We’re not in Tennessee anymore, Evan
Over at the Channel 13 blogs, Evan Dawson has a thought-provoking post about today’s confrontation between Randy Kuhl and Eric Massa. Dawson compares the incident to a seemingly similar one that occurred between Harold Ford and Bob Corker in a Tennessee Senatorial race in 2006, noting that, in his estimation, the event rebounded to Corker’s (the de facto incumbent, as a Republican in a crimson red state) advantage. While the comparison is interesting, there’s one key difference: western New York is not part of the south. In this part of the country (perhaps especially in the Tier), voters like their politicians who are real street-fighting men. I know I do (as my posts about David Bellavia and David Bonacchi, whom I disagree with politically, demonstrate). This is the state that gave rise to Stephen Minarik and Chuck Schumer. I don’t think a few on-air verbal fisticufs are going to offend many New York State voters.
Related posts:
I have to side with Evan that I don’t think it was Eric’s best move. Don’t know if it will hurt him, but I don’t think it did anything to help him.
Exile:
I’d like you view on Massa’s radio ad where he laments about the high price of gasoline. Isn’t that a bit hypocritical? Don’t progressive Democrats actually want the price of gas to be even higher so that the foolish cretins who drive big cars are forced to give them up to save the planet?
Don’t get me wrong. Massa is entitled to challenge Randy Kuhl’s claims about drilling. But it bugs me that he’d really like to have it both ways.
He wants voters to think he and his Dem pals will take steps to lower gas prices if he’s elected. That’s just not true, so his ad is nothing but pandering and hypocrisy.
Please remember this the next time you want to claim that Massa owns the high ground.
I don’t spend a lot of time talking about high ground. This isn’t a Republican blog, you know, so I don’t spend as much time on sanctimony as you might be used to.
And if you want to argue about “lowering gas prices”, you’ll have to cite some facts.
As a progressive, I’d like to see the price of gas lowered because it’s hurting lower and middle class families a lot and people are struggling to get work to earn money to buy groceries, etc… But, as a society, I think we have to work for alternative fuel sources and consume less gas because it’s the right thing to do for our futures - regardless of our pocketbooks.
I’ve cut back on my driving since the gas prices have skyrocketed under the Bush administration. I plan to keep cutting back even if the prices drop because it’s the responsible thing to do.
Realistically, the only short term way to lower gas prices is by strengthening the dollar or tapping the reserves. I’m not a huge fan of the latter, but I think getting our currency in order is very important.
And something that Republicans will never, ever, ever do. We can’t have huge budget and trade deficits and expect to have a strong dollar. It just doesn’t work that way.
And don’t forget that these high gas prices are accompanied by record-shattering profits by the oil companies. Seems to me that we’ve gotten enough of a message from the current prices to be motivated to save energy (I hope). Maybe now progressives can make sure the crisis does less harm to families.
Andrea - Just to clarify, I’m not opining that this episode is certainly negative for Massa, just pointing to a similar recent event. It is, granted, not a large sample size.
I think Rotten makes the most important distinction here between the Ford crashing and the Massa crashing: This is August. When Ford did it, he was about a week from the election, and his race had heavy national coverage already. That confrontation received saturated coverage.
Massa’s crashing comes when few voters are paying attention. It’s unlikely that the average 29th voter will know about it.
Exile - I guess I’m not exactly clear about on what you’re basing the psychological assessment that the 29th of NY is fundamentally different than Tenn. I’m sure there are differences, but without some wider research I don’t know that I could articulate them.
I lived in the south for a while (though not in Tennessee) and it’s demonstrably true that people are more accepting of conflict up here. I have no hard data to back that up. But I’m pretty sure there is no record in Tennessee of popular mayors yelling at people about ferrets with no ill political effects, for example (I have this feeling you’re about to scold me for forgetting about the great Knoxville ferret controversy of 1973).
I really do believe that politics varies wildly by region.
Thanks Evan.
I think you’re generally right about NY vs TN, but the smaller the town, the less tolerance for talking smack in public. People who have to see each other every day develop the habit of keeping a lid on their hostility.
“Talking smack” isn’t what I’m referring to. The only real smack talk (by my definition) was Kuhl’s comments about Massa’s parents. I suspect *that* kind of thing may not go over well in a small town.
But what do I know? Maybe people love “yo momma” style taunts in small towns. I know they didn’t where I grew up.
just like east rochester
Technically, that was more “yo daddy” than “yo momma”.
And just like Chili, I should add.
Or confrontation in general. Things need to be bottled up for a long time before they simmer over.
Hey John -
Do you even believe the stuff you write? Progressive Democrats wanting the price of gas to be higher?
If you have a real issue that warrants real discussion, you’ve always been welcome and been part of the back and forth. But progressive Democrats wanting higher gas prices? C’mon.
Evan -
I don’t know that it was like the Ford/Corker incident, but I also don’t think it benefits Massa. I think the event winds up making him look desperate - especially that he can’t get a face shot. Like someone who can’t get the attention himself, so he’s got to jump into Kuhl’s frame. Maybe election cycle is part of it - that Massa’s in his third year of running for this spot. Or maybe it’s that he doesn’t have the throngs of supporters with him like Ned Lamont did when he or his supporters engaged in creative efforts to obtain media attention. I also think it’s not the image Massa is looking for, given his recent ads which portray him as independent, failing to identify him as a Democrat, and seeming to support whatever war we get into in whatever place we’re going.
Exile:
I heard the Massa ad on WHAM. There are two references to high gas prices. He comments something to the effect that “you only have to go out to buy gas or milk to realize that politicians are letting you down”.
The clear implication is that he would take steps to lower gasoline prices. Yet, the environmental movement, so dear to Democrats, wants the price of gas to remain high to speed the conversion to alternative fuels. Democrats in Congress are blocking efforts to increase domestic production.
Say what you want or try to blow off my point, but the ad is intended to give a false impression, unless, of course, Mr. Massa is going to go to Washington to challenge the Democratic leadership and one of its biggest constituencies.
Domestic production of gas would not lower your gas prices.
Louis:
I tried to post a response to your comment. I guess it was too big. Here are some quotes for you by progressives on gas prices:
“I have observed that in all other countries, including in America, people are complaining about how prices of [gasoline] are going up,” Denmark’s prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, told me. “The cure is not to reduce the price, but, on the contrary, to raise it even higher to break our addiction to oil.
NY Times op-ed by Thomas Friedman 8/9/08
The days of cheap gasoline are gone and they are never coming back.
airbare 8/6/08
How can they not understand that lower prices would just fuel more consumption and do nothing remedial for our climate?
ladkiddo 8/3/08
What exactly is the incentive to actually lower prices? I’m afraid there isn’t one.
stlo7 7/1/08
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) will propose a new carbon tax that would increase the gasoline tax by 50 cents, the lawmaker said in an interview on C-SPAN’s ‘Newsmakers’ airing Sunday. 7/7/07
If you care, as Pelosi claims to, about clean air and preserving the coastline, you should welcome high gas prices.
Jacob Weisberg Slate magazine 4/26/06
“The United States could start by
gradually imposing a higher gasoline tax-hiking it by one or two cents per
month until gasoline costs $2.50 to $3.00 per gallon, comparable to prices
in Europe and Japan.” (Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich, The Population
Explosion, 1990, pp. 219-220) On the dustcover of the book, Gore said, “The
time for action is due, and past due. Ehrlich has written the prescription.”
“Higher taxes on fossil fuels. . . is one of the logical first steps in
changing our policies in a manner consistent with a more responsible
approach to the environment.”
(Al Gore, Earth in the Balance, 1993, p. 173)
Andrea:
Many people disagree with you. For every statistic and claim I’ve seen posted on RT regarding the “uselessness” of increasing domestic oil production, I can cite contrary statistics and claims about its value.
How do I respond to thee? Let me count the ways:
“I have observed that in all other countries, including in America, people are complaining about how prices of [gasoline] are going up,” Denmark’s prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, told me. “The cure is not to reduce the price, but, on the contrary, to raise it even higher to break our addiction to oil.
NY Times op-ed by Thomas Friedman 8/9/08″
Are you calling Thomas Friedman a progressive Democrat? And more importantly for the purpose of this response, are you calling Andres Fogh Rasmussen a progressive Democrat?
The short answer - I don’t think either of those two individuals are members of the progressive Democratic movement in this country.
The longer answer - we do have to break our addiction to oil, and people are trying desperately to find ways to do that. Do you think that’s necessary, or is the answer just more drilling and more oil and more profits for big companies and their benefactors?
“The days of cheap gasoline are gone and they are never coming back.
airbare 8/6/08″
Does that sound like a desire for more expensive oil, or just a statement of fact? I know you’re smart enough to discern the two. But given your Republican preferences, I suspect that blending or confusing statements of others might be a part of your repetoire, whether intended or not.
“How can they not understand that lower prices would just fuel more consumption and do nothing remedial for our climate?
ladkiddo 8/3/08″
I can’t answer this one because I don’t know the context. Context is important. Like, “My staff will have to get back to you on that” may be a reasonable statement on details of finance funding in a campaign, but doesn’t really make sense in the context of a question like “How many houses do you own?”.
“What exactly is the incentive to actually lower prices? I’m afraid there isn’t one.
stlo7 7/1/08″
Again context - whose incentive? Was Stlo referring to the apparent lack of desire of major oil company investors/executives to reduce oil prices? If so, what does that have to do with any Democrats’ desire to keep oil prices high.
“House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) will propose a new carbon tax that would increase the gasoline tax by 50 cents, the lawmaker said in an interview on C-SPAN’s ‘Newsmakers’ airing Sunday. 7/7/07″
Again - context. But assuming this carbon tax was intended to reduce the effects of global warming, is that a desire to keep oil prices high, or a desire to prevent the coming (and existing) climate crisis. By the way, John - are you a global warming denier?
“If you care, as Pelosi claims to, about clean air and preserving the coastline, you should welcome high gas prices.
Jacob Weisberg Slate magazine 4/26/06″
Context here would be helpful too. It’s clear from the “claims to” part, that there is some sniping going on, but I’m not sure what was being said. I tried to find the original article by googling “Jacob Weisberg Slate 4/26/06″ but that didn’t work.
“The United States could start by
gradually imposing a higher gasoline tax-hiking it by one or two cents per
month until gasoline costs $2.50 to $3.00 per gallon, comparable to prices
in Europe and Japan.” (Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich, The Population
Explosion, 1990, pp. 219-220) On the dustcover of the book, Gore said, “The
time for action is due, and past due. Ehrlich has written the prescription.”
“Higher taxes on fossil fuels. . . is one of the logical first steps in
changing our policies in a manner consistent with a more responsible
approach to the environment.”
(Al Gore, Earth in the Balance, 1993, p. 173)
Couldn’t deal with the quotation marks here. So a 1993 book about the environment and climate, suggesting a one or two cent increase until we reached $2.50 is an indication we want continuing higher oil prices? Last I checked, $2.50 would be a reduction.
Anyway, it’s late, this series of quotes is not a logically sound basis for the claim you make, and broad generalizations under such circumstances are generally (here’s a broad generalization) the product of intellectual laziness.
I’m impressed by the number of quotes you’ve assembled. But there really isn’t one where any Democratic in Congress says he wants gas prices to stay high. So I don’t see how it backs up your assertion.
I do respect the research you did digging up the quotes, though, even if I don’t think they fortify your case.
[...] crack about Massa’s parents was a little over the line. New York State politics may be rough and tumble, and the Marquis of Queensbury rules may not apply, but even in the Ultimate Fighting [...]