But I saw Hillary and Obama attacking each other's personalities. Didn't see ONE Right winger anywhere.

So where is THIS coming from?

The questions from the prompter were legitimate questions...so I fail to see where the right winger comment comes into play here.

were pertinent! Frankly, it's about time someone asked them.

"but not in the sense that anyone who knows anything about current events would be greatly interested in the answers."

Was this not the intent of the debate? To gather THEIR opinions on current events and how they would handle these situations?

"You didn't look at the moderators? Of course you didn't see Hannity who was offstage, pulling strings."

Nope...did you see him there?

"You mean situations like having known someone decades before or wearing various accessories? The questions were pathetic."

Ah yes, that one. Well, if you associated with someone who you later found out was running around blowing up people and things...would you continue to associate with them and call them friend? I see this one as a question of his personality and his fitness for the position. This is not an unusual question, frankly.

"Obama got the questions last night, yet Hillary Clinton wasn't wearing a pin last night. why was it just an issue with Obama in Philadelphia?"

Perhaps because she has worn one before and has no issue with putting one on?

Scorpio69er,

"Unless the convention itself comes up with a thoroughly vetted, nationally viable candidate (like Al Gore), you'd better practice saying "President McCain"."

I'll drink to THAT! Al Gore for President 2008!!!!

to Dean FSFOAD.

THEY get to choose who they want to be for...and in their OWN good time!

"They are politicians, after all. It's just horse trading at this point, and this is Dean's way of pushing them to realize that if a juicy offer hasn't come their way, then it's time they shit or get off the pot."

And, out of curiosity, just WHAT will Dean do if they DON'T "shit or get off the pot"?

Answer, not a darn thing. Nothing he CAN do.

Of COURSE cutting the taxes, or eliminating them, from the price of gasoline is a GOOD thing. But doing JUST that won't CUT it.

We need to uncap the wells we've already dug, drill for MORE oil and build more refineries (the last one was built in 1974!) and while doing this search for economical alternate sources of energy.

Only THIS will keep American independent of OPEC.

Joel29028,

"As the article points out, higher gas prices are starting to have a noticeable effect in California in terms of reduced consumption." I daresay, the higher gas prices are starting to effect California in terms of reduced spending, reduced tax collection, reduced productivity, and reduced GNP...not to mention reduced work for people to live on.

"Until car-buyers have some assurance that gasoline is permanently more expensive, many of us will not make long-term choices to drive more fuel-efficient vehicles." And many will not anyway. There ARE those who will simply pay the extra cost to get to work, but reduce the cost of going other places and simply stay at home. This will, in turn, cause an economic downturn of those businesses which are dependent on tourism and travel.

"A gas tax is the way to go. If it was phased-in over 5 to 10 years, car-buyers would have an incentive to not to invest in fuel-wasting private vehicles. Similarly, auto manufacturers would have an incentive to invest in R&D and manufacturing plants for new efficient cars. No car-maker wants to spend a lot of money developing new technologies unless they are very sure there will be a market." A gas tax would only hurt those who can ill-afford to pay it...those who CAN afford an SUV would simply move expenditures from other sources (such as recreational expenditures) to pay for the gasoling for the SUV they want. Further, the incentive for auto manufacturers is profit...thus, if people want to BUY something, the profit is there for the manufacturer. You cannot TAX an incentive for a business. Now you COULD ration gasoline and THAT would cause a reduction of fuel-wasting private vehicles...but at the cost of forcing the public (needlessly) to purchase vehicles they do not want...which would be political suicide to a politican.

So good luck with that one.

hammerbutt,

"I've got an idea how about if the government just enforces the existing laws they have against monopolies and price fixing. I'm sure gas would drop by a buck or two."

Good idea...if that were ALL to it. Of course you overlook supply and demand. We have oil wells capped everywhere and various oil deposits in other locations we are not drilling for. Further, the last refinery built was in 1976...you really don't think our demand for oil and oil based products has been stagnant for the last 32 years, do you?

Nope...the oil companies alone are not the only culprits here. Our government has capped all our previously dug oil wells, given in to radical environmental groups to prevent new drilling and have bowed to the same groups to prevent the building of new refineries. Not to mention, adding additional costs per gallon with federal and state taxes.

No, it is a combination of our federal government AND the oil companies which has driven up the cost of gasoline. Don't like paying so much? Contact your Senators and Congressmen and ask them to fix the problem.