be political suicide. We think it qualifies as political courage.
Makes me wish that we would stop talking about electability and more about the character and disposition necessary to be a good president. I realize that this is impossible given the state of political discourse... but what a difference that would be.
Advertisement
All politicians pander but they're supposed to do it subtly. McCain and Clinton are so obvious that it's quite painful to watch.
May 1, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
A rare favorable comment from the normally pro-McCain Washington Post.Even Krugman gave Obama credit on this.
I think the substance of Obama is starting to show to some skeptics. Supposed policy expert Hilalry is unmasked as a economic novice or sellout. McCain is a no-ideas clown who goes for gimmicks.
May 1, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really, he did? Now that I want to see. You have a link?
May 1, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you want the Krugman link?
It's here:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/gas-tax-follies/
May 1, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks!
May 2, 2008 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great tip, qtip!
May 1, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanx!
May 1, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's a terrific video by Laurence Lessig comparing the characters of Clinton and Obama; I encourage everyone to watch it and pass it along:
http://blip.tv/file/647623
May 1, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great Video! Thanks!
May 1, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a great video! I think this should be a post in itself... more people deserve to see this.
May 1, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I saw it back in Feb. when it was new. Coulda sworn it was linked from a TPM blog but can't find it now.
Lawrence's arguments are very persuasive.
May 1, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank the Maker for Lawrence Lessig.
May 1, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
There were so many moments of doubt that plagued me, but this video articulates precisely my very strong feelings for Obama's candidacy and every troubled thought I had about Hillary Clinton. Brilliant!!!
May 2, 2008 1:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Outstanding video. Very compelling.
As I get ready to attend my Congressional District Assembly / Convention tomorrow, I find Laurence’s soft spoken, insightful reasoning very helpful. When talking with my fellow Democratic delegates, both in the Clinton and Obama camp, I will be mindful of Laurence’s approach. My goals; to do my small part in bridging a growing divide within our party while, hopefully, expressing compelling reasons why Obama is the best Leader for our nation.
After posting this, I’ll print fifty or so business card size html links to Laurence’s video. I plan to hand them to whoever will take them. For the Obama supporters I’ll say, “Here, please watch this and pass it on.” And to the Clinton delegates I’ll respectfully ask, “Please take time to view this video. Don’t compromise on your convictions, but see if the video rings true. In the end, if Obama is OUR Democratic candidate, please support him as enthusiastically as you do now Hillary.”
Thank you for the post / link!
May 2, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is not an economic novice. And even if she was, she has advisers to explain the implications. I'm not a basher (most of the time) but I think that there is something to be said that, given the hard facts, she still came down on the wrong side of the decision in favor of something else. That to me is telling in a candidate.
May 1, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
For goodness sake, even she opposed the idea in 2000 when her Senate opponent proposed it. She might tell you it was because his wasn't "paid for", but that is not the critiqued being offered by virtually everyone who knows something about the issue.
May 1, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't need a PhD in Economics to figure this out. All you need is 3rd grade math. If $3.79 is your problem, $3.61 is not a solution. She knows better - she just doesn't care. It's spelled D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-I-O-N.
May 1, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
To use an annoying phrase of the right:
Gas tax holiday = A holiday from reality.
May 1, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish I could remember the column from a few days ago where the author contacted a series of economic and environmental analysts from the right, center and left, and couldn't find a single one who thought this plan was a good idea. They all thought it was an awful plan. When Howard Wolfson was asked to cite an analyst who supported the plan, Wolfson changed the subject.
May 1, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've seen several articles and blog posts that list where the "experts"--mostly economists--stand on this, and they all side with Obama, none with Clinton/McCain. I like Obama's new ad about it in Indiana, but I wish they would include some of this meta-analysis in the ad, because you can't expect the average voter (and I'm including myself here) to be able to figure out who is telling the truth about the impact of a gas holiday on the market and for consumers.
This would be a nice one from the WaPo:
And maybe he should take out that bit about it only saving you about half a tank of gas and instead point out that it might not save you anything, if increased demand raises the prices.
May 1, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly! And the Oil companies raising their prices to pay for the Windfall tax will make the point moot or even worse when the gas tax is reimplemented. And all the indirect costs in collecting a windfall tax, as well as the fact that inflation will make the money we do raise from windfall taxes worth less than the original gas tax would be worth, as well as the fact that there will be a postponement of infrastructure repairs, all show it will actually costs taxpayers more in the long run. If you cut the gas tax, you have to cut something else to pay for it or add to the deficit, which we can't afford right now.
A lot of people think this is about helping low income workers. You help low income workers not through half-baked, short-term, bad policies that actually hurt them in the long run, but through long term economic and development programs designed to create a strong economy and infrastructure. It ain't easy and this type of policy doesn't help.
May 2, 2008 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was in HuffPo:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/30/expert-support-for-gas-ta_n_99474.html
May 1, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now if only they had woven the former pastor whose name no longer rhymes with "light" but now "lit" into the editorial, this would be the headline on the news.
Talk about your straight talk.
Chris Matthews still beating the carcass of the former pastor.
May 1, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, great! This is the message I try to communicate to bring people to Obama's camp. I don't seem to do it so eloquently.
May 1, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, in reply to beckyleeprice. Still trying to figure out how to do this right at TPM.
May 1, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
ARGH!
HILLARY HAS BECOME MY BALL AND CHAIN! SEND THE WENCH BACK TO SLICK WILLIE!
OR I'LL HAVE HER WALK MY PLANK!
ARGH!
May 1, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dumb as We Wanna Be
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/30/opinion/30friedman.html?em&ex=1209873600&en=6d49b7ee458a2f8b&ei=5087%0A
May 2, 2008 2:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
A superb Friedman column. I can't believe I've put those four words together in the same sentence either. His statistic about our decline in solar technology is absolutely damning -- down from 40 percent of the world market share in 1997 to eight percent now, and most of it produced for foreign markets.
Our politicians have traded a world-beating economy for belief in the tooth fairy.
May 2, 2008 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's been saying this sort of stuff forever. People don't give him enough credit.
May 2, 2008 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
The only problem with the article is that many of the readers of this site "get it" but do the voters of Indiana and NC get it. How many read the WAPO?
I think this gimmick is one reason the DNC and Dem controlled Congress is weary of Hillary and her campaign.
Obama and others need to pound this into the heads of IN & NC voters. Also the 1992 Clinton Campaign on Youtube... where they call Hoosiers "shit" and "White Ni***ers" loop that shit. But will MSM squash it?
May 2, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
May 2, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think I've read those (or else my crappy memory's acting up again). Do you have links?
May 2, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink