Leadership=pandering

or, if it's expedient, do it, regardless of ultimate value for the country.

Sent by Dr. Ger | 3:09 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Pretty good spin! If every economic expert says McCain's idea (that Clinton has adopted) won't work, then claim it is "leadership" and stubbornly hang in there. Sounds like G. W. Bush kind of leadership.

Sent by Gary | 3:09 PM ET | 05-01-2008

"And I understand that there may be some people who disagree with it and of course they're entitled to disagree with it. You know, this is something that Senator Clinton believes is important. And presidents listen to advice, get advice, and then, and then act."

So leadership is what got us into an untenable quagmire in Iraq? Or perhaps being stubborn and arrogant enough to not back down in the face of reason? Isn't that how we got the President we have today?

Sent by James Cutler | 3:10 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Peak Oil. Look it up.

Sent by Jody Sol | 3:19 PM ET | 05-01-2008

I ALWAYS admire a person who examples leadership by standing their ground for the common good...her breathe of vision and understanding of America's challenges will enable her to take this Nation to a better place...this once again exhibits Clinton's toughness(she is unafraid) to take on difficult and at times unpopular issues...being President will not be an easy job, but one she appears qualified and motivated to obtain...America could do WORSE.

Sent by ard | 3:35 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Isn't this the Bush approach to things? Act first, think second, ignore mountains of evidence against your policy third?

Sent by Randy | 3:42 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Of course those addicted to being fed at the public trough don't like anything that highlights the fact that tax money is OUR money, not theirs; that includes academics.

Sent by deek | 3:48 PM ET | 05-01-2008

What's SO annoying about this is that Obama is the one with the unpopular position on this. He will take a hit with voters for this, even though he is RIGHT. He's the one showing leadership because he's trying to explain that the gas tax won't do what Clinton and McCain are claiming it will do.

Ard, one of the reasons the experts don't like it is because it will actually make the cost of gasoline go UP (supply and demand stuff). It is a political gimmick, and Hillary Clinton knows that. She is too smart not to know that. That's why this is NOT an example of leadership. I'm not saying you have to switch your support to Obama, but please see this for what it is.

I sure hope my president listens to economists and not polls.

Sent by Michelle | 4:03 PM ET | 05-01-2008

It shows "leadership" to borrow someone else's bad idea and flog it to death to pander? I guess she has experience about that since she exhibited "leadership" by borrowing/supporting Bush's idea to invade Iraq, pandering to the "9/11 patriots," even though that was bad policy, too.

Sent by P. Shears | 4:03 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Yeah, this sounds familar. Let me think....Oh Yeah, it was a guy from Texas by the name of George Bush that took a Leadership stance when going into Iraq. And just like him, she will keep beating this idea, until she gets her way.

Sent by Cedric | 4:16 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Do you want Clinton to pull your fat ass out of that suv or should I? Don't blame people for your greed and short sightedness.Is this a good solution,no.But put the blame where it belongs.

Sent by susan | 4:23 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Lol. My thoughts exactly -- smacks of Pres. Bush.

Sent by wanda | 4:34 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Dr. G./Gary/James/Randy - Great call, Ard - there's a difference between taking a stand on "difficult and, at times, unpopular issues", and bloody-minded sticking to a dumb idea. We've suffered nearly eight years of the latter. Time for a real change.

Sent by Eric Larson | 4:41 PM ET | 05-01-2008

This is leading people over a cliff.

Sent by Mike Fleissner | 4:48 PM ET | 05-01-2008

There are many people in this country who are experts at witnessing their own debt and poverty... they are behind on their credit card payments, mortgage payments, they are having trouble feeding their families. There are many people in our country in these situations. I am one of them. Hillary Clinton is thinking of us. She is speaking to us. She - not the "experts" who are comfortably well off - is actually in touch with the people, and understand that we need help - now.

That is leadership. She is brave. She has been listening to people who are in real need and trouble, and she actually is trying to help as soon as possible.

*I support Hillary, wholeheartedly - she is the real - real deal.*

*Hillary for peace and prosperity 08!*

Sent by Tells it like it is | 5:30 PM ET | 05-01-2008

I for one would love to get a 50-70 cent break on a gallon of gas. Who wouldn't?

Sent by deek | 5:36 PM ET | 05-01-2008

ard-- you're not convincing.

Sent by sem | 6:36 PM ET | 05-01-2008

It's such a stupid idea that I feel... insulted by it. Why not ignore the quote unquote experts at the American Cancer Society and make it mandatory that everyone smoke a pack of cigarettes a day? That's leadership!

Sent by Matt L. | 7:38 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Although I think Wolfson was trying to put "experts" in quotes twice, if you actually put quotes where he indicates in his comment, it would look like this:

"There are times when a president will take a position that a broad consensus of 'experts' will agree with, and there are times when a president will do something that, the group of experts 'does not agree with.'"

It sounds like dubious experts agree with their positions, and real experts' disagreement is hearsay. Not that Wolfson's statement needed any help sounding ridiculous.

Sent by trueblue | 8:11 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Judy,

Peak Oil.

I looked it up, but I am not sure if I understand. Looks like the biggest bust comes right after peak, if importing countries don't lessen demand the worse it is for them while the exporters carry internal demand prices to import customers, during peak and I suppose post-peak.

China and India are obviously driving price as well as lesser developing importers.

So basically it seems an artificial reduction (gas tax holiday) will have absolutely no effect if demand remains constant after peak. In fact, it seems that it will only make the situation worse for the consumer.

That from my cursory perusal.

Interesting post, though.

Sent by Chester | 8:55 PM ET | 05-01-2008

GREAT NEWS! I just heard on the news that clinton is loosing her voice! THERE IS A GOD! She must think the American people are stupid, on the gas tax relief issue. And on the issue of wanting people to trust her, after she demonstrated just how well she can lie. Then call it a misstatement, because she was tired, but yet she is the only one that could be trusted to take a 3 am phone call. go crawl back under a rock and take that husband of yours that took a lot of pride in disgraceing the oval office, and this contry, he did a dandy job of setting an example to our younger generation.

Sent by tdh | 9:05 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Okay.... each day I surf the news feeds and see another headline about how we Americans should be thankful we pay only $4.00 for a gallon of gas. The articles are quick to point out that places like England and other countries are paying $6 to $12 per gallon. It keeps hitting the headlines - over and over - just like a marketing message. Then I began to ask the question... is this a marketing message. As a quick check of my sanity.... I thought I would review their reported numbers on gas prices in England. Our US media reports their prices at $6 per gallon. Well.... after a bit of checking and to no surprise...they don't sell gas by the gallon nor do they sell it in US dollars... okay we all knew that. What I didn't expect was that our media would get so much information wrong. Lets start with the basic math.

Gas in England currently sells on average for 90 pence per liter. With some basic math:

90 pence / liter x 3.785 liters / gallon * 1 english pound / 100 pence * 2 USD ($) / english pound = $6.81 / gallon

Wow, this sounds like a lot.... its incredible really, when we spend currently $3.85 / gallon in the US ( national average as of today ). But why the disparity? Gas comes from all over the globe... why would it be so much higher there or anywhere else. Well it turns out.... we all know the answer... TAXES. In the US gas tax averages 18% but in England their tax is currently 81%.

Lets do the math again removing the tax:

Gas in England: $6.81 / gallon * (1-.81) = $1.29 / gallon
Gas in US: $3.85 / gallon * (1-.18) = $3.16 / gallon

So.... it seems the people in the US are getting .... well.... screwed. I checked the numbers against other countries and well.... the same thing holds true.... the US is paying more for gas. This would explain the huge profits the oil companies are seeing.

But wait... who is releasing all this information to the press on a continual basis that the US needs to suck up and take it? A recent article in CNN Money ( U.S. Gas so Cheap it Hurts ) shows numbers coming from a company called AIRINC ( www.air-inc.com ). Their site is very confusing.... their home page says they are Associates for International Research. Yet they specialize in designing, implementing and supporting compensation programs for a global mobile workforce. This sounds like an odd place for messages about gas to come from. Back to more digging and research of my own.

Well.... of all the news articles I have seen the majority have AIRINC listed as the source of information. So back to the AIRINC site for more information. After a little digging you find their Client List that shows all the information we need to know. Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Marahon Oil, Occidental Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell and my personal favorite Saudi Aramco. Now it makes sense.... all these news articles and their deliberate frequency is nothing more than marketing and the process of making us feel better as the price of gas goes higher. Oh... did i mention this is the same company that did the research for the Tobacco industry?

Well... perhaps AIRINC confusing message is perfectly suited to their business. After they provide misleading information to the public about the companies they promote, they then have to find ways to support them outside the country as part of their business strategy.... yes... they specialize in "compensation for a global workforce".... when more people understand the manipulation, i think the executives at these oil companies are going to need to be very mobile.

Sent by John Ramirez | 10:01 PM ET | 05-01-2008

thank you mr ramirez for an enlightening contribution!

Sent by tim in exile | 2:07 AM ET | 05-02-2008

Populist idea! That's all this is, pandering to the people who BUY gasoline.

"Leadership" is NOT pandering to the poll numbers. Remember Bill Clinton's first term, there was a poll every other day on some "proposed" policy. Trial Ballons, to test the winds of public sentiment.
Are we to expect the same from Hillary?

(Jody Sol, John Ramirez) you are correct, the "peak oil" period is upon us AND giving a "tax holiday" will only delay the enevitable, or make it WORSE!

We, our parents, and grandparents have spent 100+ years (since the invention of the automobile) making this mess!
We rely on "cheap energy" to support our current way of life and dreams. Cheap electricity to power our Internet until 2 am, cheap gasoline to fuel our 4000 lbs SUVs (at 10 MPG). We have no one to blame but our selfish selves for this.
There is no EASY solution, and there is no single answer for all of America.

Sent by Harold | 10:55 AM ET | 05-02-2008

"I for one would love to get a 50-70 cent break on a gallon of gas. Who wouldn't?"

NO! I want my government to wake the hell up, stop shipping money to places like Venezuela, Saudi Arabi or Uzbekistan and develop Solar, Wind and Hydroelectric power. I want all cars to get 50 mpg and legislate so the CEOs of car companies will stop whining and get down to work. I want an adult in the office with a plan...not failed rhetoric.

Sent by James Cutler | 11:32 AM ET | 05-02-2008

James, I think cars would look silly with sails or hydro plants on them.

Anyway, we could use maybe 100 new nuke plants in this country, some plug-in hybrids or pure electrics, and a change in business culture to allow more telecommuting. That would go a long way.

Sent by deek | 12:24 PM ET | 05-02-2008

Doesn't a gas tax holiday provide the same type of recession busting stimulus as the tax rebate and the over-loose monetary policy? We're in a recession; people are hurting; and working class people are hurting the most. Won't giving people a 30 cents a gallon break on gas prices provide a little relief.

Nobody is suggesting that we make eliminating the gas tax permanent policy. To me, as someone with a degree in economics and a PhD in closely related field, the gas tax holiday is the least harmful and has a much more immediate impact than the tax relief check. The most dangerous policy, and the one that helps working people the least and the moneyed interests the most, is the overly loose monetary policy. If we lower interests rates too much, our bankers around the world will flee to other currencies and investments that pay a more realistic rate of return. And they don't have to withdraw money in mass or even stop rolling over current investments. All they have to do is stop financing our balance of payments deficit by investing the money in their own domestic economies or elsewhere around the world.

I know many of my colleagues in economics don't like the gas tax holday, but I would bet that they don't like the tax rebate either. And I would bet that they are really apprehensive about the Fed's myopic monetary policy.

Sent by redstateleroy | 5:16 PM ET | 05-03-2008

Well.
"gas tax holiday" would encourage people to use more gas. Never mind that Bosnia Hilly pushes for cleaner/greener environment and technologies for greater fuel efficiency.

Use more gas - and she wants us to pull out of the middle east fast!

Don't you just prefer straight-talk, one-wheel-off-the-express McSame who says that we are in Iraq for the oil (and not really because of terrorists)?

Economy.
Forget the fumbling by the two McSame - McClinton '08 / McCain '08.
Where are the experts?
Enter the Nobel Prize winners in Economics. Ask them who, in their considered expert opinion, is better for our desperate economy.
Answer: Pres "Hoops" .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk8XpLHG_4A

----
1960s radical, leftist Hillary's thesis: "WHATEVER works to get power to the people, use it."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-bernstein/the-shame-of-hillary-clin_b_99912.html
---

"Bold Deceit and Bizarre Logic" / Hillary '08, WRONG for America

Sent by chokora | 7:21 PM ET | 05-03-2008

" .. presidents listen to advice, get advice, and then, and then act. And that is what Senator Clinton is doing."..

This would be scary - if at all there existed a real chance of her becoming a president of these united states.

As a senator she sat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. As for advice, she got, listened and acted - AND GOT IT WRONG with regard to Iraq.

"Testicular Fortitude"! / Hillary '08, WRONG for America

Sent by chokora | 5:16 AM ET | 05-04-2008

"..Economists across the political spectrum think it's a bad idea. .."

yet Sen Clinton receives applause in the rural areas where she talks about it. Poor bitter rural folks that are maligned by wealthy Clintons.

Does expert advice matter, Sen Clinton?Would you take expert advice from Nobel Prize winners in Economics? If yes, would you seriously consider their view about who they consider is best for the job of steering our ailing economy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk8XpLHG_4A

"Screw 'em", "Nuke 'em" / Hillary '08, WRONG for America

Sent by chokora | 5:24 AM ET | 05-04-2008