SubscribeAdvertise here: Contact FM.
As far as we're concerned ... this issue is done. It was an unfortunate statement, as we said, as she's acknowledged. She has apologized. The apology ... is accepted. Let's move forward.It loses some power because of their earlier statement, but I'm glad they're trying out the high road.
"Given the thud with which Clinton's RFK flub was received, it's starting to become clear that perhaps she erred in deciding to stay in the race this long. Imagine had she suspended her campaign and still won primaries. Wouldn't that have put her in an even stronger position than now? Obama hasn't run a campaign against her for the last few weeks and, in turn, it's helped Clinton prop up her personal standing. But wouldn't she be winning over the support of some in ObamaNation if she were sort of returning the favor by getting out and suspending the campaign? And that's the rub: At some point for her political future, she has to win back the support of Obama's supporters. And they don't seem to be very forgiving of her right now. The Clinton campaign may believe these folks are being irrational, but it's the state of play right now. It's interesting -- Clinton partisans are mad at a lot of folks, but Obama isn't at the top of the list. For Obama partisans, Clinton (or the Clintons) is at the top of their anger list. As for Clinton, she really hasn't given a good reason for staying in (versus suspending her candidacy while keeping her delegates) for any set of voters other than those folks in Michigan and Florida or for the folks in Puerto Rico. If she were in suspension mode, she could be focusing on legacy restoration. Instead, everything she says is viewed through the prism of angling for a longshot 1% chance at the nomination. Whatever the outcome at this point, Clinton's folks may wish they had suspended their candidacy a few weeks ago. In this case, short-term gain could end up being long-term political pain."
Only a few years ago, on the night of Bush’s victory in 2004, the conservative movement seemed indomitable. In fact, it was rapidly falling apart. Conservatives knew how to win elections; however, they turned out not to be very interested in governing.
Remember, FDR remained, throughout the New Deal, a fiscal conservative leery of deficits and of direct payments to citizens.And this, from a Time Magazine profile of John Maynard Keynes:
As the Depression wore on, Roosevelt tried public works, farm subsidies and other devices to restart the economy, but he never completely gave up trying to balance the budget. In 1938 the Depression deepened. Reluctantly, F.D.R. embraced the only new idea he hadn't yet tried, that of the bewildering British "mathematician." As the President explained in a fireside chat, "We suffer primarily from a failure of consumer demand because of a lack of buying power." It was therefore up to the government to "create an economic upturn" by making "additions to the purchasing power of the nation.All that aside, I have to say that it's very novel to me to witness a US presidential election between, one the one hand, a candidate I think highly of but disagree with, and another candidate which I think highly of and agree with. My vast reserves of jaded cynicism seem to be pumping dry this season.
Increase Fuel Economy Standards: Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years. His plan will provide retooling tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so that they can build new fuel-efficient cars rather than overseas companies. Obama will also invest in advanced vehicle technology such as advanced lightweight materials and new engines.There is more detail on reducing dependency"Relieving the Pressure of Rising Energy Prices".
Set National Building Efficiency Goals: Barack Obama will establish a goal of making all new buildings carbon neutral, or produce zero emissions, by 2030. He'll also establish a national goal of improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade to help us meet the 2030 goal.
Establish a Grant Program for Early Adopters: Obama will create a competitive grant program to award those states and localities that take the first steps to implement new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency.
Invest in a Digital Smart Grid: Obama will pursue a major investment in our utility grid to enable a tremendous increase in renewable generation and accommodate modern energy requirements, such as reliability, smart metering, and distributed storage
She: "You know, I'm just so damned disappointed."So can we officially retire the patronizing finger-wagging to spend the rest of the election cycle tiptoeing around the delicate sensibilities of millions of Clinton supporters and independents? Speaking on behalf of the grownups in both categories who can cope just fine with political disagreements and disappointments: thanks.
Me: "Why's that?"
She: "I'm so disappointed in Hillary Clinton for behaving so dishonorably. I wanted more than anything in the world to vote for her this fall, but even I can see that she's just trying to cheat at this point. The only thing that should matter now is making sure McCain doesn't win."
Comparing Obama vs. McCain on the Environment...Grist, the (very reliable) environmental news blog, said of McCain's plan on May 11:
In 2004, both Obama and McCain were endorsed by the League of Conservation Voters (a pro-environment organization) over their Senate race opponents.
Both Obama and McCain support a cap-and-trade system to phase out greenhouse gas emissions by factories.
***...McCain and Obama's cap-and-trade proposals are very different. McCain's does not include an auction component to sell credits to emitters, Obama's does. This is important because Obama's plan will create revenue to fund education and innovation in green technology.
McCain and Obama oppose oil drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge.
Both candidates support expansion of liquefied coal and ethanol energy technology.
Obama and McCain have supported expansion of nuclear power plants. Obama switched his position slightly between July 2007 and December 2007, explaining in December that until we can solve the storage and safety issues associated with nuclear power, we should not expand its use.
Both agree that humans contribute to global climate change.
McCain and Obama agree that the U.S. should have signed the Kyoto Treaty.
Contrasting Obama vs. McCain on the Environment...
The League of Conservation Voters gave McCain's environmental record a score of 53% while Obama has scored in the high 90's.
McCain opposed Dick Cheney's 2005 Energy Bill that included huge tax giveaways to oil companies with record revenues. Obama supported the bill.
Obama supported a law that required 25% of U.S. energy come from renewable sources by 2025, McCain opposed a similar federal law.
McCain opposed the 2007 Energy Bill written by Democrats which mandated improved vehicle fuel economy standards by 2020, Obama supported the bill.
Obama did not join McCain and 44 other Republican and Democratic Senators in urging the Environmental Protection Agency to draft stricter Mercury restrictions.
"it's better than expected, somewhat short of Lieberman-Warner, and far short of what Obama has proposed. It should comfort us that a McCain presidency will mean real action on climate change, not the shell game Bush is engaged in. But it's hard to see how McCain can claim the allegiance of voters who rank climate change as a top concern. He's still behind the curve."Grist also goes into great detail on Obama's environmental platform here,: and (even before the latest fine-tuning by Obama) provides an analysis of Obama's plan here, saying:
It's a deft mix of good politics and strong, substantive policy. Here are what I see as the three headlines:So I still think there is puh-LENty of information out there for those who go looking for it.
100% auction of cap-and-trade credits. This is a home run, a real act of standard-setting boldness (the kind that Obama always promises but rarely delivers). The green community should immediately use it to push Clinton and Edwards into making the same commitment, insuring that it's the new baseline for any cap-and-trade program.
Smart investment. The revenue from auctions will be considerable, up to $50 billion a year, and Obama's smart about putting it to work, dividing it between energy R&D, protections for low-income workers, and market deployment of existing clean tech.
A focus on efficiency. Clearly Obama gets that efficiency is the easiest route to emission reductions, and he's got a set of thoughtful, detailed initiatives to make it work.
posted by Bookhouse at 7:29 PM on May 23, 2008 [15 favorites]