Is this a good or bad headline in today's Washington Post for Clinton and the gas tax? "Clinton Gas-Tax Proposal Criticized" On the one hand, it's a critical story and seems to focus on the pander part of the proposal. On the other hand, Clinton is being tied to a gas-tax cut which is exactly what the campaign wants. Here's the story: "A growing chorus -- including a top congressional Democrat -- labeled Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's proposal for suspending the federal gasoline tax ineffective and shortsighted yesterday, even as she continued to paint Sen. Barack Obama as insensitive to drivers' woes for not endorsing the plan."
Not surprisingly, editorial pages are siding with Obama over Clinton and McCain on this issue. But what's resonating with voters? The New York Times: "McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton have hit on a new way to pander to American voters: a temporary suspension of the federal gasoline tax between Memorial Day and Labor Day."
The Washington Post: "We have to agree with Sen. Barack Obama, the only candidate who has refused to play this game... His opponents no doubt hope that Mr. Obama's stand will prove to be political suicide. We think it qualifies as political courage