If you needed any more proof that liberal media members don't give a darn about the state of the economy or the American people, and instead just want to raise taxes, you got it Sunday when Tom Brokaw advocated gas prices, which have plummeted recently, be kept at $4 a gallon with government keeping the added cost.
Coming just two days after it was announced that America lost over 500,000 jobs in November, Brokaw, in what could be his last performance as "Meet the Press" host, actually asked Barack Obama why taxes shouldn't be dramatically raised on gasoline with revenues to be spent on alternative energy, and to send a signal that folks won't be able to "just fill up [their] tank for 20 bucks anymore."
This came in response to president-elect uttering another disturbingly socialist statement that should make clearer his spread the wealth motives (video embedded below the fold with relevant section at 6:00, readers are encouraged to review Mark Finkelstein's earlier piece on this subject, file photo):
BARACK OBAMA: And what we still see are executive compensation packages for the auto industry that are out of line compared to their competitors, their Japanese competitors who are doing a lot better.
Stop the tape. If one of the answers to solving the auto industry problem is making our executives accept the same compensation as our Japanese competitors, shouldn't this be true across the board for ALL employees working for American car companies? If executives, as part of a bailout, are required to take pay cuts putting them in line with what Japanese executives make, shouldn't ALL the employees be so impacted?
Sadly, this didn't come up:
BARACK OBAMA: Now, it's not unique to the auto industry. We have seen that across the board. Certainly, we saw it on Wall Street. And, part of what I'm hoping to introduce as the next president is a new ethic of responsibility where we say that if you're laying off workers, the least you can do when you're making $25 million a year is give up some of your compensation and some of your bonuses. Figure out ways in which workers may have to take a haircut, but they can still keep their jobs, they can still keep their healthcare, and they can still stay in their homes. That kind of notion of shared benefits and burdens is something that I think has been lost for too long, and it's something that I'd like to see restored.
Have you ever heard a better definition of socialism? Yikes. Alas, here's how Brokaw responded:
Let's talk for a moment about consumer responsibility when it comes to the auto industries. As soon as gas prices dropped, consumers moved back to the larger cars once again. The SUVs are the big gas consumers. Why not take this opportunity to put a tax on gasoline, bump it back up to $4 a gallon where people were prepared to pay for that, and use that revenue for alternative energy and as a signal to the consumers: "Those days are gone. We're not going to have gasoline that you could just fill up your tank for 20 bucks anymore."
Wow. We certainly wouldn't want cheaper energy prices to help us out of the current recession, would we Tom?
I don't know about you, but I sure hope David Gregory is going to bring more common sense and economic acumen to the "Meet the Press" table now that he's been named as Tim Russert's permanent replacement.
Keep your fingers crossed.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Creep
December 7, 2008 - 12:21 ET by NortoYou see, $4 means nothing to him, and if taxes are raised I understand all these announcers tax dodge is that they are hired as contractors and would not be affected by the "tax the rich" scheme of the new admin.
Also, it occurs to me that ethanol, which lowers effective gas mileage is a very sneaky way to collect more taxes, you know less mpgs, more gallons, more taxes.
It's not that $4 a gallon
December 7, 2008 - 14:05 ET by motherbeltIt's not that $4 a gallon means nothing to him, it's where it's going.
When gas was cheap, liberals complained that we should be paying $5 a gallon like Europe, it would make us drive less and be better for Mother Earth! Then when gas went up to $4, they howled for the government to DO something about it!!
Unless of course the money is "earmarked" as a "tax" for what they want to use it for....then, $4 a gallon is all fine and dandy.
Libs where I work have been
December 8, 2008 - 14:42 ET by mattmLibs where I work have been saying this same thing. They look at every sector of the economy as an opportunity to tax and spend.
One guy at work implied that this would be a way to "get us out of our cars."
They know they could not get what they want by direct action - i.e. banning cars - so they come at it from the tax angle..... At least Hitler was up front about his tyrannical views.
Brokaw should study a little harder
December 7, 2008 - 12:24 ET by c5thenEven if his plan were implemented, it would result in an economic disaster later. Why? Because the alternative energy would be being subsidized by the gasoline industry, thus causing a false cost effectiveness. Once the balance moved far enough over to the alternative energy side, the gas subsidy would no longer be enough to sustain the alternative side and energy prices would skyrocket and the economy would crash.
The biggest reason for the economic problems we are experiencing right now are because of the oil speculators driving the price of oil to $140+ per barrel. Energy costs are the foundation of any industrial economy. Using the cheapest energy is the best way to allow the economy to grow. There is NOTHING cheaper than oil as long as oil is under $50 per barrel. Because the rise to $140 a barrel was artificially driven, the drop will go further down than necessary too until it settles at a more stable price of between $40 - $50. Unless it is artificially affected again.
Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!
Alan Keyes / Sarah Palin - 2012
Very good sir.
December 7, 2008 - 14:40 ET by JWFWhen the economy crashes, and they finally do away with the horrific tax on gasoline, oil will be dirt cheap. Everyone out there will be driving around their crappy electric golf carts or driving around with their mini Hindenburgs or the smug powered liberals cars. They won't be able to sell them nor afford to actually power them.
That is when, at that moment, we the underground hydrocarbo's, all open our garages at the very same time, whip off the covers of of our collective garage bound antiques, fire them up, and show off the LAST OF THE V8's BABY!
You can only subvert the laws of supply and demand for so long.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
Thanks Tom
December 7, 2008 - 12:24 ET by WorriedYou gave the genius another great idea to add to all the others he has up his sleeve. I have my own idea Tom. Why don't all you overpaid liberal blabbermouths open up your wallets and send some extra cash to the IRS.
Thankfully Brokaw is off the air.
Far Left Activist
December 7, 2008 - 12:42 ET by BW222Brokaw always has been far-left. It's no wonder the media is so biased.
BW222
Brokaw's True Colors (But then, Who Knew?)
December 7, 2008 - 12:44 ET by rammingspeedThe hubris felt and expressed by liberals after Obama's election is astonishing. A $3 per gallon gas tax? Go ahead, Barack. Propose and push it. It will be his "don't ask don't tell" moment, the equivalent of Bill Clinton's bait and switch tax cut promise during the '92 presidential election.
Obama is smart. He knows how utterly destructive a tax like this would be to his administration, and he must have winced inwardly while watching Brokaw's stupid face and ignorant pie hole blow this manure in his direction.
tell me tom
December 7, 2008 - 12:51 ET by tonemeisterwhat kind of mileage do limo's and gulfstream jets get?. it think people get it. everyone of the big three car makers have overseas companies who have produced hi-milage cars for the european market. where are they? love the idea of the electric car only the problem is/are the battery technology. you can't legislate and tax technology into being. you can only set the stage through free market innovation. all the other pieces of the electric car are in place... who ever solves the battery problem will be rich. forcing the big three into quickly producing an electric car before it's tested and proven .....remember the first gas crisis in '73. ford and gm rushed the pinto and the vega into production. don't want that again.
Obama, worst president in history
December 7, 2008 - 13:02 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsAnd, part of what I'm hoping to introduce as the next president is a new ethic of responsibility
Okay Obama, why not make yourself and all the other elected officials responsible for your failed policies, like Social Security, Medicare, schools, etc.? Why not give up YOUR special perks and be forced to live just like us poor working saps, with a government gun held to our heads not allowing us to keep what we earn?
D
Impeach Obama!
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
D, you misunderstand...he
December 7, 2008 - 14:08 ET by motherbeltD, you misunderstand...he means a new ethic of responsibility for you! (and for me, and for Joe the Plumber and all the rest of the plebes.)
Well that' s a brilliant idea Tommy boy...
December 7, 2008 - 13:26 ET by HeavyChevylet's start with this; all Americans -ooops excluding liberals- get gas cards that will debit money out of your personal account and those of other liberals who also thinks that is a great idea..
Hooray for $4 gas!!!
What is he saying?
December 7, 2008 - 13:45 ET by DelsaLets not burden the people with more taxes right now and we have to change the light bulbs.
F him
Lets drill for gas and oil everywhere we can while the green stuff is being worked on.
I just can't listen this guy prattle on ad nauseam.
for the first time in my long years I will mute the president when he speaks.
need great deals in Florida real estate? get in touch
Wasn't Brokaw the one who
December 7, 2008 - 13:58 ET by motherbeltWasn't Brokaw the one who said after the election that we really don't know a lot about Obama??
He seemed to think that was just fine before he was elected, so why would he press Obama now about anything????
We're not going to have
December 7, 2008 - 13:59 ET by MidAmericaWe're not going to have gasoline that you could just fill up your tank for 20 bucks anymore."
Yeah!... screw those low income people. Who cares if the extra gas taxes will come out of their food budget because that's the only discretionary money they have.
53% of drivers are idiots.
December 7, 2008 - 14:28 ET by JWF53% of the drivers out there voted for Obama. That means they are IDIOTS. I don't trust idiots to make safe driving decisions.
So I need to drive a big car with lots of metal between me and the Obama voter.
Also, the liberal media is really starting to lose their collective mind. You want to see real anger from small town America. Put a $2 a gallon tax on gasoline. The revolution to bring back the Constitution will arrive quicker than you think.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
I'll just contest your post
December 7, 2008 - 17:37 ET by ThatDudeI'll just contest your post because you put in a bit of assumed data. 53% of drivers voted for Obama? Well, first off I'm not entirely convinced that 53% of America voted for Obama (though it naturally has to be close). I'd withold that one till a thorough investigation of ACORN is completed. You're also somewhat neglecting the fact that some of the democrat's core constituents are those who receive welfare or live in the city. They're not drivers and don't much understand how fuel prices effect economics. A $2 tax on a $1 product is robbery, plain and simple. How can a democracy allow the government to take more from a sale than the producers?
Throughout the campaign
December 7, 2008 - 14:55 ET by Georgia7Brokaw consistantly claimed McCain would be the better commander in chief. As for his suggestions regarding gasoline tax, he's an idiot period.
And please stop the socialism fear-mongering. Yes we all have to pay taxes, it's where firetrucks come from. How do we proport to support our troops and yet complain about paying for their equipment? The VA Hospital condition is the perfect example, these men and women deserve the absolute finest care but the fed dropped the ball. Not entirely Bush's fault, but this is shameful. If Obama in any way corrects the problem it will be even more of a black eye.
Calling Dr. Brokaw
December 7, 2008 - 15:03 ET by GalvanicAs NBC's rating continue to dwindle, it's obviouos that the network doesn't understand enough about television markets let alone national economics. Brokaw -- one of the celebrities at NBC News who aided in that decline -- rarely sheds any useful insight on anything, but it doesn't prevent him from offering advice, or his network from broadcasting it, not understanding that the audience it has underestimated for years is ignoring it.
Sorry sir, there are fallacious arguments in there.
December 7, 2008 - 15:09 ET by JWF1. Complex question. Paying taxes for services the government is supposed to provide is one thing. Taking money from the productive and giving it to the unproductive is NOT a government service.
2. Straw man - No one is complaining about our taxes going to provide VA money, or police services, or firefighter services. Straw man successfully knocked over.
3. Not very nice trying to say we are arguing from adverse consequences (appeal to fear). That itself is an argument by emotive language. Dude? What is up with that?
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
double post
December 8, 2008 - 22:42 ET by JWF.
Black eye, huh?
December 7, 2008 - 20:43 ET by choselife3xA good friend of mine spent some time in a VA hospital after serving in Vietnam in the '60s. His stories are horrifying. Poor care in VA hospitals is nothing new and has nothing to do with Bush.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Tomorrow, I hope Rush, Sean, etc.,
December 7, 2008 - 15:02 ET by on-the-rocksare all over Brokejaw for this reprehensible idea.
When gasoline was $4+, at least some of that money might go towards more supply - through increased drilling activity.
If Brokejaw gets his wish, that additional $2.50/gallon would produce no new supply.
I've got to remember
December 7, 2008 - 16:17 ET by Chris NormanI've got to remember Brokaw's arrogant suggestion so when someone asks me to give an example of an elitist statement, I'll have a perfect one at the ready...
Stupid Tom
December 7, 2008 - 16:28 ET by owlpelletsTom,
I'm retired at 55 from selling a distribution company (an S corp.) and fortunately quite comfortable. Do this and increase the capital gains and income tax you mealy mouthed twit. Are you so stupid that you re unaware that oil touches everything? Adding $3 per gallon tax would be etremely inflationary. I guess evil buisiness folk are to work for the collecive good but idiot pundits and university folk are always underpaid. On second thought, maybe they should try it. Perhaps it would educate BHO et-al (including Rhinos and the chattering class media centrists)as to the real depth of their "mandate."
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
Oil touches everything
December 7, 2008 - 19:06 ET by littlemissmuffinWhen oil prices skyrocketed, our city imposed a 60% fuel surcharge on our electricity. Yes, 60% for every KW used.
Since oil prices have plummeted, has our city removed the fuel surcharge? NO! I will call them tomorrow morning and ask what is their justification now.
"If we conservatives moved to those seven non-existent States, the government couldn’t find us and tax us to death!"
The more the
December 7, 2008 - 18:54 ET by fitzfongThe more the self-important, ivory tower, economically illiterate windbags like Tom Brokaw preach punitive taxes for the "good of the environment", the more I believe addiction to blowdryers, hairspray and botox leads to senility.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
Screw You Brokaw
December 7, 2008 - 18:55 ET by oilcanI have to drive 90 round trip miles a day for my meager paying job. When gas was near 4-bux, one day's worth of wages went to gassing up my car, even though it gets 30mpg. Not only that, the cost of all things had gone up because of transpo costs.
Take a hike and earn a living like some of us less fortunate folk who don't have the privilege of being shuttled at corporate expense to your work gig, or get paid thousands of dollars for speaking. Then you'll feel the pain of eeking out a living like the rest of us red state citizens.
Dont mean to be a jerk
December 7, 2008 - 19:23 ET by criticalthinkingListen, i am a republican, and I am fed up with people calling me stupid. but i go on these sites sometimes, and am just blown away by the small scope of the world that many of my fellow republicans seem to celebrate. Listen, please, for the sake of my grandchildren, we cannot continue to rely on petrol forever, we need to start thinking about other sources, ASAP. This isnt about republican or democrat, this is about the future, and moving on from foreign oil. Sure, its a quirky idea to raise taxes on gas during a crisis, so fine CRITIZE THAT, BUT INSTEAD OF COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW HORRIBLE DEMS ARE, LETS COME UP WITH SOME IDEAS OF OUR OWN FOR NEW ENERGY SOURCES. THIS IS HOW WE WILL WIN BACK THE GOVERNMENT. THE DEMS HAVE HORRIBLE IDEAS, BUT WE HAVE NO IDEAS. DRILL BABY DRILL IS NOT A NEW IDEA. SORRY. PLEASE GUYS, YOUR MAKING ME LOOK BAD OUT HERE!
A Power Plant
December 7, 2008 - 19:29 ET by littlemissmuffinA power plant here in FL wanted to invest $1 million in new windmills. FL has wind about 90% of the time. Project is on hold for now because the company can't get a loan for the investment. The company is solvent, so I don't understand.
"If we conservatives moved to those seven non-existent States, the government couldn’t find us and tax us to death!"
You have bought into the global warming propaganda.
December 7, 2008 - 20:15 ET by JWFWe have this perfect fuel. It is called hydrogen. But it is difficult to make, difficult to transport, and dangerous in an accident.
What if we could take hydrogen, wrap it up in a long chain of molecules say with carbon, and then it would be easy to transport, and be used as a fuel. It is called oil.
Nothing wrong with oil. We have nearly perfected the process of cleaning it. It is the best fuel we as a planet have.
Don't buy into the environmental loonies propaganda.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
look
December 7, 2008 - 20:16 ET by mgindi26look drilling is good for now and alternatives are good for tomorrow.
But taxes on oil are good for neither. The free market will produce the viable solution for alternative energy. The govt tax won't lead to research. If you really are a conservative then you know better than to look to govt for a solution.
The only way we are selling our children out would be if we didn't oppose a tax like this. We would sell them out twice. First by saddling them with another tax. Second by spending the inheritance they would be getting on this tax.
→ You're a Republican
December 7, 2008 - 20:30 ET by Cool ArrowNo, you're agreeing with mob rule as a matter of faith.
Last I checked, the plants were very appreciative of our carbon emissions.
As we are
December 7, 2008 - 20:37 ET by littlemissmuffinAs we are appreciative of the oxygen emissions from the plants!
"If we conservatives moved to those seven non-existent States, the government couldn’t find us and tax us to death!"
Good Ideas not to be ashamed of.
December 7, 2008 - 22:21 ET by needle“Lets come up with some ideas of our own for new energy sources.”
Sarah Palin (and to a lesser extent even John McCain) pushed for the “all of the above” approach whenever she got the chance.
“All of the above” means let’s remove the shackles and disincentive manipulations that the Dems / Greens / Environmentalists have imposed upon all aspects of the energy industry for decades, and let’s maybe even encourage energy development and conservation without resorting to taxation of the little folk. (Wow, what a concept!)
I do not see anything wrong with this collection of ideas, and if we ever get a chance to apply them, I am confident the results will be a big relief for us all. Clearly, however, this is not the way the Dems / Greens / Environmentalists AND the state media outlets think, so for the time being we will have to contend with more years of energy discouragement.
PS: BTW, if you really are a Republican, I would think it would be pretty obvious that elitist Tom Brokaw is the jerk in this instance.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
RE: Dont mean to be a jerk
December 8, 2008 - 08:45 ET by dvdaughtryListen, please, for the sake of my grandchildren, we cannot continue to rely on petrol forever, we need to start thinking about other sources, ASAP.
Don't bring in your emotional arguments, and why not? Petroleum is the best at what it does.
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
Then don't be one
December 8, 2008 - 13:26 ET by Mike From CanmoreI don't quite get your post. Are you advocating the tax? In other words, you are advocating taking money out of the hands of the very people, (entrepreneurs), who could put it to use trying to find alternatives. Simple economics state, if they can't find a cheaper substitute, eventually, the diminishing resource called hydro carbons will rise in price enough to make them economical. To advocate taxes to advocate one's personal vision of the future is going to be correct 1 out of infinite possible futures. . . which is essentially also known as never.
I get far more worried about my 3 children losing future liberty, freedom and opportunities than their ability to leverage, which, if my guess is right an energy which will be replaced within 100 - 200 years. We have more than enough coal and oil to last hundreds of years. Guess what? The sun, which is the deliverer of solar and wind, will be around for another 5 billion. Why would we want to force environmental degradation brought on by solar and wind power when we have wonderful plant food producing, inexpensive hydrocarbons available to us now? (I'll assume you don't believe the ridiculous catastrophic AGW argument). It is just ridiculous to worry about diminishing hydrocarbons at this point in time. If you want to worry about your grandchildren’s future, worry about removing barriers to development and special interest subsidies. Help make sure they have the same freedom of choice you did so they can address their circumstances as they best see it, whatever those circumstances may be.
One of the great fallacies
December 8, 2008 - 17:04 ET by fitzfongOne of the great fallacies that has enabled the AGW hoax to continue is the perception that if you reject a terrible idea proposed by Democrats, you have no ideas. This is the same line of reasoning that poisonous RINOs produce...we must be seen to be doing something...even if we endorse destructive legislation, that's certainly better than producing no legislation. Sorry to tell you, but it ISN'T. Conservatives are every bit as concerned as they need to be about finding new energy sources. This isn't a fairy tale, big solutions don't just materialize out of thin air because you tap your heels together and wish them so. Plenty of self-interested individuals (even Conservatives, I might add) are in the process of seeking alternative energy sources. The unfortunate reality of life is that none yet discovered generate the kind of results necessary to compete with oil. And suggesting punitive measures like taxes to enforce an artificial demand for inferior power sources hinders the development of actual solutions that develop organically through market forces. And if you want to have any credibility whatsoever, dispense with the platitudes. Using your grandchildren as political pawns, worrying about how you appear to Liberals and suggesting that selling out principles to placate Liberals is the way to win elections in the future are all weak rhetorical tactics. If you don't like how you're made to look by Republicans, you can always become a Democrat. You already seem to think like one.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
I heard, I saw, I came
December 7, 2008 - 20:39 ET by bigtimerI heard, I saw, I came unglued once again with the elite left.
This isn't a new idea, quite a few on the left are thinking of doing this exact thing, as O well knows (and secretly likes) but answered wisely today... it will be at the lefts own peril in the their future, that is if the repubs, as a whole learn how to fight to win...we will be furious out here if this comes to pass...and will vote against all who implemented this upon us.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Brokaw, Rather, Cronkite.
December 7, 2008 - 21:42 ET by RR GOPBrokaw, Rather, Cronkite. Actually, weren't they tv news stars even amongst conservatives? Were they like this all along? I got turned off to Cronkite years later when I heard his statement about not being able to win in Vietnam.
One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
Another flip-flop?
December 7, 2008 - 21:45 ET by needleThe big O failed to mention that we should over-inflate our tires…
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Geez, these people sure hate capitalism
December 7, 2008 - 23:38 ET by RESTLESS 1If the market dictates, and oil and gas via oil, are a global market, that the price of a gallon is $1.00, then we will have to pay it. If it dictates that the price of a gallon is $10.00, then we will have to pay that too. The price for goods and services is predicated on cost. It is all for the most part, driven by fuel. If energy prices are down, goods cost less, travel costs less, more people get out more and have more to spend in other sectors.
It's bad enough that brokaw and "that one" are so stupid as to think that the govt. should dictate gas prices, but it is even worse that they either are too dumb to know or don't care that this will cause other sectors to suffer, possibly leading to job losses in greater numbers than even we have seen recently.
As an aside, I think a good portion of those losses were seasonal and that there will be a rebound in Jan.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
great plan tom 4 dollar gas
December 8, 2008 - 00:20 ET by smoto66great plan tom 4 dollar gas = 3 dollar bread and mass inflation these idiots will never fix this economy ,welcome back carter! buckle up its going to get alot worse .bring back the misery index were going to need it
This is what you get when
December 8, 2008 - 01:49 ET by marvlThis is what you get when the nerves and muscles that control the mouth are connected to a boiled turnip. As Brokaw's bio relates it, "Tom Brokaw dropped out of the University of Iowa, where he says he majored in "beer and co-eds"..." He later gets a political science degree. This, of course, makes him an expert on economics.
Another one of those empty-headed pretty boys who should have his mouth surgically sealed by court order.
Setup question?
December 8, 2008 - 09:28 ET by NonanonI don't doubt Brokaw 'feels' this is a good thing to do, but is this a question set up for Obama to then lie, I mean speak of it being bad for Americans to give the Obamatrons more fuel for their support for/worship of him? The rest of his policies that most people don't understand will cause them much pain as well, but most will feel Obama is looking out for them (As the dimwit woman said, If we help him, he'll help us.) by refusing to raise taxes on gas by $2.50 a gallon.
It is astounding what "news" media are willing to do to put forth support for Obama! How much of the burden of America does either of these characters share? Or any of the many rich outspoken liberals who have criticized Republicans for decades? How much extra are they paying in taxes to give the gov't more to spread around? After all, Biden says it is patriotic to pay more in taxes and liberals love to scream about how patriotic they are. But I know they are just hypocritically spewing their hatred of anything Republican or conservative and don't put their money where their mouth is.
Journalistic hypocrisy at its worst
December 8, 2008 - 11:58 ET by Mary Louise TurnerTom Brokaw, as with so many journalists, have long claimed to be for the underdog, the little guy...you know the drill. And yet, as with so many Hollyweird sorts, journalists live in pricey gated communities, with limousines taking them to and from work. So what's a huge tax hike to clowns such as Mr. Brokaw? Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e?
so let me get this straight
December 8, 2008 - 13:35 ET by katainkentwhen the oil companies charge $4 a gallon its greed but when the government does it its for my own good?
Oh. Ok.
"part of what I'm hoping to introduce as the next president is a new ethic of [government enforced] responsibility" - B. Obama
Katain, that is the correct
December 8, 2008 - 17:58 ET by celatorKatain, that is the correct answer. I do believe you are ready for the next phase of your political re-education program.
I will ask the constable to unlock your handcuffs. ;+}.
Just remember...
December 8, 2008 - 15:37 ET by Legacy76Tom Brokaw was on the short list to be a VP for Obama.
Well goody.....
December 8, 2008 - 17:48 ET by SaluteWell goody, then maybe Tommy can send me a gas card gift certificate for Christmas, oh in his term Xmas. I can only hope that Tommy has lots of stock in the NYT, ABC, and NBC. That would certainly fix his wagon.
I yam what I yam....Popeye.
I yam what I yam....Popeye.
December 8, 2008 - 17:49 ET by SaluteI yam what I yam....Popeye.
I yam what I yam....Popeye.
December 8, 2008 - 17:49 ET by SaluteI yam what I yam....Popeye.