Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Dodd Gambles With a Global Warming Ad Buy

Give Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) this: He's not sitting back and waiting for his window of opportunity to open, he's trying to pry it open with his own two hands.

Dodd will launch the third ad of his presidential campaign today in Iowa and New Hampshire, a spot focused on his energy plan that -- among other things -- would implement a corporate carbon tax designed.

The ad, which you can watch below, hits Iowa and New Hampshire airwaves today, begins with a group of children singing "we've got the whole world in our hands" as they play with globes.

VIDEO | Chris Dodd for President TV Ad: 'Global'

A narrator intones: "All the Earth's creatures are threatened by global warming. One candidate for president is doing something to stop it -- Chris Dodd. He's the only one with an energy plan that has a courageous corporate carbon tax to transform American industry."

The commercial goes on to note that former Vice President Al Gore -- the oracle on global warming -- called Dodd's plan "creative" while former Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.) deemed it "honest and bold."

The message here, as it was in Dodd's first two ads centered on his early support for a bill that would have set a firm date to defund the Iraq war, is that he is a candidate of bold ideas who is willing to step out of the pack and push for them. There's little debate that Dodd went out on a limb with his early support of the de-funding legislation backed by Sens. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), and his carbon tax proposal is clearly the most radical step to combat global warming proposed by any of the candidates running for president.

For Dodd, the risk-taking strategy is both smart and essential. His biggest struggle in the race is to find a niche he can occupy that none of the other candidates have already taken. And, a bold ideas guy who isn't afraid to make what seem like radical proposals to bring about real change could be just the ticket.

Dodd is taking a big (and early gamble) that voters will respond to that message. In order to be within shouting financial shouting distance of the Big 3 presidential candidates -- Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards -- heading into next year, Dodd must begin to show movement in the early voting states. Dodd had a solid fundraising performance in the first three months of the year but in order to grow into the tens of millions he will need to make a run at the top tier candidate he must convince donors why he is a good investment. These ads are a big part of that persuasion process.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 31, 2007; 3:37 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McCain Goes on Offense on Immigration
Next: The Line: Battle for House Taking Shape


pmufrlt zgokud fimk pieu hpovw uwzlsgn slvpnczew [URL][/URL] zlwbsfgjr nclpb

Posted by: spumlnyid hryvcea | June 17, 2007 7:00 PM | Report abuse

pmufrlt zgokud fimk pieu hpovw uwzlsgn slvpnczew [URL][/URL] zlwbsfgjr nclpb

Posted by: spumlnyid hryvcea | June 17, 2007 6:59 PM | Report abuse

pmufrlt zgokud fimk pieu hpovw uwzlsgn slvpnczew [URL][/URL] zlwbsfgjr nclpb

Posted by: spumlnyid hryvcea | June 17, 2007 6:58 PM | Report abuse

qlcoabpw kfzue kduqwm icgrqm tbzqskiuy ijhacurp yhndpqs [URL=]cjhsfe lncw[/URL]

Posted by: gpju bdaiocng | June 17, 2007 6:57 PM | Report abuse

qlcoabpw kfzue kduqwm icgrqm tbzqskiuy ijhacurp yhndpqs [URL=]cjhsfe lncw[/URL]

Posted by: gpju bdaiocng | June 17, 2007 6:56 PM | Report abuse

qlcoabpw kfzue kduqwm icgrqm tbzqskiuy ijhacurp yhndpqs [URL=]cjhsfe lncw[/URL]

Posted by: gpju bdaiocng | June 17, 2007 6:55 PM | Report abuse

hksf pfbcuenwk adkhoqv vwro imedkay flkhdcg daynqtm oarm raobhw

Posted by: lucsi dmfswvyo | June 17, 2007 6:54 PM | Report abuse

hksf pfbcuenwk adkhoqv vwro imedkay flkhdcg daynqtm oarm raobhw

Posted by: lucsi dmfswvyo | June 17, 2007 6:53 PM | Report abuse

hksf pfbcuenwk adkhoqv vwro imedkay flkhdcg daynqtm oarm raobhw

Posted by: lucsi dmfswvyo | June 17, 2007 6:52 PM | Report abuse

rhjiosfwq vwshldno tkdr gedqljnzk knpeir xzdlwp helatsz

Posted by: ygujfrck ivynweh | June 17, 2007 6:51 PM | Report abuse

rhjiosfwq vwshldno tkdr gedqljnzk knpeir xzdlwp helatsz

Posted by: ygujfrck ivynweh | June 17, 2007 6:50 PM | Report abuse

rhjiosfwq vwshldno tkdr gedqljnzk knpeir xzdlwp helatsz

Posted by: ygujfrck ivynweh | June 17, 2007 6:49 PM | Report abuse

peyngi lognc xnzyewo drkzcv zlacfvkqm mtcbs xtsy

Posted by: ioagpezdn rduxtjq | June 17, 2007 6:46 PM | Report abuse

US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate.

Posted by: anonymous | June 4, 2007 11:12 AM | Report abuse

proudtobeGOP says: "In 08 we Rs will support a candidate who can win."

and that's the whole problem. Just imagine how much better it would be if everyone could say "In 08 we AMERICANS will support a candidate who can actually GOVERN."

(which, by the way, knocks off most of your field. I'm just sayin'.)

Posted by: priority check | June 1, 2007 2:14 PM | Report abuse

I'm more moderate than you may think, not che. But, I am in the habit of supporting candidates who are actually on the ballot and can win.

In 08 we Rs will support a candidate who can win, as the Ds run from one who can't (Hillary).

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | June 1, 2007 12:16 PM | Report abuse

As is currently typical of conservative Republicans, you do not address the issues I raise because you cannot. Instead, you drag out a name - in this case, 'Kerry' - which you think has so much that is disagreeable attached to it that it gets you off the hook. It does not. The only actual person I mentioned by name was Reagan, and that only as a comparison by which to measure Bush's and the 21st century GOP's fiscal recklessness / shortsightedness.
I was not a Kerry supporter in the primary, but you could have cast a net down any street in this country in 2004 and found more than one person more sensible, practical, and intelligent to support for president than George W. Bush. Including John Kerry.

Posted by: not che | June 1, 2007 12:03 PM | Report abuse

If the dems had offered up someone better than Kerry, then maybe things would be different -according to you. Try better next time.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | June 1, 2007 11:52 AM | Report abuse

"'the REAL attributes we need to see in a president.' none of which Dodd has."

and your vote in 2000 and 2004 was wisely cast for - whom? I say again - well, I implied it the 1st time but now I'll just say it - your idea of the qualities necessary for good leadership have brought us a bloody fiasco Iraq which has become both a recruiting poster and a training ground for Al Qaeda and other groups, a return to deficit spending (on a level that makes Reagan look like an amateur), a bitterly divided and mutually suspicious nation, seven years lost in making progress to counter climate change, a dumbing down of the national conversation and culture, (which goes hand in hand with) an unwelcome and unconstitutional increase in the political role played by religious leaders (especially anti-intellectual fundamentalists), our government wiretapping the telephones of private citizens without warrants, our government's use of torture - both ours and that conducted by the client states in the Middle East to which we bring prisoners, our rapidly worsening relations with most of the rest of the world, our rapid loss of competitive advantage to foreign companies and governments, and I could go on, but then I would be che.

Posted by: not che | June 1, 2007 11:41 AM | Report abuse

"the REAL attributes we need to see in a president." none of which Dodd has. Hillary is more manly than him anyway.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | June 1, 2007 11:25 AM | Report abuse

ProudtobeGOP, good to see your laser-like focus on the REAL attributes we need to see in a president. Policy is so boring.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 1, 2007 11:20 AM | Report abuse

bjerryberg, what's it like on your planet? do the rivers run with chocolate? is everyone always cheerful and smiling? and is it your birthday every day?

down here on the planet earth, the excessive emission of co2 is threatening global weather patterns and the survival of many many species, possibly including our own if nothing is done soon. maybe you should get back in your rocketship and head home, because down here, we have a lot of work to do, and no time to explain patiently and repeatedly the necessity of doing it.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 1, 2007 11:17 AM | Report abuse

golgi says "One thing [Dodd] should be careful of is seeming too obsessed with his own virility."

Spot on golg. He's definitely quirky, and have you seen his wife? They have matching eyebrows! How cute is that?

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | June 1, 2007 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Dodd is a hedge fund-linked fool predictably taking hedge fund manager Al Gore's line. The science of the Gore global warming agenda is akin to the eugenic race science agenda that was considered respectable science by many blue-bloods (like the Bushes and the Harrimans) in the 1930s before the Holocaust discredited it.

Co2 is NOT a pollutant and to insist it is, is merely an excuse for technology apartheid--the racist denial of modern industry to impoverished under-developed nations. Call the Gore tripe what it is:

Genocide not science.

Posted by: bjerryberg | June 1, 2007 10:00 AM | Report abuse

For uncensored news please bookmark:

Rudy Giuliani: The rooster who made the sun rise

By Joseph Dillon Davey

The current polls indicate Rudy Giuliani is the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. On September 10, 2001, the odds against such a situation were astronomical. New Yorkers were not unhappy about the prospect of Rudy leaving public service and it appeared that his political career was over. Giuliani's leadership following September 11 was, if not actually Churchillian, at least a whole lot more inspiring than the seven and a half years that preceded that tragic attack. So it is with a note of admiration for his post-September 11 performance that I would like to set the record straight about Giuliani's impact on crime in New York.

The public has widely accepted the idea that Rudy's crime control methods miraculously brought down the crime rate in New York during his two terms as Mayor. There is very good reason to believe this is not so.

To give credit where credit is due, we should acknowledge that the "quality of life arrests" that the NY Police Department made under the Giuliani administration resulted in the removal of so many guns from the streets that the new policy -- aimed at squeegee men originally -- was largely responsible for the much publicized drop in gun homicides. Minor offenders found themselves subjected to a full custody arrest rather than a "cite and release" ticket. These arrests revealed an extraordinary number of handguns and, under the Sullivan Act, the perpetrator was likely to wind up doing a year at Riker's Island. More and more guns were, accordingly, left home. However, while Giuliani has claimed much credit for this decrease, a closer look raises some questions.

For instance, between 1995 and 1999 there was a 32 percent decrease in homicides nationwide. While it is true that New York saw a decrease in homicide of 43 percent during this same period, other big cities did even better. Boston, for example, had a decrease in their homicide rate of 67 percent, Los Angeles 54 percent, New Orleans 48 percent and Richmond, Virginia saw a drop of 48 percent. Does Rudy also get credit for those extraordinary decreases?

No one is quite sure why big cities have seen such a dramatic decrease in homicide. Demographic patterns are at least partially responsible, along with low unemployment rates and the historically unprecedented growth of incarceration. But there are few criminologists who think having the right mayor is a very significant explanation for these decreases.

On the opposite end of the crime spectrum from homicide is the rate of minor offenses. Rudy was successful at driving off the "squeegee men" and discouraging panhandling and jay walking. However, his claims of great success at reducing the rate of felonies in the Big Apple are far from justified. What happened to crime rates elsewhere during Rudy's regime?

The best method we have of counting crime is the National Crime Victimization Survey. (NCVS) The Survey was introduced in 1973 as an outgrowth of the Presidents Commission on Crime. It has been widely imitated around the industrialized world and is considered by criminologists to be the most accurate measure of crime ever devised. For the nation as a whole, the NCVS shows a spectacular decrease in serious crime in all 50 states during the years that Giuliani was the Big Apple's mayor. A close look at the numbers suggests that nothing very special happened in New York.

Giuliani claims that reported felonies decreased by 57 percent during his two terms in office (going from 8,259 to 3,556 felonies per week). How does this compare with other cities in the northeast?

The drop in crime nationwide during the first six years of Giuliani's mayoralty was close to 40 percent, (Personal Crimes down from 318.9 to 198; Property Crimes down from 52.2 to 33.7).Moreover, the pattern of decreases in crime during the nineties has shown that the biggest decreases came disproportionately in the largest cities, especially those in the Northeast. Giuliani may have enough of an inflated ego to claim his influence over the crime drop nationwide, but criminologists and political commentators should be expected to have a more discerning eye. And that is just part of it.

The major disadvantage of the NCVS is that it does not break down the figures by geographical location so that it does not provide us with figures on New York City. For the Big Apple, we only have the much less accurate figures from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). These are the figures that Rudy quoted in his State of the City speech.

The UCR depends on both the victim's willingness to report the crime to the police and the police department's willingness to characterize the crime as a "felony" and add it to the list of offenses sent to the FBI. By putting police administrators under pressure to lower the numbers, substantial changes can be brought about.

For example, about 65 percent of all felonies are "grand larcenies." If a theft is reported to the police and the value of the thing stolen is less than $500, then the offense is a misdemeanor and will not be reported to the FBI. The police themselves are in the position of having to determine what the fair market value of the stolen property is.

Likewise, the majority of violent felonies are called "aggravated assault." While they are included in the UCR, simple assaults are not. A "simple assault" is one that either does not involve a "deadly weapon" or does not involve "serious" injury. Again, the arresting officer is often able to characterize the "deadliness" of the weapon or the "seriousness" of the assault to determine whether or not a felony is being reported to them. (Some prosecutors ask how many stitches it took to stop the bleeding in order to determine if a felony or misdemeanor was committed)

As soon as Giuliani appointed William Bratton as Commissioner of NYPD things changed. In his book Turnaround: How America's Top Cop Reversed the Crime Epidemic, Bratton brags about the unprecedented pressure he put on precinct commanders to bring down crime statistics. These commanders were called to weekly meetings and excoriated if the crime numbers from their precincts were not decreasing.

In talking about these "Compstat" meetings, Bratton writes: " . . . one good way to bring your career to a screeching halt was to bomb there consistently. Compstat was police Darwinism; the fittest survived and thrived." (P.234 Bratton) This direct connection between crime statistics and an administrator's career had never been seen before.

"Each commander was called upon," writes Bratton, "to report on his precinct about once a month, and we had his precinct's numbers in front of us."(p.232) He goes on to explain how the precinct commander would then pressure the platoon commander who in turn would pressure the sergeants to question individual patrol officer's. Was that broom handle really a "deadly weapon"? Was that stolen 10-speed bike really worth over $500? Was that car really stolen or just borrowed without permission by a brother-in-law? The discretion of the officer would be pivotal and very often that same officer needed a favor from his sergeant.

There are lots of little things that can make a cop's life more pleasant. Assignments vary greatly; days off must be approved by someone above you. It was in everyone's interest to make the number drop -- and under Giuliani this was a greater factor in New York than anywhere else.

The top brass of the NYPD were pressured to lean on their troops. Those troops were the arresting officers who had the discretion to characterize offenses as misdemeanors or felonies. Quite by coincidence a reporter for the New York Post stumbled upon a perfect example of this process about six months after September 11. According to the Post:


March 14, 2002 -- EXCLUSIVE A Bronx police precinct is under investigation by NYPD Internal Affairs for allegedly doctoring crime statistics -- after The Post uncovered evidence that books were being cooked. Documents obtained by The Post show a rape recorded in the 50th Precinct was logged as a lesser crime -- thus giving a rare look into what some beat cops say is a statistical sleight of hand used by their commanders. According to many patrol officers, commanders sometimes reclassify major crimes like murder, assault, robbery and rape as lesser offenses to make it appear they are winning the war on crime. But downgrading crimes is a serious violation, and commanders in the past have been removed for such actions. In the incident at the 50th Precinct, the March 8 rape of a woman at a Bailey Avenue hotel was recorded as an "inconclusive" incident. Only on Tuesday, after The Post started asking questions, was the crime properly classified as rape. In the alleged sex attack, the suspect forced his estranged, 37-year-old wife to have sex at the hotel after she refused. The victim originally reported the attack to the 52nd Precinct, which classified it in its records as a sex assault. But after the assault was transferred to the 50th Precinct -- because of the hotel's location -- it was downgraded to "inconclusive." It remained inconclusive, even after the Bronx district attorney last Saturday charged the man with first-degree rape and other sex crimes. It was changed to a sex assault only yesterday, the same day a Post reporter phoned. On Tuesday, 50th Precinct commander Capt. Thomas DiRusso denied wrongdoing. "I have nothing to hide," he said. The department routinely inspects precinct crime statistics for irregularities. Officers complain that commanders who reclassify crimes want to make it appear they are keeping crime down, thus boosting their chance for promotion. In 1998, Capt. Daniel Castro, a promising young commander and one of the department's rising stars, lost his command after a review found he achieved an 80 percent crime drop after downgrading crimes like robbery and theft to "missing property."

This unprecedented level of political pressure to reduce crime statistics could very well explain the rather minor differences between the fall in the New York crime rate and the fall in the national crime rate during the eight years of Giuliani's administration. When two events occur simultaneously, there is a temptation to imply causation between the two. When Giuliani took office the Dow Jones average was about half of what it is today. Should Rudy be given credit for the economic boom across the country?

Rudy Giuliani may have had the good luck to serve as mayor during a period in which crime nationwide was falling at an unprecedented rate but we shouldn't give the crowing rooster credit for the sunrise. And we should not rely upon cooked books of crime statistics to decide who should be our next president.
Joseph Dillon Davey is a professor in the Department of Law and Justice, Rowan University, Glassboro, N.J.

Posted by: che | June 1, 2007 7:05 AM | Report abuse

I made a comment and asked a question on the other thread before looking at this one, and I cannot remember a time when I visited "The Fix" of being so filled with nothing. Hopefully it will get better.

Posted by: lylepink | June 1, 2007 12:29 AM | Report abuse

Dodd, much more than Edwards, is emerging as the true lefty hero among the Dem candidates. That's not derisive; it's a compliment. He's sticking to his guns on every issue. He could be a great get as a Veep candidate.

Posted by: mpp | May 31, 2007 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Dodd really has something real, and realness is valued this go-around. He has a shot!

One thing he should be careful of is seeming too obsessed with his own virility. I picked up a few whiffs of something like that here and there, hard to put my finger on exactly where, but the thing is this trait can be cute in one's own spouse and even in a quirky member of a club like the Senate, but is unattractive in a candidate for world leader, so take care here.

Good luck Mr. Dodd! You are a good person to have participating in the campaign, and if it comes to it, we could do worse than to have you in the Oval Office.

Posted by: Golgi | May 31, 2007 10:06 PM | Report abuse

Razor, I accept that clarification. I incorrectly concluded you were favoring the cost reduction attributable to illegal alien labor.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | May 31, 2007 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin:

I said I hold business accountable to provide me the lowest possible price. Thats gas prices, hamburger prices, shampoo prices. I don't engage in conspiracies to violate the law to purchase from illegals. That would be wrong. It is also bad economics. Jail would impair my earnings potential. Its also wrong. MikeB went on a diversionary trail, and you followed it.

The fundamental point that MikeB misses is that corporations and labor are on one side of the table together, and the consumer is on the other side of the table. The interests of corporations/labor and consumers diverge. His idiotic rants about corporations shows that he doesn't understand that consumers hold business accountable.

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Razorback, you know enough history of economic theory to know that both Smith and Ricardo were Protestant ministers who assumed an ethical framework for capitalism - "honest day's work for an honest day's pay" and the like.

They did not assume slavery as part of the system. So, while Mike B. does lose any sense of objectivity when he talks about illegal immigrants driving down wages, you do not add light to the conversation by arguing that the artificially suppressed wages of illegal alien sheetrockers are a
xost reduction that our consumers have some "right" to enjoy. That we do enjoy it, I will grant you. But it is more akin to mercantilism to exploit illegals than it is to classical capitalism.

And both of you have meaningful points that do not require namecalling.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | May 31, 2007 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Pray tell, how does the IRS audit taxes for an illegal that has no SS number, and doesn't exist in the above ground economy. That is what's happening wih an estimated 2/3 of the illegals. Moreover, most of the rest use false i.d. They work for a period of time and pull up stakes and leave town. Most of the construction trades use illegals as "ubcontractors" under that guise. It's what's reported every day. Go look it up and quit belaboring a very obvious fact.

Posted by: MikeB | May 31, 2007 7:13 PM | Report abuse

MikeB you uninformed idiot, illegal's taxes are withheld and sent to the government and if not, they can be audited. But you have to prove it. You can just post over and over with the same idiotic sayings with no proof. If you have proof, call the IRS. Call the FBI. If you don't shut up.

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Razorback, you really are an idiot. Don't you get a little tired, playing your silly, useless games? Or, does it somehow provide you with entertainment to call the reality that everyone around you sees something else? Perhaps you are merely insane. You're a Bushie, so that is entirely likely. Now, the Post and every media outlet in the country, the DOL, the COngress, even that swine Bush, have all been moaning that illegals don't pay their taxes. They are either paid under the table or they use false i.d. and maximum deductions and their Social Security, federal and state taxes end up in some dead account. Now, no one realy knows, but the best estimates are that two-thirds of the illegal economy is underground. The whole idea behind the "immigration reform" has been collect more taxes, all of the taxes these people don't pay right now. That is the reality of this debate. But you, you silly time wasting twit, you would much rather see a reality different. That, my mna, is the definition of someone clinically insane.

Posted by: MikeB | May 31, 2007 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Its illegal? Im sure you have a cite for that. You liberals are all about rights for terrorists and insist on proof before acting against those who want to kill us. But when it comes to proof for your allegations, its nothing more than hot air.

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 6:41 PM | Report abuse

"The least possible cost" for any good or service would be free. If taken to it's logical conclusion that would be the result of theft; at least in many/most circumstances. Your economic model, then, means that the "least possible cost" is the result of using any means to achieve the least possible cost. The result of that is businesses participating wholesale in using illegal labor, beating wage and benefit concessions from workers by any means, etc. Unfortunately, that is the result of your insane search for lowest possible cost. It also, unfortunately, drags businesses into all sort of illegal activities. Witness the whining of construcion comapny owners in Utah who cry that the construction industry will come to a complete halt if the government actively enforces immigration laws. Those jobs, formerly held by US workers, are now held by illegals working for $8 an hour, paid under the table....the lowest possible cost. These businessmen have painted themselves into such a crner that they cannot imagine that they would be literally overrun with skilled U.S. workers if they actually went back to paying the same wages they paid in 2000. Witness what happened with the Swift plants when INS raided them and deported the illegals. Swift whined. Then, they advertised for workers, offering to pay them $12 an hour. Now, never mind that the average salary was $18 an hour in 1980, they offered just $12 an hour. They had more than 200 applicants, desparate AMERICAN workers, applying for every single opening. Of course, paying Social Security and Mecicare and Medicaid and other taxes and fees are expensive. But they are also the law and your lowest possible cost model has meant that companies have engaged in illegal activities that result in the lowest possible labor costs....using slaves, indentured servants that are too fearful to even complain becasue they will be deported.

The "savings", and this ought to even get you going, are not passed onto the consumer. The savings ends up, most of it, in the pockets of the investors and corporate or business owners. Have you seen a price drop for the Apple Mac's, etc. since their manufacturing was outsourced to China? No. They pay no import duties. The completed computers, using $2 a day labor costs, is shipped directly from Shanghai when you order it. Since the labor costs make up over 50% of the costs for that computer, where did the 50% reduction go to? Hum? Me thinks it ended up in Mr. Jobs' pocket and the pockets of a bunch of parasites you call "investors". Ditto, but in spades, for anything from WalMart.

All of this is the result of your morally and intellectually bankrupt education. What MBA's are taught in school, what they practice in the American business world, is degenerate, it is unethical, it is harmful to this country and it's people, and it is illegal. I'd tell you to get a job, but ou wouldn't last five minutes actually working. You'd whine and blather just like those silly Utah housing contractors. Hasn't it occurred to you that this country is coming to see you people as the moral equivalents of pedophiles, peying on people, enticing and lying to them, mistreating the innocent, and moaning and whining about your twisted world view as somehow being "normal". Go away!

Posted by: MikeB | May 31, 2007 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Surely Cillizza meant that Dodd is taking bold steps following John Edwards.

Edwards started trying to defund the war back when he was in the Senate in 2004.

Also, since Cillizza seems to have missed it, here is a summary of Edwards' plan to fight global warming (released March 20th):

"The Edwards Plan halts global warming, achieves energy independence and jumpstarts a new energy economy by:

* Capping greenhouse gas pollution starting in 2010 with a cap-and-trade system, and reducing it by 15 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050, as the latest science says is needed to avoid the worst impacts of global warming.
* Leading the world to a new climate treaty that commits other countries--including developing nations--to reduce their pollution. Edwards will insist that developing countries join us in this effort, offering to share new clean energy technology and, if necessary, using trade agreements to require binding greenhouse reductions.
* Creating a New Energy Economy Fund by auctioning off $10 billion in greenhouse pollution permits and repealing subsidies for big oil companies. The fund will support U.S. research and development in energy technology, help entrepreneurs start new businesses, invest in new carbon-capture and efficient automobile technology and help Americans conserve energy.
* Meeting the demand for more electricity through efficiency for the next decade, instead of producing more electricity."

If Dodd is stepping out of the pack, it is behind John Edwards.

Posted by: ashlarah | May 31, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Going wages and rates MikeB? Does that mean as between 2 possible providers of equal quality, you choose the provider that offers the lowest price?

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

I pay my taxes and wish the best for my country too. I also hold business accountable by purchasing from the least cost provider of products of sufficient quality.

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Razorback, I do not hire illegals...and I checked the guy's I had paint my home recently. Also, I pay fair, going wages and rates. I do not pay people under the table. I do not shop at WalMart nor do I use products and services that result from outsourced labor. I pay my taxes. I don't lie to nor cheat on my spouse. I check my facts when I post and I try to be thoughtful. I wish for the best for my country and for my fellow citizens and work to make the Amercian Dream something obtainable by every American. All of this stands in stark contrast to utter swine like you. Go away.

Posted by: MikeB | May 31, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

MikeB, who is fit to mow your yard?

Do you only pay union rates MikeB? Or do you seek the best value for your money when its time to mow your yard?

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Dodd is another of those "Free Traitors" that would give our jobs away to guest workers in exchange for corporate cash. He isn't fit to mow your yard, much less be President. Don't be misled by his or the rest of the rat packs blathering about progressive ideas. Kennedy, Obama, Clinton, Dodd, Gulliani, Richardson - they are corporate cronies and crooks, every bit as bad as Bush and McCain.

Posted by: MikeB | May 31, 2007 5:10 PM | Report abuse

dodd speaks.....and a butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil is more interesting and worthy of attention.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Dodd is challenging his Senate colleagues to step up on this issue just like he did on the Iraq redeployment bill. And good for him for doing so! He is showing that bold is better these days, and sharing that stage well with Edwards. Both believe that the time for incrementalism is past. Given the mess the next president will inherit from Dubya, I agree.

Posted by: edgery | May 31, 2007 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Jessie, global warming will not work as an issue once people figure out that it means they will be paying $10 a gallon for gas and have their electric bills doubled or tripled.

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 5:01 PM | Report abuse

It's refreshing to see a candidate who is using global warming as a key part of his "persuasion process." And NH may just be the state where it works. Recently 164 towns in NH passed a climate change resolution calling for national leadership on climate change. Also, a survey done last December shows that 94% of NH Democratic voters and 70% of NH Republican voters consider global warming to be "serious threat." I'm anxious to see who will follow his lead.

Posted by: Jessie | May 31, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

CC says "his (Dodd's) carbon tax proposal is clearly the most radical step to combat global warming proposed by any of the candidates running for president."

What is radical? Doubling or tripling of gas prices? Even that is not enough.


"What Dr. Hansen fails to discuss is how large this carbon tax might have to be in order to achieve the magnitude of the effect he correctly wants. Given how locked in all economies are to high energy-using equipment including vehicles, it is well known that the price of energy would have to be many times the current price in order to induce the desired levels in reduction of energy use through price effects alone. For example, if gasoline is currently about $3 per gallon, the price including Hansen's proposed carbon tax would have to be several times this level, at least, to have any significant impact on total energy consumption within a decade. (Remember gasoline in Europe already costs almost $6 per gallon, and Europe also uses far too much gasoline.)"

Also, politicians fail to square their rhetoric about gas prices and energy independence with contradictory rhetoric regarding global warming. Dodd calls his plan a "corporate" carbon tax. He still pretends that consumers don't ultimately pay these costs.

"The political momentum to subsidize coal fuels is in odd juxtaposition to simultaneous efforts by Democrats to draft global-warming bills that would place new restrictions on coal-fired electric power plants.

The move reflects a tension, which many lawmakers gloss over, between slowing global warming and reducing dependence on foreign oil."

All the liberals want to be "green" but none has the courage to say what changes will have to be made in American lifestyles and the American economy if the magnitude of the problem is as they say it is.

Posted by: Razorback | May 31, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

The factual news is most unfavorable to Dems, isn't it? Better stick with your Dan Rather/Jon Stewart versions.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

On Monday, Senator Clinton unveiled one of the first big domestic proposals of the 2008 campaign: a $10 billion, federally funded "universal prekindergarten" scheme. It fits right in with what is clearly a plan by the powerful national teachers' unions to capture the massive public money becoming available to serve the under-five year olds set.

Just as bad, it implicitly assumes that government money can do far more than it can to improve people's lives.

Posted by: spend, spend, spend | May 31, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

ANKARA, Turkey -- Turkish authorities seized weapons hidden among construction materials on a Syria-bound train from Iran after Kurdish guerrillas bombed and derailed the train, a prosecutor said Wednesday. The cargo was discovered when authorities checked containers on the train, which was attacked by separatist Kurdish guerrillas on May 25 near the town of Genc in southeastern Bingol province, Prosecutor Ismail Sari told reporters Wednesday.

guess where this was headed? same place as the WMDs, then on to Iraq.

Posted by: still think its a civil war? | May 31, 2007 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Health Reform: If the "detailed" universal care plan offered up this week by Barack Obama is a demonstration of the candidate's substance, he should confine his ambitions to the Senate. As the New York Times put it, Barack Obama's plan "came after months of criticism that his campaign lacked specificity and policy heft on complex issues like health care." But his "detailed" plan is little more than a mixture of recycled liberal bromides, vague promises and wishful thinking.

Posted by: empty Lib promises | May 31, 2007 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Iraq Residents Rise Up Against al-Qaida
Associated Press, by SINAN SALAHEDDIN

this must have been in afghanistan or maybe Okinowa.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Clinton, who complained about corporate America's largesse and skyrocketing executive pay during campaign events Wednesday, said she did not believe her message was undermined by her acceptance of the private flights. In line with Senate rules then in effect, Clinton's campaign has said she reimbursed Gupta at the cost of a first-class flight, typically a significant discount off the expense of a private jet.

"Those were the rules. You'll have to ask somebody else whether that's good policy," she said.

Posted by: no controlling legal authority | May 31, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

the number of dead american troops is not the measure of winning a war. that is the measure used by defeatist surrender monkeys to assist in losing the war.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

NASA's Top Official
Questions Global Warming
ABC News, by Clayton Sandell & Bill Blakemore NASA administrator Michael Griffin is drawing the ire of his agency's preeminent climate scientists after apparently downplaying the need to combat global warming. In a pretaped interview to be broadcast this morning on National Public Radio's ":Morning Edition" program, Griffin is asked by NPR's Steve Inskeep whether he is concerned about global warming.

Posted by: defectors emerging | May 31, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Zouk (and don't pretend it's not you), if you think that May 2007 being the 3rd worst month for US troop deaths in Iraq = 'winning', then I have serious worries about you.

Posted by: Aussie view | May 31, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Despite the impression created by the dominant media, global jihad is showing signs of serious trouble. [snip] Just as the Iraqi Sunnis have decided to wrest control from al Qaeda, it would appear the tribal chieftains of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border are doing the same. Not quite an awakening but it appears al Qaeda has overstayed its' welcome again.

Pssst - we're winning. don't tell anyone. It will ruin the Dems.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Louis Freeh, Democrat Bill Clinton's FBI director, is going over to the other side in a big way today - endorsing Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani, the Daily News has learned.The high-profile endorsement is a boon to the former mayor, whose views on security and terrorism can only benefit from having an international lawman like Freeh in his corner, experts said

those who know her best - endorse the competition.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

BAGHDAD- A battle raged in west Baghdad on Thursday after residents rose up against al-Qaida and called for U.S. military help to end random gunfire that forced people to huddle indoors and threats that kept students from final exams, a member of the district council said. Elsewhere, a suicide bomber hit a police recruiting center in Fallujah, killing as many as 25 people, police said.

I thought it was a civil war. What is al queda doing there?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2007 4:04 PM | Report abuse

The bold ideas niche is taken too, by John Edwards. Who's been a step a ahead of Dodd on Climate Change, De-funding, Fox News and a host of other issues. And two or three steps ahead of Obama and Clinton.

Posted by: AJ | May 31, 2007 4:01 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company