We cannot drill our way out of the current crisis of higher gasoline prices. Why? It is a simple matter of supply and demand. While the supply of oil is finite, the demand for oil is ever expanding. No matter how many holes we drill, we will never catch up to the global demand for oil-based motor fuels as they are currently used.
Trying to drill our way out of this crisis is a little like chasing the Sun on a bicycle: you can pedal all you want and you may even feel like you are making a little forward progress, but the Sun will inevitably pull away from you. The demand for oil will inevitably pull away from the supply, and the more the gap between supply and demand widens, the higher the price of gasoline will go. We cannot address this crisis on the supply side of the equation because the available supply--even if we were to drill as many holes as we could--is both finite and insufficient. The more we consume, the more insufficient it becomes, and the higher the price of gasoline will go.
Barack Obama is now the presumptive Democratic candidate for the President of the United States in 2008. After a close, and at times acrimonious race, it has become clear that Hillary Clinton will not be able to collect enough delegates and super delegates to claim the nomination.
Unfortunately, due to closeness of the race (both real, in the beginning and as exaggerated by the media during the last few weeks) many Clinton supporters will find it very difficult to accept this outcome. The Democratic Party faces a serious challenge over the next two or three months: the need to reconcile Clinton supporters to Obama's candidacy and unify the party so it can devote its energy to the campaign from August through November. There is a lot at stake here: a Democratic civil war at this point would not just jeopardize Obama's chances at the presidency, it would interfere with our opportunity to expand our margin of control in the House of Representatives, obtain a working majority in the U.S. Senate, and to adjust the balance of the U.S Supreme Court.
I believe that all Democrats--not just Obama supporters--must approach the next few months with a mixture of patience and vigilance towards the hard core of Clinton supporters.
Yesterday was Hillary Clinton's last best chance to catch up to Barack Obama, and she fell short.
Depending on who you ask (CNN or the Secretary of State of Pennsylvania) Clinton's margin of victory is somewhere between 8.51% and 9.39%. Clinton spin doctors and some media commentators have been doing some creative rounding in order to award Clinton the "double-digit victory" she needed, but did not earn. That does not change the fact that Clinton failed to rack up the numbers she needed to even begin catching up to Barack Obama.
I did not see another diary on this subject in the rec'd or recent diary lists and thought it was important enough to call attention to. I apologize if it has been previously diaried. The purpose of this diary is to call attention to Stephen Braun's article in The Los Angeles Times and perhaps spark a discussion of this topic.
I was disappointed to see that just a week after former President Bill Clinton was revealed to have ties to a group supporting the Colombia free trade agreement, it has now been revealed that he has ties to a company that assisted the government of China in its crackdown on Tibetan dissidents.
Unfortunately, much of the Clintons' dealings with this company remain shrouded.
"Projection" is a psychological phenomenon where an individual accuses another individual of engaging in behavior that the first individual is, in fact, engaged in.
Take Hillary Clinton, for instance. She's accusing Barack Obama of using Deval Patrick's response to her attack that Obama is "all words and no action." What Hillary Clinton fails to acknowledge is that she stole Kerry Healey's line of attack on Deval Patrick. It was Kerry Healey in 2006 who taunted Deval Patrick with being "all talk and no action." Deval Patrick skewered her with his response.
I'm confident that Barack Obama's supporters will set a new fundraising record today, raising more than $6 million since the polls closed yesterday. But we can do better. This Friday is payday. It's time for everyone to sit down, tweak their budget, and find that extra $25, $50 or even $100 to send to the Obama campaign this Friday.
Hillary Clinton has asked her supporters for $3 million in three days. If we can answer her with $12 to $14 million in the same period, then perhaps she will begin to see the light.
The only thing Hillary Clinton has to offer the Democratic Party and our nation is dishonesty and divisiveness.
One of the most common criticisms leveled at Hillary Rodham Clinton is her fundamental dishonesty. At the same time, her defenders call accusations about Clinton's dishonest behavior "right-wing talking points" and they routinely dismiss any criticism of her on that score.
For Democrats, taken in the context of her many battles with the Right Wing, it has been all too easy to overlook Clinton's transgressions on this point.
But if you take an example of her behavior outside of the context of the partisan conflict, if you look at her recent behavior towards her fellow Democrats, then an objective observer is likely to arrive at some troubling conclusions. There is no need to plumb the depths of Clinton's long history of political conflict. Recent events provide ample examples of just how ruthless and irresponsible Hillary Clinton can be when it suits her purposes.
I just wanted to take a moment and pass along to you an invitation that brand new Virginia State Senator Donald McEachin has extended to his constituents and friends.
Now some of you out there may not remember Donald McEachin. Donald was a key early endorser of Jim Webb early in his race for the U.S. Senate against George F. Allen. It's no exageration to say that without Donald McEachin there might not have been a Jim Webb candidacy--and without a Jim Webb candidacy we might not have been able to take back the U.S. Senate.
I suppose I could have addressed this to the supporters of other Democratic candidates as well, but they don't seem to be the ones causing problems--and supporters of Hillary Clinton were always rare here anyway. I wanted to take a moment today and address some troubling patterns of behavior I have seen emerging in the last few weeks.
I am referring to over-the-top, obnoxious and negative political rhetoric.
The art of political blogging is still relatively new. Many of the bloggers at this site are relatively new to the practice and have never blogged through a major primary campaign and don't understand how ticklish it can be. I am a veteran of the Jim Webb campaign, including the primary fight with Harris Miller. Throughout the primary and the general election I blogged at my personal blog, The Richmond Democrat. Bloggers played a big role in Jim Webb's victory, and in his primary victory in particular. Perhaps more than in any other election to date.
I'd like to share some things I learned from that experience after the jump.
By now you know that Barack Obama has won the Iowa Democratic Caucus by more than 7.5% over his nearest rival. Tonight's win was huge for Obama for many reasons.
It revealed the raw power of Obama's organization and his ability to draw new blood into the process, including a significant number who aren't captured in polls because they aren't "likely" Democratic voters: they are unlikely Democratic voters.
This post grew from a comment I started to write on a post that accused Barack Obama of not "fighting" for Democratic values the way John Edwards has. Pro-Edwards bloggers are certainly entitled to their views, but I do not know that John Edwards has been dramatically tougher than any of the other Democratic candidates, let alone Barack Obama. If you prefer your candidate to be more pugnacious, well that's your choice.
I'm not writing to support Barack Obama or attack John Edwards. Rather, I am writing to remind all the supporters of all the Democratic candidates that there will be only one Democratic presidential candidate, and those people who identify themselves as Democrats have an obligation to behave responsibly during the caucus and primary season.
To self-destruct as the result of overusing negative advertising.
To wantonly destroy one's own political campaign as the result of negative campaigning.
To inappropriately invoke Hitler in the course of a political campaign resulting in the failure of one's own political campaign.
Example: Boy, George Allen really Kilgored himself when he attacked Jim Webb after the "Macaca" incident.
Anyone even remotely involved with Virginia politics remembers the ads accusing Tim Kaine of being so weak on the death penalty that he wouldn't even execute Hitler if given the chance. The negative ads rebounded on Kilgore so badly that he lost a double digit lead and ended by losing the election to Kaine by six points. The scenario repeated itself a year later when George Allen, imploding after being caught on tape using a racial epithet, launched an insanely nasty series of attacks against challenger Jim Webb's books about his experiences in the Vietnam War. These attacks were the final nail in Allen's coffin, as the press decisively turned against him in the last weeks of the campaign.
It seems that no one is faster to wrap themselves in the flag these days than the Republicans who started it but refuse to fight it. Yet, even as they refuse to volunteer to serve in the military, these people have never hesitated to claim that they "Support the Troops," waving flags and planting yard signs. But in the treatment of our nation's veterans--in other words in the only metric that counts for anything--the Republican Party's record in the last seven years has been worse than dismal.
Senator Jim Webb will be on television tonight to discuss the Bush administration's escalating rhetoric and unilateral sanctions against Iran. Senator Webb will underscore the need for his Iran bill, which prohibits the use of funds for military operations in Iran without the explicit consent of the Congress.
This is exciting news: Chap Petersen--Democratic candidate for the Virginia State Senate--has a new television ad up!
It's a devastating example of the right way to use negative advertising. It's a factual critique of Jeannemarie Devolites-Davis' record on transportation issues (issues critical to Northern Virginia these days); it is cool, clinical, to the point, and it steers clear of personal attacks.
