August 1-2, 2008
Aug 01 05:21 Sen. Salazar, We The People Object Aug 01 12:33 Rep. Bachmann Steps Forward Aug 01 17:51 Great Politics Makes For Great Political Theater Aug 01 23:38 Obama Changes Mind On "Limited Drilling" Aug 02 11:15 No Explanation Needed Aug 02 12:54 Properly Skewered Aug 02 15:16 Obama vs. Obama vs. Obama Aug 02 18:49 LFR Comment Policy Aug 02 19:36 Obama Chickens Out of Town Hall Meetings
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Sen. Salazar, We The People Object
Everyone who drives a car or cares about the US economy needs to see this appalling video:
Sen. Ken Salazar told Colorado's voters that he wouldn't be a partisan if they elected him. That alone should've told them that he's a bitter partisan. Despite those warning signs, they still elected. The next time he's up for re-election, though, he'll have to explain to Coloradans why he voted against drilling on the OCS, even if gas reached $10/gallon. Salazar went so far as to call the provision a "phantom solution." I find that characterization disgustingly innacurate. in fact, I refuse to believe that a United States senator is stupid enough to believe that. What I find entirely plausible is that Sen. Salazar believes drilling will provide relief at the pump but he and his Senate colleagues don't dare say that in public.
We The People won't accept Sen. Salazar's refusal sitting down. The Democrats' obstructionist tactics are something that we'll oppose. We'll fight their obstructionist tactics because it's hurting our wallets.
Most importantly, it's time to tell Washington that they work for We The People , not the other way around. If this batch won't listen, we have a golden opportunity to replace them this November.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2008 5:24 AM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 01-Aug-08 09:23 AM
Garry I think you missed a way that Colorado is already paying him back even though he's not up for reelection until 2010. Colorado was consider to easily be an Obama state and the democrats were easily going to pick up the Republican senate seat. The polls instead of being very lopsided are close. And with my count of six senate seats that might go Democrat this November this will be a very big one to take off that list of six!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Rep. Bachmann Steps Forward
While El Tinklenberg was making his swing through the Sixth District's alternative energy shops, Michele Bachmann put together legislation that would give tax incentives for alternative energy development:
Specifically, this bill would accelerate tax depreciation to 3 years for investments in newer, cleaner, and more efficient energy technologies. By encouraging greater investment in solar, wind, geothermal and more, these alternatives become a bigger part of our arsenal of energy options more quickly. And a diverse arsenal of solutions will decrease our dependence on foreign oil and curb our gas costs.It's nice that Mr. Tinklenberg went on this tour. It's important that Rep. Bachmann put this legislation together. It's the best way to incentivize investment in alternative energies.
According to a study by the nonprofit, nonpartisan American Council for Capital Formation, investments in alternative energy experience less favorable tax depreciation rules in the U.S. compared to many other countries. My legislation will put America on better footing globally and take us one step closer to increasing our domestic energy production.
Talk is fine but Rep. Bachmann is a leader. The question before Sixth District voters is whether they want a talker or a leader. I suspect that this isn't a difficult decision for most MN-6 voters.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2008 12:33 PM
Comment 1 by anokacountyred at 01-Aug-08 02:15 PM
Well said!!!
Comment 2 by anokacountyred at 01-Aug-08 04:16 PM
Please use Elwyn instead of El, much more respectable! LOL
Michele Bachmann means business and I applaud her efforts!
Great Politics Makes For Great Political Theater
Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic brethren adjourned the House for the next 5 weeks. The bad news for them is that Republicans refused to leave, causing a major media opportunity to highlight Ms. Pelosi's Politburo mentality. Here's Rep. John Shadegg's quote on Ms. Pelosi's strongarm tactics:
"The speaker wouldn't let us have the five-minute speeches because she didn't want the day dominated on the floor by speeches pointing out she has not allowed a vote on a single measure to permit greater oil exploration for the past two months. This is our answer to the Orange Revolution and our modern day Boston tea party."Ms. Pelosi obviously underestimated the Republicans. It's equally obvious that Ms. Pelosi attitude's is that of a dictator. In fact, here's what the Politico is quoting Rep. Thaddeus McCotter as saying:
"This is the people's House," said Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.). "This is not Pelosi's politiburo."Ms. Pelosi has ruled the 110th Congress with an iron fist. Now that style has returned to bite her. She's a little tyrant.
I'll be mightily surprised if this isn't THE NEWS STORY of the night. Here's a great Mike Pence quote :
While Democrats have privately decried the breakdown in order, Republicans defended the protest. "You are not witnessing a revolt," said Rep. Mike Pence. "You are witnessing democracy in action."Ms. Pelosi has been a picture in desperation, if not abject failure. She's tried blocking the GOP's legislation that would increase oil exploration and production. The overwhelming majority of people polled agree with the GOP on this issue. (BTW, if Republicans want to reach out to moderates and independents without abandoning their principles, this is the vehicle.)
Check out Kevin Brady :
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), who was on a plane headed home, went back to the Capitol, walking on to the floor dragging his luggage. He got a standing ovation.Rep. Brady deserves a standing ovation for his actions. (Did I mention that this is great political theater?)
The bottom line in all this is that Democrats are heading back to their districts where they'll be confronted by one angry voter after another. By the time they return after the conventions, the job approval rating for Democrats will be in the low single digits.
In one of the most delusional pieces of sping, Ms. Pelosi's spokesman, Nadeam Alshami, insisted that Republicans weren't leaving for fear of having to face angry voters :
"Republicans are too scared to go home to face their constituents after voting against bills to force Big Oil companies to use it or lose it, demand that the president free our oil from the government stockpile and crack down on speculators," Elshami said. "In a week where Exxon Mobil made the largest quarterly profits by a U.S. corporation, Republicans are staying in Washington to argue that Big Oil deserves more taxpayer lands."Someone should tell Mr. Alshami that the 'Big Oil' boogeyman won't work this time. When the national average of gas hit $4/gallon, people decided that drilling had to start and the OCS had to be opened up for leasing. Poll after poll shows that almost 75 percent of people favor the GOP plan of opening up the OCS. Even Gov. Charlie Crist now favors drilling off the Florida coast.
I've said it before and I'll repeat it again: Ms. Pelosi has a tin ear when it comes to PR. I'm convinced that Ms. Pelosi thinks that they're winning this debate. That's why, barring something extraordinary happening, she'll be stunned when the election results start rolling in this November.
By 2:00 PM, in what resembled newsreels of the packed House floor on the day war was declared in December of 1941, the House floor was almost full. More than 400 visitors were in the gallery and Shadegg, having figured out the code on the panel that controls the microphones, put the sound system in the House back on, until a staffer (presumably from the speaker's office) came and shut it off again.Let these people know that you appreciate them standing up for us. If these people will stand up against the Democrats on this important issue, then it's our responsibility to fill their coffers so they can win races all across the nation and retake the House.
"Word spread that the speaker, who was never actually here on the floor, was going to shut down the House press gallery," a breathless Shadegg told me in a call from the floor, "But rules are clear that the gallery can't be shut down if a Member is there. So a bunch of us have been taking turns, we're 'human shields,' keeping the press gallery going." Along with Shadegg, the 'human shields' included House GOP Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.), and Texas Reps. Ted Poe and John Carter.
The Democrats have handed us a golden opportunity this election cycle. We can't afford to not make the most of this opportunity.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2008 11:21 PM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 02-Aug-08 11:46 AM
You know Nancy has problems when it's causing a ripple effect of damage to the Democrats.
The Colorado senate seat which I resigned myself to being lost has a good chance to be won now because Udal had promised not to adjourn until an energy bill was voted and Pelosi to win the one vote recess shut off debate before Udal who had flown back to Washington got a chance to vote. He not only has to deal with the recess, but he has a very embarrassing nonvote that will haunt him.
And Obama has started to say that he is for drilling.
If Obama has gotten the message the Democrats might want to vote for a bill this year to try to take the issue off the table.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 02-Aug-08 12:29 PM
Walter, Stay tuned on the Obama drilling thing. There's alot more to this than just a routine flip-flop.
Obama Changes Mind On "Limited Drilling"
Earlier this week, "The One" was caught on tape saying that "If everyone were just filling their tires and getting regular tuneups, you could actually save just as much." Here's that video:
Seeing that this is a PR disaster, Obama has flip-flopped on drilling :
"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post.We shouldn't take him at his word. Less than a month ago, he said that it wasn't $4 gasoline that bothered him so much; it was just that prices jumped too quickly.
"If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage-I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done."
Supplies didn't suddenly tighten. Prices didn't suddenly spike. All that happened was that Sen. Obama saw this issue standing between himself and the White House. When you analyze this, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the biggest difference between Sen. Kerry, Vice President Gore and Sen. Obama is that Sen. OBama is a better speaker. He is their equal in terms of flip-flopping, though.
This quote is extremely telling:
"Like all compromises, it also includes steps that I haven't always supported," Obama conceded. " I remain skeptical that new offshore drilling will bring down gas prices in the short-term or significantly reduce our oil dependence in the long-term, though I do welcome the establishment of a process that will allow us to make future drilling decisions based on science and fact."Why doesn't Sen. Obama think that increasing supplies will lower prices? The fact that he questions the principles of supply and demand tell me that he isn't qualified to make decisions on the economy.
It's obvious that Sen. Obama is unprincipled. It's also obvious that he doesn't have a list of accomplishments that tell people he's qualified for being the leader of the free world. What he's asking voters to do is to hope that he's up to the task. Trusting a novice to the most important job in the world isn't wise.
Trusting a novice prone to changing his mind with the opinion polls is too big a risk for a country at war.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2008 11:41 PM
Comment 1 by The Lady Logician at 02-Aug-08 09:38 AM
He is partly right. Short term drilling will not bring the price down MUCH, but in the long run it will bring the price down a lot.
This remark (and several others made by Democrats) is telling. They are ONLY looking for immediate solutions. This is not an immediate solution issue - this needs long term planning!
LL
No Explanation Needed
According to this Newsmax article , Pelosi spokesguy Brendan Daly is telling Republicans they've got some 'splaining to do:
Brendan Daly, a Pelosi spokesman, told The Associated Press said Republicans "should go home to their districts and explain their record of obstructing common-sense proposals to address the pain at the pump being felt by American consumers and businesses."I'd suggest to Mr. Daly that Republicans don't have to explain their votes on the Democrats' "common sense proposals" on energy because the Democrats haven't put together any common sense proposals. Let's review some of the Democrats' "common sense proposals":
- Democrats proposed suing OPEC.
- Democrats proposed creating a massive windfall profits tax for the oil companies.
- Democrats proposed a redundant use it or lose it bill.
"The New Direction Congress led by Democrats has offered real solutions to bring down energy costs," her spokesman, Brendan Daly, said. "But a majority of Congressional Republicans have voted no each time. They should go home to their districts and explain their record of obstructing common-sense proposals to address the pain at the pump being felt by American consumers and businesses."I'd pity Mr. Daly for being put into an impossible situation if he wasn't well compensated. Mr. Daly's job is to spin Speaker Pelosi's disastrous 'New Direction' agenda. He's paid to say that his boss's statements make sense even when they don't.
The Democrats haven't proposed real longterm relief. For that matter, Democrats haven't proposed anything that would supply short term relief, either. When the Republicans introduced the American Energy Act, they spoke directly to supplying both short- and long-term relief while transitioning to a more efficient use of our energy resources.
It isn't just the House Democratic leadership that's to blame on this either. Rank-and-file Democrats haven't lifted a finger to sign any of the discharge petitions that Republican have for their various energy bills. Instead of standing up to Ms. Pelosi's tyrannical rule, rank-and-file Democrats have stayed obedient to Ms. Pelosi.
What does it say when the American Energy Act would get upwards of 250 votes in the House if it got an up or down vote but 19 Democrats won't sign a discharge petition to give it that vote? That's a despicable display of cowardice by Blue Dog Democrats. Blue Dog Democrats like to portray themselves as moderates. Yet their track record on energy issues shows little difference.
When have these Blue Dog Democrats defied Ms. Pelosi on energy legislation? They haven't that I've seen. If that's the case, why should we trust these so-called moderates? Don't the Blue Dog Democrats' actions speak for themselves?
Posted Saturday, August 2, 2008 11:16 AM
No comments.
Properly Skewered
Captain Ed has a great post up showing why we shouldn't trust Sen. Obama's supposed conversion to the pro-drilling side. Here's a video of Obama from Springfield, Missouri:
The time difference between his speech in Springfield, Missouri and his Florida flip-flop was 48 hours.
Why the switch? Here's what I said in my post about Obama changing his mind:
Supplies didn't suddenly tighten. Prices didn't suddenly spike. All that happened was that Sen. Obama saw this issue standing between himself and the White House.While it's true that Sen. McCain changed his mind on drilling on the OCS, that change took 18 months, not 48 hours. In those 18 months (roughly speaking), prices spiked dramatically and the economy sunk significantly because of high gas prices. I'm betting that most people would say that McCain's shift was logical. I'd bet the ranch that most people would have difficulty giving justification for Sen. Obama's 48 hour 'transformation'.
It isn't difficult making the case that Sen. Obama's 'transformation' has more to do with polling in Florida showing people approving of offshore drilling than it has to do with economic principles or conditions.
Originally posted Saturday, August 2, 2008, revised 18-Aug 11:07 AM
No comments.
Obama vs. Obama vs. Obama
The more that Barack Obama talks about energy policy, the more he sounds like a John Kerry flip-flopper. In this McClatchy article , Sen. Obama says that he's most worried about high gas prices:
Obama made his comments in St. Petersburg during an interview with the Palm Beach Post. "My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," he said.It wasn't that long ago that Sen. Obama said he wasn't worried about the price of gas, just that it shot up too quickly:
"If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage, I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done," the paper quoted Obama as saying.
Obama drew McConnell's notice on Wednesday after he commented about a question of whether Congress was actually working to keep prices from falling.Notice how the June version of Sen. Obama is talking about helping "people make the adjustment."
"I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocketbooks is not a good thing. But if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment, first of all by putting more money into their pockets, but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more quickly, particularly US automakers, then I think ultimately, we can come out of this stronger and have a more efficient energy policy than we do right now," Obama said Tuesday.
That's a far cry from the late July version of candidate Obama. That version of Obama is suddenly populist.
Today's Obama is more nuanced:
If it is part of an overarching package, then I am not going to be rigid in preventing an energy package that goes forward that is really thoughtful and is going to really solve the problem.Got that? John Kerry said he voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it. Obama didn't mind high gas prices before he didn't like high gas prices, which was transformed into a more nuanced drilling policy.
The question I have for sensible undecided voters is simple:
Do you want to vote for someone who's comfortable saying whatever he thinks people want to hear and who isn't tied to any particular policy position? Or would you rather vote for someone who can explain why he's changed his mind on the energy issue?
Posted Saturday, August 2, 2008 3:17 PM
No comments.
LFR Comment Policy
During the last 24 hours, I've deleted a bunch of comments. That's because they fell into two categories:
They either contained vulgar comments or they were personal attacks or they made accusations without offering proof. This is unacceptable behavior and it won't be tolerated.
Let's be clear about this: If you disagree with my commentary, feel free to disagree with me. If you disagree with other comments left to my posts, disagree with that, too. There's one stipulation if you're going to disagree, though:
If you disagree, back it up with proof.If you can't argue logically, I'll ridicule you mercilessly. If you cross the line, your comment won't last long. THAT'S A GUARANTEE.
Posted Saturday, August 2, 2008 6:49 PM
No comments.
Obama Chickens Out of Town Hall Meetings
In May, Sen. Obama said that he'd debate John McCain about foreign policy "anytime, any place". Now he's decided that he won't debate John McCain regardless of time or place. When Sen. Obama was shooting his mouth off, here's what he said:
Today, Obama responded with anger and forcefulness, while criticizing Bush's "failed" policies abroad and hammering McCain for supporting them. "They're trying to fool you. They're trying to scare you. And they're not telling the truth. And the reason is they can't win a foreign policy debate on the merits, but it's not gonna work. It's not gonna work this time and it's not gonna work this year," Obama told voters in Watertown, South Dakota. "If George Bush and John McCain want a debate about protecting the United States of America, that's a debate I'm happy to have, anytime, any place, and that is a debate that I will win, because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for," he said.Sen. Obama's tone in that quote is that of supreme confidence. Notice the difference in tone in this campaign statement:
In a letter to the commission, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said the short period between the last political convention and the first proposed debate made it likely that the commission-sponsored debates would be the only ones in the fall.There's a reason why he won't participate in those town hall meetings. We've seen a pattern of Sen. Obama saying things off the cuff that make no sense. His line about inflating your tires and getting your car tuned up on a regular basis is a perfect example of this. His advisers must cross their fingers anytime he's away from a teleprompter because he's a disaster waiting to happen.
"We've committed to the three debates on the table," campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in an interview. "It's likely they will be the three appearances by the candidates this fall."
Before anyone says that he did fine in the Democratic debates, I'd suggest that he didn't. It's just that he didn't do worse than the others sharing the stage with him. During most of the debates, Hillary didn't know how to attack him.In the early debates, he didn't have to worry about Joe Biden or Christopher Dodd or John Edwards. They were intellectual lightweights.
If you'll recall, he had several awful performances once the field was pared to just he and Hillary. I recall the ABC debate when he gave one atrocious answer after another when Charlie Gibson asked him about capital gains tax policy. He started by trying to tell how doubling the capital gains tax was sound fiscal policy. When that failed, he said doubling it was a matter of fairness.
I can't blame Obama's handlers for this decision. I wouldn't want to risk him saying something that would expose him.
Posted Saturday, August 2, 2008 7:37 PM
Comment 1 by Chuck Hyde at 02-Aug-08 10:12 PM
Gasp, are you trying to say he wasn't being straight? I think your right, the debates are going to be tough on him. The other part of the debate that is going to be interesting is how he does keeping straight his different opinions. At some point he's going to be put on the spot for say, the surge. There is no good answer to this question for him. It'll be interesting seeing him trying to stumble through this.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 02-Aug-08 11:24 PM
Chuck, You've just nailed it!!! It's like the old saying that it's easier to tell the truth. That way, you don't have to remember which version you said to which person.
You're better off thinking things through first, then holding to that position unless conditions change.
Clearly, Obama hasn't thought alot of issues through. That's why he's changed positions as frequently as he has.
The perfect illustration is how he went from calling drilling a Republican scheme to saying he'd be ok with drilling if the drilling was done in a thoughtful way to saying that he's ok with drilling if it's done in an environmentally thoughtful way AND if it's part of a comprehensive energy policy in a matter of 60 hours.
If I'm Obama's handlers, I'm frightened any time he wanders off script. It's just that simple.
Comment 3 by Walter hanson at 03-Aug-08 12:08 PM
You know earlier this year I was so worried about how Obama was going to clean the clock of the Republicans in the debate. Man I was so wrong. You could take the worse candidate we had in our field and they can clean his clock. Man those debates might kill Obama since god forbid he might be asked real tough questions.
Sean Hannity for debate moderater!
He's a no hold bars for asking tough questions of everyone. Oh he works for Fox.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
