Benchmarks

The Saxton Surge is still working, meeting the hey-at-least-we-didn't-find-any-more-than-20-decapitated-bodies benchmark. With news like this, can somebody tell me why we're still keeping our brave men and women over there in that sectarian death pit?

More of This

Chris Dodd for VP!

The Saxton Surge Is Working

Except, it's not.

Today, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said the Bush escalation strategy was failing. The loss of Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) is a huge blow to the cheerleader's of Bush's Iraq strategy.

Sen. Richard Lugar, a senior Republican and a reliable vote for President Bush on the war, said Monday that Bush's Iraq strategy was not working and that the U.S. should downsize the military's role.

The unusually blunt assessment deals a political blow to Bush, who has relied heavily on GOP support to stave off anti-war legislation.

It also comes as a surprise. Most Republicans have said they were willing to wait until September to see if Bush's recently ordered troop buildup in Iraq was working.

"In my judgment, the costs and risks of continuing down the current path outweigh the potential benefits that might be achieved," Lugar, R-Ind., said in a Senate floor speech. "Persisting indefinitely with the surge strategy will delay policy adjustments that have a better chance of protecting our vital interests over the long term."

How much longer will Jim Saxton write a blank check for a policy tht is such an obvious failure?

Jim Saxton to Conservatives on Immigration: You're Irrelevant

The only thing I love more than pointing out when Jim Saxton's right wing conservative positions are radically out of touch with NJ-03 is pointing out when he makes exceptionally dumb political moves, like completely ignoring his wingnut conservative base on the issue of immigration. Conservative Voice columnist Alan J. Ashinoff recently took a tour of the Capitol with a Jim Saxton aide.

Among the aide’s first questions were where I lived and what I did for a living. I told her we lived in Arizona and, to be fair, I told her that I wrote political commentary. As if on cue, Fox News began reporting about the Senate Immigration compromise on a nearby television. Sensing a potentially productive segue I remarked on how Arizona’s Senators were taking a lot of heat for their involvement in the Senates Immigration Compromise.

Apparently I touched upon a lively conversation topic on the Hill among congressional aides. My guide began to tell me of the hundreds of faxes Congressman Saxton’s office receives daily related to the Immigration bill; a stack of faxes “two or three inches deep,” she remarked. But she assured me that the three inch stack was nothing compared the quantity of faxes her fellow aides said were being received by those Senators directly associated with the Immigration Compromise.

Naturally I had to ask what Congressman Saxton thought of the near 500 faxes a day he was receiving from Americans who felt betrayed by their representation. Her reply was that the faxes were immediately recycled and that the Congressman never sees them.

I may have been pleasant on the outside but I was truly livid on the inside.

I asked (calmly I might add) if she was aware that people are spending between $19 and $99 to bulk fax the Senate and the House to have their voices heard. No. She explained that this really wasn’t the Congressman’s issue and that he was focused more on the interests of his district in New Jersey and his obligations to our soldiers fighting in the Middle East.

Already knowing the answer, I asked if the good Congressman had a vote in this great Senate Compromise when it reached the House. Yes.

I then asked if it was not irresponsible for the Congressman not to understand what it was he was voting for or against especially when he was receiving greater than ten thousand faxes a month from concerned Americans across the nation. No answer.

If ignoring mainstream constituent positions weren't typical of Jim Saxton's tenure as Congressman, this would be absolutely hilarious. As it is, it's still worth a good chuckle. Between being way out of touch with the majority on most issues and alienating his far right conservative base on others, I don't know how Jim Saxton expects to be reelected.

UPDATE: (Tuesday 9:47 AM) This story also appeared in Human Events. It's really making the rounds

Jim Saxton Shills for Big Oil

If you were a Republican Congressman who had received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Big Oil and who noticed that his constituents were increasingly restless about the rising prices of gasoline, would you A) work hard to investigate the root cause, impose penalties on any corporation that sought to shamelessly exploit consumers and become a leader on legislation to wean America off of oil and onto renewable energy to make our lives more affordable or B) trot out a red herring to defend the Big Oil interests that have lined your campaign coffers? Jim Saxton chose B.

Exactly one month ago today, Jim Saxton an op-ed in the Asbury Park Press entitled, "OPEC's Greed Pushing Gas Prices Higher and Higher. Here's a snippet.

Each morning on the way to school or work, Americans drive past constant reminders of highway robbery.

Gas station signs trumpet $2.80-plus regular fuel and $3-plus premium blends. The old adage of what goes up must come down does not apply. It seems $4, even $5, for a gallon gasoline is inevitable.

Who or what is to blame? More than any other single factor, the price-rigging schemes of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

I always get suspicious when I hear Jim Saxton, who's been a great ally to big business, pretend to stand up for everyday consumers. So I did a little background research into prices and found that the evidence doesn't support Oilman Saxton's claim.

The US Energy Information Administration puts out monthly data on both crude oil and gasoline prices. In May 2006, crude oil cost $62.83 per barrell, compared with $63.11 in May 2007, or a 0.45% increase. Compare that to a $0.14 raise in prices at the pump, which is a 4.47% increase. In short, gas prices rose ten times as fast as crude prices, which doesn't support Jim Saxton's notion that OPEC's manipulation of crude is driving record-shattering gas prices.

To be sure, OPEC has had a role in the long-term growth in gas prices. But Saxton's supposedly consumer-friendly rhetoric just doesn't hold water. More than any other single factor in recent years, Big Oil has driven the price of gas sky high by deliberately limiting refining capacity-- refusing to increase, upgrade or do good-faith upkeep on current refineries. Of course, more limits on refining means less gasoline...and higher prices, which means more profits for Big Oil. And with ExxonMobil last year posting the highest profits in recorded corporate history, oil companies have certainly done well for themselves. CNN Money did a bit on Big Oil's price manipulation a while back.

Gas prices hit $3.10 a gallon Wednesday, according to AAA. It's the fourth record day in a row, and the surge has been attributed to low gasoline supplies caused by a lack of refining capacity.

"They have no interest in building spare capacity because that would undermine their pricing power," Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer Federation of America, said prior to a hearing by a House Judiciary Committee antitrust panel in Washington Wednesday.

And this as well:

It's the same story every year.

Each spring, just before the summer driving season, gasoline prices skyrocket. And every year, these four words appear in news reports nationwide as a big reason for the runup: "lack of refining capacity."

Then experts call for more refineries, politicians pledge to make the dirty behemoths easier to build, but guess what? Nothing really happens. Next year, repeat story.

The article also notes the strength of Big Oil's monopoly power on refining; the top four refiners (Exxon, ConocoPhillps, Valero & BP) control fully 50% of national refining capacity. Yet these companies, making billions and billions in profits by ripping off consumers refuse to build new refineries. What's more, the current refineries keep breaking down, further limiting refining capacity and lining Big Oil's pockets with middle class families' hard-earned dollars.

So why would Jim Saxton blame OPEC for rising prices when it's clearly the fault of Big Oil's deliberate refinery manipulation? Because he's taken $73,740 in campaign contributions from Big Oil. As much as he might try to spin his full-throated defense of Big Oil as looking out for consumer interests, Jim Saxton's real motives here are completely transparent. When it comes to siding with Big Oil or hard-working New Jersey families, Jim Saxton chooses Big Oil's money every time.

Rep. Scott Garrett, (R-Loony Tunes)

It's not a NJ-03 post, but you simply must check it out. Blog the Fifth has a great story about one of New Jersey's other Congressmen, Scott Garrett of the fifth district. It seems he's made quite a hobby of screwing New Jersey families when it comes to gas prices.

Stay Tuned

for a big story about Jim Saxton and Big Oil coming later today. Until then, posting will likely be sparse, as I'm in and out all day.