Congratulations to Senator Obama for hanging through his most challenging times so far (accusations about what someone else said? Is that the best they got?) and still won decisively in N. Carolina and performed well in Indiana, as well. In fact, if Rush hadn't called for his minions to go and vote for Clinton, Obama may have well won that state, as well.
I think Clinton is finished. Someone let her know, please?
=======
On another front, let me just say a hearty and sincere "WAY TO GO!" to John McCain and many of our Republican leaders. Did you see this story?
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. John McCain Monday joined other GOP senators urging environmental regulators to ease rules demanding a sharp increase in ethanol use to help head off further increases in food prices.
The energy bill that passed Congress with bipartisan support in 2007 requires U.S. fuel marketers to increase the use of biofuels fivefold by 2022.
But McCain, the presumed Republican presidential nominee, and 23 other Republicans, including many who supported the bill, called on the Environmental Protection Agency to waive or roll back the law's requirements in order to ease pressure on food and livestock feed prices.
In other words, after it became clear (what many people had predicted well before the fact) that our desires for cheaper gas came at the cost of greatly more expensive food for the starving millions, these Republicans have led the way in telling Bush, "STOP!"
It remains to be seen whether Bush will listen.
Where are the Dems in all of this???
Man! It has been soooo long since I've been able to give some credit - anything! - to the Republicans...
ReplyDeleteI know what you mean. :)
ReplyDeleteBut you know what they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. ;)
"Where are the Dems in all of this???"
ReplyDeleteWhere they always are Dan. With their heads up their arses.
However, it isn't quite as simple as "use more corn for gasohol, therefore food prices go up." Because, in fact, farmers are planting something like 15% *less* corn this year than last. Why? Because there's more money in soybeans, which is why farmers are planting 18% more soybeans this year than last. (There's also the issue of crop rotation playing a small role.)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/business/01crop.html?_r=2&ex=1364788800&en=ded789b1801c23af&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Obviously using some of the corn produced for ethanol doesn't help the situation. But it isn't the only issue.
This is the problem with senators running for president. They don’t have to take responsibly for the legislation they pass.
ReplyDeleteMcCain and Obama are in the senate they now have more influence over congress then they will have as President. I would be happier if they would pass some legislation and then tell us how awesome it was instead of telling us how they will do something that they are capable of doing for the last two years.
I still don’t understand what Obama is saying but for McCain I say stop promising to do stuff that you could have done as a senator
Hiya Dan!
ReplyDeleteI must say that I agree with you on this one, and I also agree with Edwin. The people running around promising to do things are the people that have been in a position to do them all along and yet they've done nothing.
Sorry, had a busy week. Thanks for the thoughts, all. Good to hear from you, NC.
ReplyDeleteI'd suggest that while these folk HAVE been in the Senate, we've had an obstructionist president in power who was able to block any progress. We'll hope that with President Obama, things will change.
**EDWIN DROOD**
ReplyDeletesorry cant log in as I am in a hostile network environment.
Important note, Bush has vetoed only 17 bills while his predecessor vetoed 77 bills. We cant blame Bush for this one. Congress has done nothing for the years and it is sad we have to choose from that lot for the next President.
We can't blame Bush for this one?
ReplyDeleteUmmm, yes, we can.
What would Bush have done (and he had a Republican majority for several years) about our dependency that he was blocked from doing? Where was his leadership in saying "We need to decrease our hyperconsumption of a finite supply"? Where are his speeches (like Carter's) warning of the pending dangers of hyperconsumption of a finite resource on which our economy is utterly dependent?
Can you produce anything at all to suggest that Bush had/has a plan for dealing with this?
****Edwin Drood****
ReplyDeleteSure Dan, how about the 2007 State of the Union.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/23/AR2007012301075.html
A speech in which he gives a little lip service to reducing usage, but mostly depends upon a genie called Technology to come and save us with some magical solution that maybe one day might possibly exist?
ReplyDeleteI was looking for more thoroughly responsible solutions, not make-believe, "yes we can (let's just hope)" sorts of solutions.