It's embarrassing that a politician can take something so totally out of context (the $1.79 gas prices in 2008) and spin it in their favor where people actually fall for it. This is a classic example of using statistics in her favor. Nobody judges gas prices for one day -- what were the 6 month and yearly averages? Every day I feel more strongly that our nation is 75% full of idiots who go for this stuff. If Bachman even sniffs the nomination I will mourn for what our nation is head toward.
Don't mention the stock market to Republicans, they can point to how it goes down thanks to "Obama policies" and "Obama getting elected", but will probably fail to mention that the NYSE has gone up a huge amount of points since the Obama Admin. took over. Using their own flawed logic is just hilarious. Of course, it's probably ingratiating that many of the top financial speculators are on the Dem side---Soros, Buffett, Corzine, Blankfein, despite the fact that the Dems were the one passing flawed (but nevertheless, better than nothing) financial regulation, and "threatening taxes on the rich." Is that influence corruptible? Probably. Is it good? Probably not. Is it indicative of the fact that Wall Street knows what kind of administration is better for them---hmm.
Are you serious? Why not fix the regulation that has allowed all the investment banks to act as speculators in the process in which they are not taking final delivering of the product. See this bill:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000 then, http://arizona.typepad.com/blog/200...phole-and-oil-speculators-on-wall-street.html If she were to go back to laws that governed commodities that existed prior to 1992, that would be a huge win for the middle & lower class. There is no way to know at this point to know if that's what she is implying here but still, if you remove the speculators from the process, you could theoretically return to post bubble pricing on all commodities. The only benefactors to these above mentioned policies have been wallstreet and the affluent who were funneling wealth to themselves through the GWB tax breaks and market deregulation. I'm not saying Bachmann is a great choice because I know nothing about her really but we need candidates that are willing to be political and wallstreet outsiders in order to see the middle class rebuilt.
Great points. That said, Bachmann isn't that candidate... and frankly, that candidate probably doesn't exist - with the possible exception of Ron Paul. To that end, I find it highly dubious that she's referring to a repeal of the laws that deregulated otc derivate trading, but much more likely that she is ultimately referring to a cowtow to the energy lobby, which imo would have the impact that JV pointed out in his post.
I agree and have been saying for awhile that high gas prices aren't really a bad thing. Given all of the problems with fossil fuel infrastructure and the fact that it is a finite resource conservation and alternatives are the way to go. The only way though that that will happen is for higher gas prices. Consider that since we've started to have higher gas prices we have seen more conservation and much more moves to developing alternatives, true a global downturn contributed to that, but compared to 10 years ago when we gas prices were truly cheap our energy efficiency has greatly increased.
Yeah Bachmann is definitely not the candidate to bring back more regulation and cut down on speculation.
While I'm no fan of Bachmann in the least bit, what does being a woman have to do with anything? Besides that...they do take a test. It's called election season. It's the people that are voting her every 2 years that I'm more concerned about.
You are right of course. It just baffles me how people like her get elected, I mean are Republican party not able to produce a more qualified candidate for that district?
People very often vote irrationally, based on animal reactions to other people. In this case, and especially in what feels like a complex and threatening world, I believe people are naturally drawn to confidence, a true, deep and abiding confidence. Bachman has this and perhaps nothing else. History shows a convincing (and often very horrific) precedent for confident, aggressive people doing very well in times of confusion, hardship and strife. EDIT: sticking to positive examples, you can cite Churchill and FDR. I don't want to go into all the bad examples, but I think Bachmann would be a bad one.
Yes, I am serious and I think I explained why. I am in favor of improving regulations, but I don't think going backward or eliminating speculators is the way to go. I'd rather move forward and have more control on speculators and more transparency. Speculators serve a useful purpose in the market. When a company that does take delivery needs to hedge their position to mitigate their risks, speculators are usually the counter-party. Getting rid of them would make the energy business more volatile and therefore more expensive. There has been a lot of innovation in this industry in the last couple of decades that we don't want to get rid of of. At the same time, we know people have gamed the system along the way, caused market bubbles, and a lot of trouble. So, there's still work to do to find the right regulatory framework that still allows people to buy and sell risk and eliminates distortions.
More or less. Bachmann is after all from a very right-wing district. It's how she gets elected, just like how Tom DeLay or Lee get elected in their own way. She represents that small area out in the country. And now she can be leader of this big nation. Great.
$2 gas? Promised? Good enough for me. That's it, I am officially changing my political allegiance. She'll fill up your car, too! Crazy Eyes for the Win!
Michelle Bachman doesn't even pass the sniff test (one of the few politicians where you can just see the crazy spewing out of every pore), let alone once she opens her mouth. How anyone can support such nincompoopery is beyond me.
I agree that expensive gas is a good thing so long as investment banks are not involved. I don't mind paying $4 a gallon if I knew that the government were taking in say $3 of that in the form of taxation to be used in road and infrastructure repair but that's not happening. This would be an endless source of revenue to supply jobs but considering the amount of wealth that has ended up in the hands of people like the Kochs & Soros the last 10 years while the middle & lower classes have suffered, we need an overhaul. It is things like this that have me quite dissapointed in Obama. If he was a president for the people, this is easy legislation he could undo to create revenue to get people back to work (tax above and beyond market with speculators removed on all commodities to maintain current pricing). The top 1% is not hurting in this country and they'd be potentially be the only ones giving up something. I realize Bachmann is probably not the candidate to do this but I am trying to look beyond the rhetoric with everyone.
michele has parlayed being in a district in congress that likes her to this position she is in. once she is vetted out like the other crazy lady from three years ago she will go back to being an irrelevant yet loud congress woman with no legislation accomplishments to speak of because she introduces crazy legislation
