Shaking Hands after the Game

[If you don't like sports analogies about the election, you'll want to skip this.]

When you have been at Washington State University as a student, as I have, or when you are here at Oregon, as I am, you learn to dislike the Washington Huskies - it's part of the culture. Not just cheer against them, but really, really, dislike their coaches (Neuheisel was not my favorite person), awful fans with their pompous attitudes (one of whom spit on my daughter when she was playing in the band for UCLA), their really bad school colors, everything about them. They share the feeling about us.

But I noticed that whenever the Huskies play outside of the conference, especially post-season tournaments and bowl games, I root for them. Always. It's the same with any Pac-10 team - no matter who they play, I support the Pac-10 team. Why is that? Is it tribalism?

In a sense, perhaps, but I think self-interest is at work. The conference is rated by how well we do when we play teams from other conferences, and when any Pac-10 team destroys an opponent from outside the league, particularly one that is highly touted, it makes the whole league look better - it gives you extra pride in your own team (if that is a source of pride for you, it's not exactly clear why we should care at all who wins these games). In economic terms, there's a positive externality for all the other teams in the league (and sometimes money too, lots of it, if there's revenue sharing, there's better recruiting, and so on).

The presidential primary is like crowning a league champion, and the election in November is like the World Series or Super Bowl matching the champion from each league. During the long, drawn out regular season and league championships, key players can get hurt, sometimes from cheap shots from the other side, there are bad calls in key games, players and coaches sometimes cheat, all sorts of things happen that can infuriate opponents and their fans. The whole process of selecting a champion can bring great disappointment at times, and all but one team will end up frustrated by the process.

Not everyone can put it all aside after the regular season and root for the Huskies, some people simply hate the Huskies no matter what and are happy to see them lose any time, any place (and, without hoping for this, if a team has to blow an important game outside the conference and become the league goat, may as well be them). But most do put it aside, it least that's how it seems to me.

It's not easy to do. If you are in the finals for your league and lose, it's not easy to support the team that beat you when they are in the championship game even though they are in your league, and even though you will look better for having lost to the champion than to have lost to the second place, losing team. If they beat you due to acts by their players or coaches that violate your sense of fair play, it's not easy to forgive and forget.

But you learn to do it. You learn to battle as hard as you can during the game, to do what's needed to get an edge, but once it's over you shake hands, say nice game, and leave it all behind. It's a ritual we make kids do starting with their very first organized sports games. After it's over, they line up, shake or slap hands as the lines pass, and say (or mumble as the case may be) nice game, good game, nice game, way to go. Sometimes it's begrudging, and you can see it, but you do it. With the election, I'm starting to understand why we force people to go through this ritual, it somehow helps, and it stays with you later when you face other tough battles outside of sports.

It's hard not to blame a loss or a personal failure on bad calls by the umpires, the other team playing unfair, a teammate's mistake, the weather, bad luck, the unfair media, whatever. The list of reasons for losing is endless, and it's always something other than getting beaten by the other team because of not being ready to play up to capability. It's always something else.

If you really beat another team, decisively, then one or two bad calls won't matter. Go into the bottom of the ninth four runs up instead of tied and that ball that was called fair (which was clearly foul) wouldn't have mattered, it wouldn't have even happened. Close games are the hardest, and where it's easiest to place the blame for losing on other things. Some small event or set of events will suddenly take on great importance to the defeated team and be used to explain the loss. But that's how battle is when the stakes are high, it's always tough, feelings are always hurt, someone always loses and hates the unfairness of it all.

You are taught, and expected, to play as hard as you can and not to give up no matter how lop-sided the score is. You keep playing just like you would if the score was tied. Only quitters give up. But there is a difference once the score becomes lop-sided. If it's truly a blow-out to the point where the outcome cannot be in doubt, then stealing second in the top of the ninth is a good way to get knocked down the next time you are at the plate (even if it's a different game, pitchers are expected to remember these things). Square to bunt, and the pitch goes at your ear (or that inescapable spot just behind and below the shoulder blade). It would be completely different in a close game, so there are informal rules of conduct, and the rules change once the outcome is known. For example, if it is the league championship game, doing something unnecessarily aggressive that injured a player on the other team making them unavailable for, say, the Super Bowl would bring great resentment, perhaps unforgivably so.

There are also lessons here, I think, for the candidates. We understand that the heat of battle is a tough place to be, and it doesn't always bring out the best in us. Within bounds, and with a bit of time to get over it, we can forgive and forget and fall behind the winner. But once the game, for all intents and purposes, is decided it's different. In a blow-out, the loser still scraps as hard as possible - you never know and everyone admires someone who still beats out a ground ball from hustle when they are losing badly - but the limits on how that determination not to give up can be expressed are much more restrictive. Avoidable injuries to players on the winning team are particularly frowned upon.

But winners have responsibilities too. If you have already won the game, show boat dunks, parading after a home run (another way to get knocked down the next at bat), dancing after a touchdown or on the opposing teams mascot painted on the center of the field, running a squeeze play to score one more run, throwing a long pass after a trick play, that sort of stuff is likely to produce people who just want the Huskies to lose even when they play teams outside the Pac-10. And it's not just players and coaches, same goes for fans of the winning team, rubbing it in simply creates bitterness. You already won.

I don't know what any of you are going to do in the November election, and it may be that transgressions from the regular season are unforgivable to you, I don't know. But the league championship is about over, and when the Democrats play the Republicans this fall in the Championship game, I'm voting for the Democrat. No doubt about it.

Comments

[Bruce Webb]

Well as a Cal Bear exiled for the last fifteen years to the heart of Huskyland I know exactly where you are coming from. It helps to understand that under Pac 10 rules all receipts from Bowl Games and NCAA Basketball tournaments are split evenly among all teams after expenses (though admittedly after expenses sometimes there is not much left over). And conference ratings are important. But as to the specifics I have found the following useful:

"I love the Huskies. I just hate the Husky fans." Oddly enough even Husky fans recognize the essential justness here.

[Petter]

I think Obama supporters don't have to be this tactful as an post-struggle reunion pledge. It might backfire as pretending to be the more noble part, which has irritated the opposing side to begin with. Just say there's a common enemy and that's it.

[anne]

''I'm going to marry you, whether you like it or not.''

-- Lorrie Moore

[swells]

While I can understand the position of supporting the party's nominee, whomever that may be, there are people who won't do that. I'm one of them. I'm really, really picky about voting. I simply cannot vote for someone who doesn't exhibit the qualities I think requisite.

In short, none of the above has been my decision for a long time. This election is different. There is one candidate that I will vote for assuming he gets the nomination.

[2slugbaits]

Having grown up in Chicago and being a Cubs fan, I know something about disappointing sports teams. I still have a hard time forgiving the '69 Mets, but in my head I know that with a 3 man starting rotation and only two mediocre relief pitchers (Ted Abernathy and Phil Regan), a late summer pitching collapse was all but inevitable. The difference is that with sports teams there's always next year, but in Presidential politics you generally only get one serious bite at the apple. That simple fact of political mortality undercuts a lot of the positive externalities that might come from seeing your local rival win.

One snarky comment. I'm not sure anyone from the Univ of Oregon should be deriding other teams for "really bad school colors." ;->

[save_the_rustbelt]

Anne: who is Lorrie Moore (pardon my ignorance)

Clinton and Obama will become buddies when Ohio and Michigan fans hold hands and sing Kum-bah-yah.

[hari]

Mark's analogy is not bad at all. Obviously he's been trying to digest the stuff we threw at each other yesterday - and he's come up with a sequel to Pac-10 Championship....

Come Nov there is one only choice to make; namely, to make sure America finally comes to grips with its on-going decline. If GOP belives in using the mounting deficit to strike at Dems concept of a *social contract* ever coming into being, they must be put to rest this time.

I'd go so far as to suggest that there is a redeeming aspect to the current tactical struggle between HRC/BO - a woman and an Afro-American - contesting for POUS which was not actually conceived in the original US Constitution.

I've no idea who will hit the *bye-bye-baby* homerun (Giants fan I've been since 1956)! What happens in Nov is another/different ballgame...we shall have a chance to witness it, I'm confident.

[Paul R. Dorasil]

I wonder if there are loyalty differences between parties. After a primary election, is a Republican supporter of a losing primay candidate more or less likely to fall in line behind the primary winner than his or her Democratic counterpart? A number of things would influence this. For example, a Ron Paul supporter is less likely to support McCain than a Huckabee supporter. I suspect that there is also a difference between the parties. Specifically, I suspect a Republican is more likely to fall in line with a Republican than a Democrat is to fall in line with a Democrat.

What kind of data would one need to test for this statistically?

[Barry]

Mark, this does assume that the losing team from the conference was not deliberately trying to sabotage the winning team's shot at the final championship.

says...

Living in SEC country, you come to realize that no amount of player malfeasance, be it bar room brawls, weapons charges, drugs, alleged recruiting violations, fathering of multiple children to multiple girlfriends, DUI's, nonattendence to classes, charges of theft, and booster improprieties, any or all involving multiple players can alter the endearment of the Seminole fan for his beloved team. Not coincidentally , a Republican stronghold.

says...

Living in SEC country, you come to realize that no amount of player malfeasance, be it bar room brawls, weapons charges, drugs, alleged recruiting violations, fathering of multiple children to multiple girlfriends, DUI's, nonattendence to classes, charges of theft, and booster improprieties, any or all involving multiple players can alter the endearment of the Seminole fan for his beloved team. Not coincidentally , a Republican stronghold.

[anne]

No; I am not going to be shaking any hands other than those of friends any time soon. I understand now with complete clarity what I did not properly understand even a few months ago, much to my regret, which is the extent to which a disdain for women is part of the make-up of supposed progressives. I understand, and know how to deal with this personally but am not about to excuse this broadly.

Just as only a few years ago, I noticed so many, many progressives turn to stay at home warriors, I am not about to forget. I have problems with policy pretense and I am not about to pretend policy that is destructive to my understand is actually benign. I am not on the soccer field now, and I had my limits then as well.

says...

http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/09/20/specials/moore-writer.html

March 3, 1985

How to Become a Writer Or, Have You Earned This Cliche?
By LORRIE MOORE

First, try to be something, anything, else. A movie star/astronaut. A movie star/missionary. A movie star/kindergarten teacher. President of the World. Fail miserably. It is best if you fail at an early age - say, 14. Early, critical disillusionment is necessary so that at 15 you can write long haiku sequences about thwarted desire. It is a pond, a cherry blossom, a wind brushing against sparrow wing leaving for mountain. Count the syllables. Show it to your mom. She is tough and practical. She has a son in Vietnam and a husband who may be having an affair. She believes in wearing brown because it hides spots. She'll look briefly at your writing then back up at you with a face blank as a doughnut. She'll say: ''How about emptying the dishwasher?'' Look away. Shove the forks in the fork drawer. Accidentally break one of the freebie gas station glasses. This is the required pain and suffering. This is only for starters....

The writing professor this fall is stressing the Power of the Imagination. Which means he doesn't want long descriptive stories about your camping trip last July. He wants you to start in a realistic context but then to alter it. Like recombinant DNA. He wants you to let your imagination sail, to let it grow big-bellied in the wind. This is a quote from Shakespeare.

Tell your roommate your great idea, your great exercise of imaginative power: a transformation of Melville to contemporary life. It will be about monomania and the fish-eat-fish world of life insurance in Rochester, N.Y. The first line will be ''Call me Fishmeal,'' and it will feature a menopausal suburban husband named Richard, who because he is so depressed all the time is called ''Mopey Dick'' by his witty wife Elaine. Say to your roommate: ''Mopey Dick, get it?'' Your roommate looks at you, her face blank as a large Kleenex. She comes up to you, like a buddy, and puts an arm around your burdened shoulders. ''Listen, Francie,'' she says, slow as speech therapy. ''Let's go out and get a big beer.''

The seminar doesn't like this one either. You suspect they are beginning to feel sorry for you. They say: ''You have to think about what is happening. Where is the story here?''

The next semester the writing professor is obsessed with writing from personal experience. You must write from what you know, from what has happened to you. He wants deaths, he wants camping trips. Think about what has happened to you. In three years there have been three things: you lost your virginity; your parents got divorced; and your brother came home from a forest 10 miles from the Cambodian border with only half a thigh, a permanent smirk nestled into one corner of his mouth.

About the first you write: ''It created a new space, which hurt and cried in a voice that wasn't mine, 'I'm not the same anymore, but I'll be O.K.' ''

About the second you write an elaborate story of an old married couple who stumble upon an unknown land mine in their kitchen and accidentally blow themselves up. You call it: ''For Better or for Liverwurst.''

About the last you write nothing. There are no words for this. Your typewriter hums. You can find no words.

At undergraduate cocktail parties, people say, ''Oh, you write? What do you write about?'' Your roommate, who has consumed too much wine, too little cheese and no crackers at all, blurts: ''Oh, my god, she always writes about her dumb boyfriend.''

Later on in life you will learn that writers are merely open, helpless texts with no real understanding of what they have written and therefore must half-believe anything and everything that is said of them. You, however, have not yet reached this stage of literary criticism. You stiffen and say, ''I do not,'' the same way you said it when someone in the fourth grade accused you of really liking oboe lessons and your parents really weren't just making you take them.

Insist you are not very interested in any one subject at all, that you are interested in the music of language, that you are interested in - in - syllables, because they are the atoms of poetry, the cells of the mind, the breath of the soul. Begin to feel woozy. Stare into your plastic wine cup.

''Syllables?'' you will hear someone ask, voice trailing off, as they glide slowly toward the reassuring white of the dip.

Begin to wonder what you do write about. Or if you have anything to say. Or if there even is such a thing as a thing to say. Limit these thoughts to no more than 10 minutes a day, like sit-ups, they can make you thin.

You will read somewhere that all writing has to do with one's genitals. Don't dwell on this. It will make you nervous.

Your mother will come visit you. She will look at the circles under your eyes and hand you a brown book with a brown briefcase on the cover. It is entitled: ''How to Become a Business Executive.'' She has also brought the ''Names for Baby'' encyclopedia you asked for; one of your characters, the aging clown-schoolteacher, needs a new name. Your mother will shake her head and say: ''Francie, Francie, remember when you were going to be a child psychology major?''

Say: ''Mom, I like to write.''

She'll say: ''Sure you like to write. Of course. Sure you like to write.''

Write a story about a confused music student and title it: ''Schubert Was the One with the Glasses, Right?'' It's not a big hit, although your roommate likes the part where the two violinists accidentally blow themselves up in a recital room. ''I went out with a violinist once,'' she says, snapping her gum.

Thank god you are taking other courses. You can find sanctuary in 19th-century ontological snags and invertebrate courting rituals. Certain globular mollusks have what is called ''Sex by the Arm.'' The male octopus, for instance, loses the end of one arm when placing it inside the female body during intercourse. Marine biologists call it ''Seven Heaven.'' Be glad you know these things. Be glad you are not just a writer. Apply to law school....

[anne]

"You spend too much time slouched and demoralized. Your boyfriend suggests bicycling. Your roommate suggests a new boyfriend."

That was me, explaining though I do not feel obliged to explain being in the sort of mood I am enjoying being in, but that was me above....

[hari]

Anne - that's what's known as *detachment* in oriental philosphical terms.

Even Darwin twiddled with concept of detachment between species....some are carnivorus and other's (more or less) cannibalistic, me thinks!

Don't forget your devotion to *genetic deviation* - it might one day redeem the *gender* beast in our (global)society. Since I was brought-up by a great Matriach, including my Granny, I venture to say thou shall inherit the earth!

[Francois]

"the extent to which a disdain for women is part of the make-up of supposed progressives."

Quid?

What about all those people who support Senator Clinton? They're not real progressives? Or are they the only real progressives?

As for those who attacked Sen. Clinton: was it sexism? Only sexism? Part sexism? Is it possible that they had some real issues with the candidate as such, regardless of gender?

What makes you conclude that the disdain is toward women in general? Yes, there is plenty of jerks everywhere who'll bash women in general because said jerks are limited in more ways than one. But to conclude that among "progressives", the density of jerks is endemic is a stretch.

But that's my take, and my take only.

[hari]

It was *genetic mutation* (not deviation)!

[Holly W.]

Swells: I'm really, really picky about voting. I simply cannot vote for someone who doesn't exhibit the qualities I think requisite.

This is a cop-out of massive proportions. When you vote in a presidential election, you aren't just choosing an individual, you're choosing a party. And the party that individual represents will have great influence on who else is appointed to key positions (both short and long-term), and what kind of legislation is proposed and passed. Each party in this country has a very different of the American future, and you should vote based on that, not just force of personality.

[anne]

The matter is that I pay almost no attention to conservative thought, while the thought I do attention to styles itself progressive, though I would argue it is often nothing of the sort. I have found for months, and with increasing vehemence, with so much vehemence that I tend to read less, there has been a pattern of attacks of Hillary Clinton that are not only ferocious but wildly sexist.

The attacks on Clinton have, interestingly, come from those who were long apologists for war and occupation. I am not impressed or amused, but deeply angry.

[Jim D]

It's hard for me to chastise Clinton supporters for not wanting to vote for Obama - after all, I was ready to vote for Barr (ick) rather than Clinton, so it's understandable (by me, at least).

It's less understandable to me that they feel so aggrieved about gender, given their candidate's major qualification was that she was First Lady. You don't get to claim that as "experience" (which I think it wasn't), and then say gender shouldn't have mattered. Or do we really believe that Bill Clinton's brother the Senator, rather than his wife the Senator, would have been a successful candidate against Obama this year? That some abhorrent things have been said about race and gender this time is undeniable, but I'm aware of any gender slams from the Obama camp - while I am aware of racial comments from the Clinton camp. But then, that's probably just my bias showing.

But please, vote. If you don't wish to vote for a major party candidate, then vote for a minor party candidate. All it takes is 5% of the national presidential vote to go to a minor party for all sorts of good things to happen to the nation's political system - like preferential treatment in getting names on the ballot, and federal financing. Vote Green. Vote Libertarian. Heck, vote Socialist. But vote.

[anne]

What I had hoped the Democratic primary would do would be to set down increasingly clear policies that might give us a fair idea of what we were voting for in November and an idea of what to expect should a Democrat be elected. What I am finding is that simply asking about policy by Barack Obama is taken as offensive by Obama supporters while Obama's policy makes me wonder whether there will be any significant move to universal health care, protection of Social Security, work on increasing labor and environment protections in trade pacts, protection of communities ravaged by losses of homeowners, and so on.

Then there is Iraq and Afghanistan and Somalia and Pakistan. What of Latin America, which seems to be awfully lucky to be little attended to be the current President? My reading of Obama policy on Latin America, to my surprise, is actually threatening. But, who can ask proper questions let alone challenge policy positions in the current political atmosphere where the only need for so many seems to be to belittle Hillary Clinton lest important questions be asked?

[uberdave]

Well, the real question should be, how do you get people who don't like sports (politics) or who watch soccer or hockey (independents) to watch the football game (vote), and preferably root for your team. The excitement this year is partly due to 8 years of Bush, but also because independents make up 30% of the electorate and they find much that is appealing in all 3 of the main candidates the past few months (and in the remaining 2 as well).
Here in NY, I tend to root for the Big East; when the Rose Bowl features some Okies and Trojans, I am pretty much neutral. As an independent, McCain seemed more attractive to me in 2000, but Obama is the most centrist and least polarizing.
(By the way, it was very gracious of you not to revel in Washington's last place finish in the Pac10 last year!)

[anne]

I rather like the idea that many Puerto Ricans will feel that it matters that they vote in the primary. Since Puerto Rico always has relatively high voter turnout, and there is campaigning in the commonwealth, I suspect there will be an ample vote totaling more than all but a few states.

Then too, these have been different sorts of Presidential primaries in American history where a woman could both vote and vote for a woman who was a viable candidate no matter the eventual outcome. Just as Barack Obama was an exceptional candidate for so many voters, there are women for whom this has been the only opportunity to vote for a woman who might really have become President.

[Jim D]

"there are women for whom this has been the only opportunity to vote for a woman who might really have become President."

It was the first opportunity, but by no means the last - unless, of course, you're getting long in the tooth. And maybe next time we can forgo at least some of the identity politics sniping. But given how much crap Romney took for his Mormonism (after his father took almost none), I suppose that's wishful thinking. It seems hard to imagine that there won't be at least one other female candidate of a major party within the next 20 years - though who it will be is hard to tell at this point.... but then, who knew who Obama was 5 years ago, before the big speech? Hillary '16? Maybe by then I'll have forgiven her for some of her pandering as a Senator... Heck, with Presidential ambitions behind her, maybe she'll finally turn into the Senator I was hoping for, and stop voting for things like unjustified wars and anti-flag-burning amendments, and instead concentrate on some of the things that she's finally started to pitch in the last few months...

[2slugbaits]

anne,

It's perfectly fair to ask questions about some of Obama's positions. There are plenty of important policy areas in which I think Sen. Clinton's position is better. For example, I think her healthcare plan is better. She's clearly the more wonkish of the candidates and loves to get into the nitty gritty, although a little more wonkishness with respect to actually bothering to read the intelligence report prior to her vote on the Iraq war would have been nice. And then there are issues in which she is clearly wrong, such as the gas tax holiday and her comments about obliterating Iran.

For me Sen. Clinton has three big drawbacks. First, it's not at all clear to me that the short term benefit of a Democratic win in 2008 with her at the head of the ticket would be worth the long run cost that the Democratic party would have to pay in the next several election cycles thereafter. Bill Clinton's presidency was a disaster for the Democratic party. My second problem with Hillary Clinton is that in many ways she shares a lot of the same flaws as George Bush, only she's at the other end of the political spectrum. Both are enamored with the romance of being called "commander-in-chief." Both demand loyalty above competence, as we saw with the way she staffed her campaign staff. Both would seek to further aggrandize executive power. Both seem to believe they are above the law (remember the still unsolved mystery of those disappearing and then magically reappearing documents in her office?). Finally, there's this dynasty issue that really bugs a lot of us. The idea of a wife replacing her husband in office reminds many of us of Governor George Wallace not to mention the Perons in Argentina. It's one of those things that kind of gives me the creeps.

Charges of misogyny as the overarching reason for people supporting Obama over Clinton just don't ring true. Sure, there have been some sexist comments here and there, but that's not why a lot of Democrats would feel uneasy about her as the nominee.

says...

"The attacks on Clinton have, interestingly, come from those who were long apologists for war and occupation. I am not impressed or amused, but deeply angry"

hateful lies and nonsense - the warmaongers are supporting Bill and Hillary.

[lonesome_moderate]

The matter is that I pay almost no attention to conservative thought, while the thought I do attention to styles itself progressive, though I would argue it is often nothing of the sort. I have found for months, and with increasing vehemence, with so much vehemence that I tend to read less, there has been a pattern of attacks of Hillary Clinton that are not only ferocious but wildly sexist.

Anne - if there is anything or anybody in particular that you have in mind here, please let us know.

[Ken Houghton]

anne - "Obama's policy makes me wonder whether there will be any significant move to universal health care, protection of Social Security, work on increasing labor and environment protections in trade pacts, protection of communities ravaged by losses of homeowners, and so on."

Simple Answer to Simple Question: No. And don't be too optimistic about withdrawal from Iraq, either, except in comparison to McCain.

Which apparently is what the Obama supporters want.

I've promised to vote for him (if he doesn't pick Sibelius as his running mate, at which point my absentee ballot will either get lost or defaced), but I won't promise to campaign for him. His supporters have made and are making it quite clear that they don't need any help.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

I have been heated about Hillary, but I have not said that she should not be president (or the candidate) because she is a woman. And, despite her awful remark about obliterating Iran, I would still take her over McCain.

More seriously, and again, yes, there certainly have been plenty of people who have said sexist things (and you may consider me to be one of them), but I challenge you to find any sexist remark by Obama, any, one, anything. Certainly there is not anything remotely comparable to her memorable remark about her appeal to the "white working class."

And, also, please drop the sock puppets. Just be our good friend, anne, who loves birds and social justice, even if she is annoyed with many of us and cannot bring herself to vote for B.O., at least not at this time...

[anne]

"And, also, please drop the sock puppets."

Huh???

"Sock puppets are easy to make. All you need to do is start with a sock."

Huh???

[anne]

"Obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating."

Rubbish.

[anne]

http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hN5AY3xnB8C0Ge3MGgHnxpAt3axw

May 27, 2008

France demands fuel tax reduction
By Press Association

France is calling for a Europe-wide cut in VAT to reduce fuel prices. President Nicolas Sarkozy said the move would help offset high prices at the pump.

OMG!!!

[anne]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jx7OJlb2y3v1-8-bdtPh3Vjc8J1QD90U16OG0

May 27, 2008

France's Sarkozy wants tax cut on fuel
By Associated Press

PARIS — France plans to ask its European partners to suspend part of the value-added tax on fuel to counter rising oil prices, President Nicolas Sarkozy said Tuesday.

Lowering the VAT on fuel would help counterbalance the high prices at the pump, Sarkozy said in an interview on RTL radio.

"If the barrel continues to rise must we maintain a VAT rate that is proportional to the price in the same conditions?" Sarkozy asked. The price of oil has risen to more than $130 a barrel.

Sarkozy said he was "launching the proposal" within the EU, as a decision to lower the VAT "must be European."

He also said the French government could create a new fund from the revenue generated by rising oil taxes to help those in need, including fishermen. He estimated such a fund could be worth $235.5 million to $267 million per trimester.

Fishermen have blocked French ports for more than a week this month to protest rising fuel prices, which they say could put them out of business.

OMG!!!

[anne]

"My second problem with Hillary Clinton is that in many ways she shares a lot of the same flaws as George Bush, only she's at the other end of the political spectrum."

"He was thinking, but she could tell he wasn't good at it."

[anne]

Ken Houghton:

"Obama's policy makes me wonder whether there will be any significant move to universal health care, protection of Social Security, work on increasing labor and environment protections in trade pacts, protection of communities ravaged by losses of homeowners, and so on."

Simple Answer to Simple Question: No. And don't be too optimistic about withdrawal from Iraq, either, except in comparison to McCain.

Which apparently is what the Obama supporters want.

[anne]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessIndustry/idUKL2791388420080527?sp=true

May 27, 2008

Calls Grow for European Action on Fuel Prices
By Crispian Balmer - Reuters

Portugal's Economy Minister Manuel Pinho too urged the European Union to take action, warning of the "worrying impact on economic growth".

OMG!!!

[anne]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=a.UQ.LaCWhhs&refer=japan

May 27, 2008

The expiration of the gasoline tax lowered the average price of the fuel nationwide by about 17 percent in April, according to the Bank of Japan.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

Are you not "says" and "says1 says"? Sure sounds like you.

As for "obliterate..." she said and she repeated it and she never apologized for it or denied or undid it. If Obama had something like this, you and your allies would be all over him, you repeating it endlessly. Deal with it, anne. Doing these silly repetitions does not undo how plain awful it was and still is. It utterly disqualifies her, and you know it.

[Barkley Rosser]

I'll do it here also. I apologize for falsely accusing anybody of being sock puppets. You are actually hand muppets instead... :-) (if I am allowed to joke after all my wicked awfulness).

[jeff hoffman]

After a stench filled 7 years of unmitigated BS piled upon itself by this administration, the electorate has every right to demand one thing from its prospective candidates: credibility. And Clinton didn't even come close to measuring up. Nobody in their right mind mistakes the memory of a poetry reading by a girl on the tarmac for being shot at...Try to explain that for anything but what it was: a completely fictitious account. Go ahead, Anne: try remembering the last time you weren't shot at while anywhere: the airport, the grocery store, your living room, as a time when you were, in fact, shot at, and believe me, you will have a hell of a time doing so. And if you are able through sheer will to navigate that past terrain from the not shot at memory to the shot at one, remember the cameras and witnesses at the not shot at moment, because they will likely show up to undermine a whole string of self promotional memories involving other events as you recollect them. And this domino effect will tend to infuriate those who have been defending you because it was completely gratuitous and careless, and perhaps quite revealing.

[athreya]

anne says...

http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hN5AY3xnB8C0Ge3MGgHnxpAt3axw

May 27, 2008

France demands fuel tax reduction
By Press Association

France is calling for a Europe-wide cut in VAT to reduce fuel prices. President Nicolas Sarkozy said the move would help offset high prices at the pump.

OMG!!!

So Sarko is pandering. How does it justify the stance of certain US Presidential candidates on gasoline tax? Consider:

1. Sarko's ratings are falling quite spectacularly.
2. EU taxes on fuel are quite high.
3. Sarko's other proposal to use part of the oil tax revenue to provide relief to certain groups is a more sensible proposal.
4. The gasoline tax has since been reinstalled in Japan. It was waived in the first place due to a legislative deadlock between government and opposition.

[Jim D]

Anne wrote:

"Obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating obliterating."

If you wonder why people think you act childish, look no further.

Really, you can do better. I've seen you do better.

[Lafayette]

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

MT: and it's always something other than getting beaten by the other team because of not being ready to play up to capability.

Were it only so. Because there will be a winner, does that indicate they have been best player obtainable?

Both sides descended into populist rhetoric to attack one another. This was uncalled for between candidates from the same party and shows that they were willing, both intelligent people, to trespass boundaries of mutual professional respect. (You do not talk in that manner about a fellow senator on the Senate Floor. Of course, primaries are different. Are they?)

The case in point that troubles some most about "playing up to capability" was shown most aptly by BO. Hillary Clinton, when her husband passed NAFTA, had pronounced in favor of the bill. Her electioneering prattling about "having been against it all along" just does not stick -- and has a stench about it.

But, BO telling workers in Ohio in March that NAFTA had destroyed 1m jobs in America, "including nearly 50,000 jobs here in Ohio" also has a mendacious stench about it. He was clearly pandering to populist sentiments, amongst a voter group with which he must earn their confidence.

Wherever did he get this bit of electioneering nonsense? From his Economics advisor? The jobs, if anywhere, have left for points further West. On balance, trade is good. It benefits most people. It hurts some people, however. Ask any American shopping at WalMart for Chinese junk-products if their dollar doesn't reach further from trade with the Chinese. When an American enjoys a tomato and lettuce salad that is affordably cheap – who broke his back to pick the ingredients? Likely some Mexican.

So, NAFTA was a handier bludgeon for BO. After all, Mrs. Clinton's husband had signed it into law, didn't he? So, she is guilty by association.

Both of the two candidates come away from these primaries stinking to the high heavens, both from their populist polemic. If that is "playing up to capability", then the rest of us are horses' asses.

Let's get beyond this petty hassling. BO is the best chance we have to make sure 8 more years of Republican inanity does not inhabit the White House.

Isn't that thought scary enough to do away with the murderous in-fighting. No?

Then the Dems don't deserve the White House either. And they wont get it, just as in 2000 and in 2004.

[anne]

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMpxg1Uzq4KipFprbm64pkZVV5tQ

May 28, 2008

British PM Warns of Global Oil 'Shock'
By AFP

LONDON — British Prime Minister Gordon Brown warned Wednesday that the world faced an era-defining oil "shock" that required urgent action, as European leaders struggled to contain growing protests over soaring fuel prices.

"It is now understood that a global shock on this scale requires global solutions," Brown wrote in The Guardian newspaper.

Record oil prices of around 135 dollars a barrel have contributed to protests worldwide over the rise in fuel and food costs, with fishermen and truck drivers taking the lead in Europe, blocking ports and road access to oil depots.

"However much we might wish otherwise, there is no easy answer to the global oil problem without a comprehensive international strategy," Brown said, adding that the problem should be made a "top priority" at the EU summit next month and the gathering of G8 leaders in July.

"The way we confront these issues will define our era," he said.

Brown's warning came a day after French President Nicolas Sarkozy urged a Europe-wide cut in consumer taxes on fuel and Portugal's economy minister Manuel Pinho called on the Slovenian head of the European Union to hold an urgent debate on the crisis.

French consumers pay about 19.6 percent VAT on the price of fuel and Sarkozy renewed his reduction proposal on Wednesday during a visit to Warsaw.

"Should we really apply the same tax rate when the price of a barrel of oil has doubled in one year and tripled in three years? I don't think this is a crazy question to be asking," Sarkozy told reporters in the Polish capital.

While fishermen called off strikes in key French ports on Wednesday, lifting a week-long blockade of the country's largest oil refinery, truckers and farmers stepped up their own protests over soaring fuel prices....

[Pandering by pandering panderers. OMG!!!]

[OhNoNotAgain]

"I understand now with complete clarity what I did not properly understand even a few months ago, much to my regret, which is the extent to which a disdain for women is part of the make-up of supposed progressives."

This type of hit-and-run comment does you no favors. Who are you referring to, exactly ? And does simply not supporting Clinton now quality us men, that have wives, daughters, and female friends that we love, support, and treat as equals, as misogynists ? If so, then you've really descended into a fanatical obsession with your choice of candidate that borders on delusional.

Here's something to really think about: you can't translate someone's dislike for the candidate for POTUS into a dislike for the candidate's gender, no matter how hard you try. This is especially true when these same people work day in and day out to make sure that women have the same rights, opportunities, and rewards as any men.

[anne]

I understand now with complete clarity what I did not properly understand even a few months ago, much to my regret, which is the extent to which a disdain for women is part of the make-up of supposed progressives.

"If so, then you've really descended into a fanatical obsession with your choice of candidate that borders on delusional....

"This is especially true when these same people work day in and day out to make sure that women have the same rights, opportunities, and rewards as any men."

My oh my oh my. Will they work on weekend, too?

[anne]

Will they work on July Fourth, too?

[anne]

"If you wonder why people think you act childish, look no further."

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/c/carroll/lewis/alice/chapter6.html

1865

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland
By Lewis Carroll

Pig and Pepper

The baby grunted again, and Alice looked very anxiously into its face to see what was the matter with it. There could be no doubt that it had a very turn-up nose, much more like a snout than a real nose; also its eyes were getting extremely small for a baby: altogether Alice did not like the look of the thing at all. 'But perhaps it was only sobbing,' she thought, and looked into its eyes again, to see if there were any tears.

No, there were no tears. 'If you're going to turn into a pig, my dear,' said Alice, seriously, 'I'll have nothing more to do with you. Mind now!' The poor little thing sobbed again (or grunted, it was impossible to say which), and they went on for some while in silence.

Alice was just beginning to think to herself, 'Now, what am I to do with this creature when I get it home?' when it grunted again, so violently, that she looked down into its face in some alarm. This time there could be no mistake about it: it was neither more nor less than a pig, and she felt that it would be quite absurd for her to carry it further.

So she set the little creature down, and felt quite relieved to see it trot away quietly into the wood. 'If it had grown up,' she said to herself, 'it would have made a dreadfully ugly child: but it makes rather a handsome pig, I think.' And she began thinking over other children she knew, who might do very well as pigs, and was just saying to herself, 'if one only knew the right way to change them—' when she was a little startled by seeing the Cheshire Cat sitting on a bough of a tree a few yards off....

[anne]

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gawWo52uFMERmNKAg9Zl3_PSZZ9g

May 27, 2008

Brown to Meet Oil Chiefs Over Fuel Prices
By AFP

LONDON — Prime Minister Gordon Brown was on Wednesday set to meet with top oil industry executives as the pressure grows for the government to act on spiralling fuel prices.

The premier is expected to use the Scottish talks to press for greater output from Britain's North Sea oil fields, the Guardian newspaper reported.

In an editorial also published in Wednesday's Guardian, the prime minister made clear there was "no easy answer" to the problem of fuel prices and warned that there was a limit to what the government could do about it.

But Brown acknowledged the pain being felt by consumers.

"I know that families up and down the country are feeling the impact in the cost of filling up at the petrol station and in the rise in gas and electricity bills," he wrote, while impressing the need for a "global solution".

"If we are to ensure a better deal for consumers, energy security and lower greenhouse gas emissions, Britain, Europe and the world will have to change how we use energy and the type of energy we use," he wrote.

The talks come a day after hundreds of truckers rumbled en masse into central London to protest against soaring fuel prices, claiming higher costs at the pump were driving British haulage firms out of business.

Angry truck drivers handed in a petition to the prime minister's Downing Street office, as pressure grew on Gordon Brown to abandon planned motoring tax hikes.

"The government must realise that people are really hurting," said haulier Peter Carroll.

The Automobile Association reported that the average price of diesel is 128 pence (2.53 dollars, 1.61 euros) per litre in Britain -- the most expensive out of 24 European Union countries monitored.

Tax accounts for around 50 pence per litre, while the EU average is only around 25 pence.

The cost of fuel is soaring as crude oil hits record prices on international markets at around 133 dollars -- up a third since the start of 2008 and compared with 50 dollars a barrel 18 months ago.

The demonstration comes as rank-and-file lawmakers from Brown's governing Labour Party urged him to scrap plans to raise fuel tax by two pence per litre in October.

Some Labour MPs also want a rethink on plans announced in March for sharp rises in vehicle excise duty for older "gas guzzling" cars.

Drivers could be forced to pay up to 200 pounds (400 dollars, 250 euros) more per year to keep such cars on the road.

The letter to Brown demanded the immediate introduction of an "essential user" rebate of 20-25 pence per litre, allowing heavy goods vehicles to claim some of the fuel duty back....

[anne]

There now we have an example of the social and economic idiocy of Gordon Brown, and why voters could evidently care less if labor is smashed about especially after going from Tony Blair to Brown. What is needed is a sense in policy that the British Prime Minister actually cares about social needs, not care about telling people they need to drink less gasoline after meals, no matter what smug theorists might say, but actually cheapening the price of gasoline.

Nicholas Sarkozy gets it, or is finally beginning to, Brown as yet gets nothing. Can you imagine the idiocy of Brown trying to raise gasoline taxes, no matter the theory?

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

Gasoline prices are on the order of three to four times in most of Europe what they are here in the US, mostly due to their far higher taxes than we have. Are you backhandedly suggesting that somehow the seriously irresponsible Hillary-McCain gas tax "holiday" is somehow justified because Brits and French facing taxes multiple times what we face are complaining about the current surge of prices? Sorry, does not fly. This is all just irrelevant.

"He is not a Muslim, as far as I know."
[no apology]

"o... Iran"
[not only no apology, but repeated and reaffirmed]

"hard working Americans, white Americans, are for me"
[no apology]

"RFK assassinated in 1968"
[apology after repetition following Ted Kennedy's diagnosis]

So, what is comparable from Obama? I think in one debate he pointed out that she had been on some corporate boards. And, of course, he just gaffed on mistaking Auschwitz for Buchenwald where his grandfather was, but that was not a slam on Hillary, much less on her being a woman candidate.

Anyway, I can hardly wait to watch the pro-Hillary demonstraters at the DNCC meeting who will be declaring that not seating the FL and MI delegations will be some horrible travesty of democracy, even though the only member of the DNCC who opposed punishing those states for violating the rules was an Obama rep from Fl. Sheer hypocrisy. But given the rest of the drivel she has been handing out, with nothing remotely comparable coming from Obama, we should not be surprised.

And, anne, why is it that when Hillary says something that is despicable and utterly unacceptable, it is unacceptable for people to point this out and probably some plot by the Obama campaign that people are doing so? And is it sexism to point out that she is advocating war crimes, racism, religious bigotry, along with just plain lying?

Lafayette,

Both of the candidates made asses of themselves in Ohio over NAFTA.

[anne]

What I am interested in is understanding what to expect in the way of policy of the coming President, and no matter the insistence that there are more than 7,000 pages of economic policy proposals on a candidate Internet site I want a set of simple policy proposals set down repeatedly in speeches that show me a significant willingness to represent middle class needs.

I want meaningful health care policy, Social Security protection policy, community homeowner protection policy, public college and university cost reduction policy, green infrastructure development policy, and on.

Similarly I want the same specificity on foreign policy, and I am not about to be fooled that when a candidate makes a speech threatening interference in Latin American affairs the speech is really not the least threatening, and I am not about to be fooled about Middle East policy that is highly aggressive while the pretense is otherwise.

[anne]

"And is it sexism to point out that she is advocating war crimes, racism, religious bigotry, along with just plain lying?"

Warts, no question, she, whoever she happens to be, also has to have warts, and warts is the deciding factor so when I find a religious bigot racist war criminal I will know she must have warts and look for them the better to avoid being led astray. Warts are the sign.

[anne]

"And is it sexism to point out that she is advocating war crimes, racism, religious bigotry, along with just plain lying?"

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/c/carroll/lewis/alice/chapter6.html

The Cat only grinned when it saw Alice. It looked good-natured, she thought: still it had very long claws and a great many teeth, so she felt that it ought to be treated with respect.

'Cheshire Puss,' she began, rather timidly, as she did not at all know whether it would like the name: however, it only grinned a little wider. 'Come, it's pleased so far,' thought Alice, and she went on. 'Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?'

'That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,' said the Cat.

'I don't much care where—' said Alice.

'Then it doesn't matter which way you go,' said the Cat.

'—so long as I get somewhere,' Alice added as an explanation.

'Oh, you're sure to do that,' said the Cat, 'if you only walk long enough.'

Alice felt that this could not be denied, so she tried another question. 'What sort of people live about here?'

'In that direction,' the Cat said, waving its right paw round, 'lives a Hatter: and in that direction,' waving the other paw, 'lives a March Hare. Visit either you like: they're both mad.'

'But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.

'Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: 'we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.'

'How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.

'You must be,' said the Cat, 'or you wouldn't have come here.'

Alice didn't think that proved it at all....

[BJ Feng]

Anne is right, there is no viable woman candidate other than Clinton in the foreseeable future. Pelosi has no chance and I can't think of anyone else with the stature or high level experience necessary to be considered viable.

Looking at the issue, I can see why some women feel alienated. Here is a woman that surpasses her opponent in every measurable standard. She has much more foreign policy experience, and has been in the Senate as a key political figure for many more years than her counterpart. She has had to cast tough votes and make tough decisions while her opponent is so new to the job that he has yet to be tested by a controversial vote in the Senate. And he has routinely avoided such votes while serving as State Senator.

So a woman who is much more qualified in every single aspect is passed up for the top job for a man who just recently entered the same level. The one quality he has over her is his ability to talk, and talk, and talk...but nothing of substance, his leadership abilities have never been tested, there is not one single bill of importance he has authored or co-authored. Until now, he was just another unimportant senator, one of the pack that is led and obeys, but he can give great speeches, oh the speeches!

[BJ Feng]

Why is Hillary being passed up despite her overwhelming credentials? What has Obama done that merits the nomination, that shows he has the capacity and capability to do the job? Surely much more is required of a president than just the ability to make a rousing speech. Where has he demonstrated any other quality? Again, what has he actually done to qualify him to become president? Point to a bill where he exhibited leadership, point to a situation where he had to display leadership on the national level such as 9-11. I cannot think of a single example, and frankly his foreign policy ideas are to the point of absurd. Does he really think a good speech will sway the leaders of Iran and North Korea? Will Bin Laden faint while he talks? Come on, where's the beef? Show me something!

[OhNoNotAgain]

"Why is Hillary being passed up despite her overwhelming credentials? What has Obama done that merits the nomination, that shows he has the capacity and capability to do the job? Surely much more is required of a president than just the ability to make a rousing speech. Where has he demonstrated any other quality? Again, what has he actually done to qualify him to become president?"

What were FDR's qualifications prior to being elected President ? And how did that work out ?

Frankly, I think you're just upset because McCain is going to get trounced in the general election. You've got your very own Hoover in the White House, and the results are going to be the same.

says...

"What were FDR's qualifications prior to being elected President ? And how did that work out?"

You can't really be that ignorant of history can you?

[swells]

Holly W, It's not a cop out. It's called having principles. If you must know, when I was about 19 years old I figured out that nuclear weapons could not be used ethically, even in self-defense since they could not used in a way that would limit the effects to an aggressor.

Just like you wouldn't have a right to toss a grenade into a group of mostly innocent people at the mall because one person in the group was trying to kill you.

If my choice is to vote for terrorists or not vote, I don't vote. Up till now, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been a presidential candidate who had as part of their plank the elimination of nuclear weapons. Obama does. That is why I will vote for him when I haven't voted for any presidential candidate before.

To be honest, I would prefer if his platform position acknowledged that the possession of nuclear weapons for defensive purposes is morally equivalent to being willing to use suicide bombers, but I can compromise a little bit.

Why have you been voting for terrorists all these years?

[swells]

BJ Feng, Some people object to Senator Clinton because of her lack of integrity. I am one of them.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

Of course, "warts" backwards is "straw," :-).

BJ Feng,

Hmmm, this all seems a bit disingenuous. First of all, as hasa been pointed out, nobody four years ago would have said that there were any African-Americans likely to become president in the near future, but here is Obama, beating the odds to very likely do it. Second, if he selects Kathleen Sebelius, Gov. of Kansas, as his running mate, and she is reportedly high on the list, she jumps to the top of the list to be his successor. Duh.

If a list of credentials, meaning seniority of service in many positions is what matters, well then, the candidate should have been Richardson or maybe Biden or Dodd, not Hillary.

As for Obama, yes, he is pretty fresh, and the comparison is not FDR, who had been Governor of New York and Secretary of the Navy during WW I, but JFK, with whom Obama is indeed often compared. So, sure, he has not authored much legislation, but he was right on Iraq when we went in, although who knows if he would have voted that way if he had been in the Senate then, and he has been right to vote against authorizing Bush to do whatever he wants in Iran, in sharp contrast with Hillary, who alone among the Dem candidates voted with Bush on this, along with her insane and irresponsible talk of "obliterating Iran."

More striking is the evidence that Obama is an extremely capable and intelligent leader. What is the evidence? His campaign. He has successfully led and planned a nationwide campaign, building up bases of support throughout the country, while Hillary stupidly assumed she had it in the bag, did not build up support around the country, despite her edge in existing support, all based on her erroneous assumption that she would have everything sewn up by Super Tuesday. Personally, I would rather have an intelligent president who can accurately strategize, rather than one who shoots off his or her mouth and rushes into idiotic wars (although I realize that you are still a diehard defender of the Iraq war, but most here are not).

[Barkley Rosser]

BTW, anne, was your posting from Alice in Wonderland supposed to suggest that you are the sane Alice while all the Obama supporters are the Mad people? I guess this is in there with your vague idea that somehow stikes against high gas and oil prices in France and the UK are relevant to this presidential race...

Meanwhile, I am going into the sugar bowl myself, after taking my hat off of my elbow...

[anne]

The point of the proposal to lower the gas tax for a time, was to limit some of the difficulties drivers will face from current gas prices. Possibly lowering gas taxes and making up the revenue difference by directly taxing oil companies might not be the best way to help drivers, but the idea showed concern.

Conservative Nicholas Sarkozy knows enough finally to show the same concern, while supposedly liberal Gordon Brown is playing at making sure Tories keep on winning elections in Britain. Meanwhile the energy puritans preach about the virtues of higher fuel prices, since higher prices will in no way effect them.

[anne]

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2008/05/i-was-visiting-my-local-toyota-dealer.html

May 28, 2008

"I was visiting my local Toyota dealer in Bethesda, Md., last week to trade in one hybrid car for another." * Oh, really? So what do you want from me? A blender? You need a reward because you are driving a hybrid? Do you want poor people to buy hybrids too even if they can't afford it? And how did that pie-in-your-face taste? Was it creamy enough for you? When I read Thomas Friedman writing about energy and conservation I get a strong urge to waste energy. I get a strong urge to cut down trees and to turn on all lights in the house, and to operate my blender on gasoline....

* http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/opinion/28friedman.html

-- As'ad AbuKhalil

[anne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/opinion/28friedman.html?ref=opinion

May 28, 2008

Truth or Consequences
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Cynical ideas, like the McCain-Clinton summertime gas-tax holiday, would only make the problem worse....

[Phooey....]

[anne]

Now let yawl buy another Prius, while I look for a Hummer.

[anne]

Remember when a certain terminator terminated a certain Governor of California who liked the idea of having higher vehicle registration fees? Well, the terminator became Governor for all the moaning of analysts and even now remains Governor. There are those times when political symbolism matters, and the symbolism might even help around the edges.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

And what makes you think that "energy puritans" will be in "no way effected by higher fuel prices"? You are getting more and more out of touch with reality.

says...

How is helping out drivers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?

[2slugbaits]

BF Feng,

" there is no viable woman candidate other than Clinton in the foreseeable future. Pelosi has no chance and I can't think of anyone else with the stature or high level experience necessary to be considered viable."

Think a little harder. I can think of quite a few women who would be very strong Presidential candidates. Most of them support Obama.

"Here is a woman that surpasses her opponent in every measurable standard. She has much more foreign policy experience, and has been in the Senate as a key political figure for many more years than her counterpart."

If foreign policy experience, time in the Senate, wonkish knowledge and and tough votes were the primary qualifications for winning the nomination, then we'd be talking about presumptive nominee Joe Biden or Chris Dodd. Those are all important qualities, but by no means determinative.

says...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/26/gas.driving/index.html

(CNN) -- At a time when gas prices are at an all-time high, Americans have curtailed their driving at a historic rate.

[2slugbaits]

Barkley Rosser,

Oops. I just saw where you made the same point about Biden and Dodd.

says...

"Think a little harder. I can think of quite a few women who would be very strong Presidential candidates. Most of them support Obama."

Can you name some potential hopefuls? "Kathleen Sebelius, Gov. of Kansas" seems like a nonstarter.

says...

Joe Biden's time has clearly come and gone.

Dodd out of Conneticut.
Richardson out of New Mexico.

Can we have something in between boredom vs a rock concert?
Can we both have excitement and knowledge in one person?

[anne]

"How is helping out drivers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

Interesting question.

[anne]

"I was visiting my local Toyota dealer in Bethesda, Md., last week to trade in one hybrid car for another." * Oh, really? So what do you want from me? A blender? You need a reward because you are driving a hybrid? Do you want poor people to buy hybrids too even if they can't afford it? And how did that pie-in-your-face taste? Was it creamy enough for you? When I read Thomas Friedman writing about energy and conservation I get a strong urge to waste energy. I get a strong urge to cut down trees and to turn on all lights in the house, and to operate my blender on gasoline....

Me, I can afford gas but when I sit through lunch listening to a Mercedes-tank driving guy explaining that Clinton was pandering to panders by wanting to lower the gas tax, I just get all crazy.

I really need to get a Hummer, just for spite.

Me, riding through the streets burning gas something fierce, naked in my fire-engine red (to match my hair) Hummer convertible. I am down with it. Can you dig it?

[anne]

When I read the likes of these Friedmanesque puritans * I just want to get naked and drive with wolves - which come to think of it might become all the rage anyway.

* http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2008/05/i-was-visiting-my-local-toyota-dealer.html

[anne]

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/c/carroll/lewis/alice/chapter6.html

'Speak roughly to your little boy,
 And beat him when he sneezes:
He only does it to annoy,
 Because he knows it teases.'

CHORUS.

'Wow! wow! wow!'

[2slugbaits]

says:

"Can you name some potential hopefuls? "Kathleen Sebelius, Gov. of Kansas" seems like a nonstarter"

I don't know why she is a nonstarter. If Obama nominated her that would put her near the front of the line. But clearly Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri is an up and comer in the party. Another one to watch is Clinton supporter Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz of Florida. She might also be a sleeper Veep candidate. In addition to the fact that she helps heal the wounds with the Clinton supporters, she also helps out in Florida. And as a Veep candidate it's always good to be a ferocious debater, which she is. And if Obama were to pick Rep. Jane Harmon as his Veep choice, that too would be an interesting pick...especially interesting given the bad blood between Harmon and Pelosi.

says...

Those who don't follow politics are going to be wondering who those women are. I didn't know what any of them looked like or name any of their accomplishments execpt for Wasserman Shultz. And that's only because I saw her on TV recently. My sister liked her somewhat because she said she fought harder than the others, but honestly, I didn't think she had much presence. We will see I suppose, but being a running mate didn't help Geraldine Ferraro.

says...

"How is helping out drivers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

Anyone?
There's gotta be some econ types out there who know.

[anne]

"How is helping out drivers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

"How is helping out low income consumers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

"How is helping out workers with a higher minimum wage different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

"How is helping out farmers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

"How is helping out bankers different than helping out home owners with a bailout?"

[BJ Feng]

Yes, a VP nomination won't do it alone. Dan Quayle, Ferraro, and a host of past VP candidates were not viable candidates for president. I've never heard of Sebelius--only McCaskill's name is familiar, and Jane Harmon is disliked by the hardcore left so she has an uphill battle to begin with and thus is not viable. A woman would have to show great competence and leadership as VP, as all viable VPs have to do, not just be invisible in the media as Quayle and to some extent, Gore were.

As for Obama, Clinton is unable to unload on him because he's a Democrat and she must play nice. There won't be such restrictions when the real race begins. Obama will be pounded on foreign policy and his ties to unsavory characters, one of them who is on trial right now, but somehow that story hasn't been picked up yet by the mainstream media (humm...).

Clinton's remark that she would "absolutely destroy" Iran if they launched a nuclear weapon at Israel is completely appropriate and shows how out of touch the extreme left is. You mean after they launch a preemptive nuke, we should do nothing but engage in more talks? What kind of nonsense is that? And oh, by the way, the latest reports show that Iran is continuing on the path to building a nuclear weapon, all the talks have failed, and their promises were not kept. But I guess we can keep on talking, what's another 3 years? Obama will have to deal with these questions and many other tough ones as well once he makes it into the finals.

Of course he could always have an accident or be assassinated as Clinton speculated. Would it be too much for another Vince Foster or Ron Brown type death? It's unfortunate that so many bad things have happened to close associates of the Clintons, I guess it's just bad luck.

[anne]

"The idea of a wife replacing her husband in office reminds many of us of Governor George Wallace not to mention the Perons in Argentina. It's one of those things that kind of gives me the creeps."

"Replacing?" Notice the creepingly creepy rottenness; notice the creepingly creepy insinuations. Creepy crawly.

[anne]

"Would it be too much for another ----- ------ or --- ----- type death?"

This is sick vile degenerate pornography.

[anne]

"Would it be too much for another ----- ------ or --- ----- type death?"

Truly degenerate pornography.

[anne]

"Would it be too much for another ----- ------ or --- ----- type death?"

Obscene trolling.

[reason]

Anne,
I'm going to ask you to look in mirror. What is the title of this piece? Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?
American's at some stage are going to have to decide that are grown up enough to do proper complex policy tradeoffs, like the rest of the west mostly manages to do.

[reason]

that they are grown up ....

[anne]

"I'm going to ask you to look in mirror."

Part of the problem; so preach on the rotten sexism, not on me. OK?

[OhNoNotAgain]

"You can't really be that ignorant of history can you?"

I was asking BJ if *he* knew. I know what his qualifications were, and I also know that many people at the time (1932 election) considered him to be unqualified for the job, irrespective of what we view as his qualifications *today*:

http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/fdroosevelt/essays/biography/3

I find a lot of similarities between Obama and FDR, specifically with the circumstances under which they are running (contested primary) and the state of the Nation with respect to the sitting President.

says...

Sorry for my confusion and wrongful accusation OhNo.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

A lot of homeowners who bought houses near the peak of the bubble did so uninformed about the details of their subprime mortgages. This differentiates them from drivers, farmer, bankers, and the rest you think deserving of "bailouts" because maybe some homeowners are now in this rather huge housing crisis that has been the main force driving the US economy downwards. Or perhaps you have been too busy making false accusations of sexism to notice?

BJ,

Boy are you disingenuous. Being a VP candidate puts one forward if one is on the winning side. Then one is at the head of the pile, period, unless one is a complete screwup, such as Spiro Agnew, who took bags of cash while in the office of VP and had to resign. So, you may not have heard of Sebelius, but by many accounts she is very sharp, and many consider being a governor better preparation for being president than being a senator.

The IAEA is unhappy about Iran not providing info on its now defunct nuclear weapons program, but the international evidence remains that they are not pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

Of course, you are the guy who thinks that 30 years from now people will be praising Bush for the Iraq War. Sorry, but you do not have any credibility, not with me, certainly not with all your twisted misinformation.

Oh, and as for responding to a nuclear attack on Israel, not likely to happen during the next 8 years at all, certainly not from Iran, an appropriate reply would be to hit something similar to what was hit, a city for a city, or whatever, not a complete obliteration killing an order of magnitude more people killed and so forth. But, in fact, this is a silly discussion, aside from the horror and outrageousness of it. That remark is only one of many that completely disqualify Hillary as president, and maybe even as dogcatcher, which is what she may find herself competing for if she does not quit the prez race by late next week when it will really be over.

[anne]

"And is it sexism to point out that she is advocating war crimes, racism, religious bigotry, along with just plain lying?"

To the gutter, now, Merv.

says...

There are all sorts of reasons for all sorts of subsidies, indirect and direct, and subsidies to make increasing fuel costs and the consequences of increasing fuel costs less difficult for people have been used with varying success for years. China has been especially successful in using such subsidies while avoiding resulting bottlenecks, and I wish there were more study of the Chinese subsidy systems to use of examples.

I have not the least problem with selective subsidies that will both help lower income persons and spur general growth, and am especially interested in generating subsidy systems for agriculture in developing countries.

[anne]

America uses all sorts of subsidy systems which are remarkably overlooked, while energy puritans have recently used the idea that energy price increases might be limited, or that prices might even be reduced, as a political club. Me, I would suggest that when Thomas Friedman becomes hysterical about our actually having to drive, like, to work and things, we wonder why Friedman has long been so intent on another energy intensive sort of driving, like, driving us to war.

How much energy are we using each day in smashing up Iraq and Iraqis? How much in Afghanistan or in attacking Pakistan and Somalia?

Forgive my computer for forgetting my name above....

says...

"A lot of homeowners who bought houses near the peak of the bubble did so uninformed about the details of their subprime mortgages."

Couldn't they sue? Couldn't they just walk away and rent? Couldn't they have bought a smaller more efficient car, I mean house?

Does bailing out homeowners make the price of houses go up or down, or no change at all?

[anne]

Interestingly, when a Presidential candidate suggested we could limit the effect of increasing mortgage expenses which have been especially acute for African American and Latino homeowners, who for many years were sold a disproportionately high portion of expensive mortgages, the suggestion was ignored while another candidate chose to ignore the problem altogether.

Say what?

says...

The above says is not Anne.

[anne]

"A lot of homeowners who bought houses near the peak of the bubble did so uninformed about the details of their subprime mortgages."

This is trivial, since African Americans and Latinos were disproportionately sold needlessly expensive mortgages as studies have shown from the middle 1990s and as the New York Times was reporting at least since 1999.