Clinton joins McCain in the race for panderer in chief

Just so I understand:

Proposal to cut the gas tax: Pandering.

Attacking Big Oil's profits: Doing God's work.

No, it's:

Proposal to cut the gas tax: Pandering

Attacking Big Oil's profits: Pandering, but of a sort that for some reason doesn't bother me quite as much, maybe because I figure the oil companies have the resources to protect themselves, while there's no such constituency out to save the gas tax (except maybe roadbuilders).

"Basically, U.S. drivers haven't been paying anywhere near the real... costs" Tell it like it is! Hallelujah!

Not to mention that tax holidays, like equally silly "stimulus" refunds, only serve to get us deeper into debt if we don't reform our spending. How much have we spent on Iraq now? Oh, that war was supposed to pay for itself?

Over at Down with Tyranny, it was pointed out that the Clinton pander is even worse than McCain's, because she pretends that she could fund such a tax holiday with windfall profits tax that the Senate wouldn't pass and the President wouldn't sign.

McCain just adds it to all the other stuff he's putting on the cuff.

Krugman summarizes the argument pellucidly:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/gas-tax-follies/

Hear, hear.

I'm all for a gas tax holiday. Yeah, it'll be small and pointless, but it would give justification for a . . .

WINDFALL/ EXCESS PROFITS TAX ON BIG OIL!

Let THEM help pay for the war effort, and keep our government afloat! They're the ones profiting from America's economic plight, so it's time they contribute their fair share . . .

I think this is the relevant point regarding the change in Obama's position on the gas tax in Illinois:

"Barack Obama opposes it (as does George Bush), saying his experience with a similar move in Illinois shows that the oil companies won't pass the savings on to consumers, and it won't encourage conservation."

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/04/gas_tax_holiday_a_good_politic.html

And this is the truly remarkable quote from Justin Fox himself:

"Basically, U.S. drivers haven't been paying anywhere near the real environmental, infrastructural, and military costs incurred in getting gas into their cars and then burning it."

Justin, you have stated an extremely important, insightful and subversive thing. This economy is not built on 'real costs' and conservative free-market thinking appears to be focused on nothing short of hiding those 'real costs'. This economy is built on the ethos of privatizing profit while socializing liability - to suggest anything else is considered Marxist class warfare. Thank you for stating this obvious but highly suppressed fact.

I have a bit of an issue with the reference to SUV owners.
"The people stuck with gas guzzlers now are mostly middle-class folks who bought big SUVs and pickup trucks. Do we really want--even in a token, temporary way--to be retroactively subsidizing their poor decisions?"

I live in Wyoming - and live, as most people do in Wyoming - a lifestyle that truly benefits from SUV's and trucks. Come to any rural area like this and the streets are dominated by gas guzzlers. But here it's not a status symbol - it's a way to live the life we've chosen: one that embraces camping trips over shopping centers and hunting over the opera. Most of the access roads are absolutely impossible to navigate without an SUV - not to mention the fact that we all usually cart around our fleets of retrievers and sheep dogs. Many people need these trucks for their agricultural related work and countless other needs associated with life in Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, etc. To aggravate the problem, you have to drive distances for absolutely EVERYTHING - I travel 30 miles to a nearby town to see my dentist and doctor. The nearest airport to board most major flights is a full 3 hour drive away.
I own an SUV - old and used. I've used it to haul many, many dogs in. In the winter, the 4-wheel drive has been invaluable. However, with gas the way it is I would dearly, dearly love to trade it in for some gas efficient miniature car. But I've staked my own little claim as a sufferer of the credit crisis, and can in no uncertain terms afford to get a new car - paying for gas at 3.50 a gallon doesn't help either. Most of the people who live here are in about the same shape. I understand that the U.S. needs to be weaned off oil in no uncertain terms - but can't this issue be more nuanced? Is there seriously no other remedy in our immediate future?
Or will you all just consider us clinging to our trucks out of bitterness?

@caitlilly: See my response here.