NYG 1950 Logo
It's hard to believe that the election is only 40 days away. This campaign has been going on for years. I was actually shocked last night when I realized that the last day to register to vote in DC and VA is in only a little bit more than a week (October 6). I promptly mailed in my DC registration today -- yeah, I know it's pointless, and I wish I could speed up my impending relocation to Northern Virginia.
Because becoming a lawyer is proving to be pretty much impossible until I finally get my bar exam results back (I took the thing in July), I've decided to distract myself from the solitary and obsessive job search by volunteering for the Obama campaign, and maybe even getting in some community service. I figure I might as well make some use of myself beyond sending out countless e-mails and resumes every day.
Today, I went to the official opening of the Obama headquarters in DC. This headquarters, as you would guess, is almost entirely focused on getting out the vote in Virginia. DC Mayer Adrian Fenty made an appearance at the event this morning, and provided a brief pep rally for the modest crowd which by then had blocked off most of U Street. I'd like to think of my attendance today as the beginning of 40 days of service to getting Obama elected. I've never really done official campaign work before...this is a first for me, and somewhat rattles my non-partisan stubborness. However, I still checked independent on that voter registration last night.
The argument over the feasibility and effectiveness of an increased tax on gasoline has been debated for years now in this country, but mainly by newspaper columnists and policy wonks, rather than the politicians who would actually have the ability to make such a tax happen. Understandably, politicians regard this topic as politically toxic, especially as the average American continues to struggle with $4/gallon gasoline. But in the wake of abnormally high gas prices this summer, the potential effectiveness of a gas tax is becoming more clear. Americans reduced their gasoline usage this summer, and for once, the market began to demand that the alternative energy industry respond with options cheaper than gasoline.
The idea to increase the gas tax in the United States begins with the presumption that the market is the most powerful force that can curb American's energy use and the world's shift to cleaner energy. Today, the Washington Post Editors propose that we consider a gas tax that would set the price floor of oil in the United States at $110/barrel. When the worldwide price of oil is below $110/barrel, a tax would keep the price artificially high, and then the government would rebate the tax revenues at the end of the year. In defense of its plan, the Post continues:
The gasoline tax proposal is certainly more complicated than I will even pretend to understand. But I do agree that the free market will drive alternative energy innovation more than any Congressional proposal can. This country urgently needs to take the lead in the alternative energy industry...it may be worth giving the market a little bump in order to keep us on track in our pursuit of energy independence and a cleaner environment.
David Brooks of the NYT continues to be the only columnist I routinely read and trust. Today, he offers another illuminating column, this time providing an historical perspective on how important experience might be for elected national leaders:
Sarah Palin is incredibly inexperienced. The question, obviously, is how much this really should matter. Unfortunately for the Democrats, the argument is a hard one to make. Obama is perhaps one of the least qualified nominees for President in the country's history. And he, unlike Palin, is at the top of the ticket. The Palin pick should have rendered the debate about experience a non-issue in this campaign, ostensibly hurting Republicans by relinquishing one of their strongest criticisms of Obama. Astoundingly, it has instead somehow put the Democrats on the defensive. Again, shrewd politics from a McCain campaign that continues to defy the odds.
Fantasy football has been an incredibly effective and inevitable source of autumn procrastination for me for years now. My team this year, already 1-1, should be in decent shape barring major injuries. My top WR,
Brandon Marshall, the formerly suspended Broncos wide receiver -- and risky gamble in the early round of all fantasy drafts, seems to be panning out quite well.
This week, Marshall reined in 18 throws from budding superstar QB Jay Cutler, tying the record for most receptions in a single game in NFL history. I expect more greatness to come. Oh, and the Giants seem to have continued their dominance from last season's magical Super Bowl run, having easily stomped the Redskins in week 1, and then the Rams this past weekend. Should be a great season, even (or especially) without Tom Brady.
Herd mentality, the theory that human beings can be influenced to adopt just about any behavior or view of the world based on the actions and beliefs of those around them, was dramatically exemplified during the Republican Convention when the attendees began an unbelievably ignorant and narrow-minded chant of "Drill, Baby, Drill" during Rudy Giuliani's speech. While personally shocked in utter disbelief at the moment I heard this deplorable chant, I have been waiting for Thomas Friedman, currently in an environmental sermonizing phase, to respond in-kind. Finally, today, Friedman addressed the chant:
In reality, it looks like the forty-year old offshore drilling ban will come to an end sometime soon -- with limitations. But to rejoice in this development is to ignore the fact that offshore drilling will do little to mitigate soaring gas prices at the pump today, and if anything will only prolong an oil addiction that becomes more painful for Americans with every passing day
At this point, it's obvious that John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his VP candidate was politically brilliant. The media hysteria surrounding Palin, even though often negative, has kept the previously unheard-of Alaska governor on the front pages of major newspapers for two weeks.
As Palin's star has grown, Obama's seems to be inexplicably faltering. To make things worse for Obama supporters, the media's often negative portrayal of Palin (while sometimes deserved), has veered into an unjustiably ignorant new direction in the past few days - brewing up resentment among women voters, and inciting a conservative Republican base that seemed intent on taking this election off only a few months ago.
Being the convenient moderate that I am, I can try to comment on this issue without a partisan bias filtering my observations. First, let me reassert my support for the Obama campaign. I believe that the Obama/Biden ticket is immeasurably stronger and more predictable than the McCain/Palin combo. But that's for another post.
Much has been made of Palin's apparent failure to understand what Charlie Gibson was getting at when he asked Palin about her feelings on the "Bush Doctrine." The absurdity of all of this is that Gibson referenced the "Bush Doctrine" as though it actually was a commonly accepted term for Bush's willingness to use preemptive force to defend the country. As a Washington Post article today finally makes clear, Palin's confusion regarding Gibson's question was entirely justifiable:
"Peter D. Feaver, who worked on the Bush national security strategy as a staff member on the National Security Council, said he has counted as many as seven distinct Bush doctrines. They include the president's second-term "freedom agenda"; the notion that states that harbor terrorists should be treated no differently than terrorists themselves; the willingness to use a "coalition of the willing" if the United Nations does not address threats; and the one Gibson was talking about -- the doctrine of preemptive war.
'If you were given a quiz, you might guess that one, because it's one that many people associate with the Bush doctrine," said Feaver, now a Duke University professor. "But in fact it's not the only one.'"
Sure, Palin may not have intentionally answered the question correctly -- she may not have had any clue what Gibson was talking about. But, at this point, it doesn't matter. The damage has been done. The media unjustifiably slung mud at Palin again, and voters resent negativity -- especially when undeserved.