Thursday, January 19, 2012

Reasonable Democrats

House Dems want to set limits on oil profits.
Six House Democrats, led by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), want to set up a "Reasonable Profits Board" to control gas profits. 
The Democrats, worried about higher gas prices, want to set up a board that would apply a "windfall profit tax" as high as 100 percent on the sale of oil and gas, according to their legislation. The bill provides no specific guidance for how the board would determine what constitutes a reasonable profit. 
I'm still furious about the unreasonable profits movie theaters make on popcorn. When is Congress going to do something about that?  


Blogger steve mcdonald said...

Start setting profit limits on one industry, spreads to others deemed 'unfair' over time. It will never end. And the free market dies with profit caps.

January 20, 2012 at 8:12 AM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

Gil, by the way, can you post the video of Gingrich's response to the question of his marital woes from last night's debate? I listened to the response on the radio this morning and was blown away - it was great!

January 20, 2012 at 8:37 AM 
Blogger Bob Bohne said...

Steve - I don't think this issue is going to matter one way or the other, but I wasn't impressed with his answer. This is the vetting process, and when someone runs for President of the US, character is always an issue. If there are charges of serial hypocrisy, it's fair game. Newt's defense was that their personal friends know that this allegation is not true. Considering the assertion that this alleged discussion took place between Newt and his ex in the privacy of their home, how would their close friends know what was, or was not said?

January 20, 2012 at 9:58 AM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...


Your response is 100% crap. Vetting through stuff that seems more fit for the National Enquirer is a load of it. JFK had his whores, Roosevelt had a companion. LBJ's alleged to have had affairs and we all know the details of Clinton's time in the White House. The argument is invalid. Gingrich is dead on. "Vetting" - what a joke.

And Gingrich is also stating the obvious - two days before a key primary they're rollign out this interview? Pathetic.

January 20, 2012 at 10:05 AM 
Blogger Bob Bohne said...

Steve - I will agree that it wasn't handled well by CNN. It shouldn't have been the leading question. And I personally don't have a problem with what he does in his personal life. I didn't have a problem with any of the others that you mentioned. Except for JFK, because more than one of his "whores" had questionable connections. But when you are playing to a conservative base, and proclaiming yourself a champion of family values, why should you get a pass?

January 20, 2012 at 11:22 AM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

Seems like that conservative base agreed with him last night.

January 20, 2012 at 11:53 AM 
Blogger Bob Bohne said...

Steve - What did you expect. This is what Newt does so well. He deflects the question by putting the blame on the media. Classic Newt. And you mentioned Clinton. The Republicans were all over Clinton about the Monica Lewinski affair. And Newt was among those leading the charge. While he was having an affair. This is a Republican primary, so I don't have a dog in this fight. But here's my question to you. If a candidate champions family values, do the voters have a right to know if he walks the walk?

January 20, 2012 at 12:07 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home