Federal Gas Tax Holiday - Boon or Boondoggle?

Senator Clinton jumped on the bandwagon with Senator McCain by proposing a Federal gas tax holiday for the summer. Both feel this 18.3 cent a gallon decrease will give this huge benefit to the American driving public. But what would it do to the theory of "there is strength in numbers" where that puny 18.3 cents adds up to a 10 b-b-billion dollar hit to the transportation fund. Our road and bridge infrastructure is already failing and now the candidates propose this humongous decrease in the funds to make the repairs.

I understand that Hillary's proposal does not take the money from the transportation fund, but rather she is suggesting that we put some sort of windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Like that is going to happen quick enough to make a difference this summer. This is simply convenient political rhetoric (from both of them, frankly) and in my opinion, a bit of pandering to the masses.

I certainly would like a 18 cent per gallon break in gas prices. After all, I have two cars and own a motor home. But really....what will I save? Let's assume one tank a week (20 gallons) per car, and assume that most families have two cars. This tax break would generate about $3.68 per tankful, or $7.36 per week for the family. That might almost buy lunch... for one. In four months it might generate about $118 for the two car family, a princely sum, but that wouldn't even pay my cable bill for a month. On the other hand, the collective tax of 10 billion dollars might actually make a difference. And if the gas prices keep going up as they have, they will effectively wipe out much of the "savings", and psychologically at least, it will seem that the "quick fix" break went away.

And then on September 2, we all get hit with a 18.3 cent per gallon increase. Seems like a good deal, right?

Political Pet Peeves

I am one of "those" persons who has a few pet peeves for the world in general. I am usually a nice person so I don't blast people too often, but those who write or say "Me and her went shopping", or "irregardless" grate on me nevertheless.

For today, I will pick on the three current presidential candidates. Nothing big, just irritants that their handlers should have brought up and corrected.

For Hillary the list is long. The woman just rubs me the wrong way. It is more my issue, I guess, than hers. Of course, she would be totally unaware of what I thought, and would care even less. So to be fair, I will only list E pluribus unum (likely only my brother will get the reference).

I don't know if she can help it but the poor lady's voice was not meant to be used above 65 decibels. When she hits 80 dB it is more of a screech and is not becoming of a lady. She should just wait to speak until the roar of the crowd subsides. Or talk at 65 dB so everyone can wonder what she is saying. Remember the Howard Dean shreik didn't win him many votes.

Senator Obama, the great speaker du jour, has this very annoying habit of injecting "you know", when he is stretching for the right words. Actually it is more like "a no" but then most of us slur some of our words. His people should certainly have coached that out of him by now. To me it is like the word "like" in the current teen vernacular. Unnecessary and, like, distracting. I also happen to think he should let his waffle get cold to answer questions in a public setting, but that is just me.

John McCain, as far as I can tell, took my advice and quit using "trancendent" in every other sentence. Dr. M.L. King was a "transcendent figure in American history...", and our need to "confront the transcendent challenge of our time...", and so on, are just a few of Mac's lines. My freshman English teacher, Miss Zirian Blish, always told us, "Use a word three times and its yours". OK, Mr. McCain, I will cede the word to you, just quit letting it trip off your tongue so frequently.

My real peeve about Mr. McCain, great gentleman that he is, is that someone doesn't get him to the dentist to file his offending teeth to stop that shrill whistle when he talks. It wouldn't take but a quick flick of the emery and he would stop alerting the neighborhood dogs. Listen to him next time and it will begin to irritate you as well. And then you can thank me for pointing it out.

Potomac Primaries - Is the Die Cast?

Six short months ago I could never have predicted where this presidential campaign is today. McCain was left for dead, and like the Phoenix, (appropos) he rose from the ashes to be the nominative candidate for the GOP. Governor Huckabee is fighting the valiant fight, but short of a major faux pas from Senator Mack, he may only get the VP consolation prize, if that.

Similarly, six months ago Hillary was swatting at the Obama gnats buzzing around, just biding her time until the early primaries would thrust her into the lead and then with a few more, she would be crowned the solid candidate of the Dems. Yet, not many would have predicted the tsunami of the Obama movement that now has left only a few state primaries to save the day for Mrs. Clinton. I am sure that she and Bill are shocked and annoyed that the American people could be so naive as to pass on her candidacy. She is pinning her hopes on Ohio and Texas, seeming to leave Wisconsin alone to go to Obama. He is already beginning to campaign in the Badger State, not wanting to alienate any possible constituency.

Of course it ain't over til its over, but the fat lady is standing in the wings.

And Then There Were Two...or Three, or Four

Romney's denouement was a surprise to me. I took him at his word that he was marching on despite a poor showing on Super Tuesday. This changes the complexion of the campaign for the Republicans. McCain had started his meager attempt to bring every one into the tent. He saw this as necessary to combat the flogging he was taking not only from Romney, but from the radio right.

Now it seems that he has a choice. To continue the catering if he wishes, or to be true to his more moderate ways. He appears to not need the far right, unless there is an ABMc (Anyone But McCain) movement that Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh seem willing to join.

McCain was lambasted this past week with constant references to "McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, and McCain-Lieberman" legislation. This was an attempt to "liberalize" the Senator, but I always saw McCain's efforts as a way to bridge that awful partisan gap that hamstrings our government. It looks like no good deed continues to go unpunished.

Republican Debate More Like Feud - January 30, 2008

It sure is nice to have the number of "debaters" drop a little each time. Easier to really get some depth from those still standing. I was impressed again, overall, with Mike Huckabee in his common sense answers, his ability to think on his feet, and his ability to avoid shoving out the the same cliched lines. I want to give McCain a wedgy each time he says "transcendent". Enough, Senator...find another couple of words.

I was disappointed with the Romney-McCain feud over what "timeline" means. So silly to continue that tete-a-tete after Wolf read Romney's actual relevant comment. So petty and not impressive. Of course, Mr. Romney has got to learn not to get so excited about some of the critcisms leveled at him. He reminds me of a CEO who has total control and therefore can intimidate his employees without risk. That could be scary in a President, I suppose.

Ron Paul continues to have good but Pollyann-ish answers. Would that it were true and possible, but the reality is that some of what Paul says is just not possible in this real world.

I like Senator McCain for a lot of reasons: his straight talk, his patrotism, his service to the country. Yet, I wonder how he would fare against Barack Obama. I think he would lose. A race against Hillary would be better for McCain. She has enough negatives that can be brought to bear, that he could win the country to his side. Any disagreement here?