Carl Sheeler (BSS #62)


Guest: Carl Sheeler

Condition of Mr. Segundo: Ejected due to the apparently “serious” nature of politics.

Subjects Discussed: Running an unorthodox senatorial campaign, Howard Dean, the similarities and differences between Whitehouse and Sheeler’s platforms, problems with Sheldon Whitehouse, on Sheeler styling himself as “the next Ned Lamont,” more problems with Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island’s status as a blue state, efforts to determine Sheeler’s positions, even more problems with Sheldon Whitehouse, universal health care, negotiating the mechanisms of the Senate, on impeaching Bush and the Democratic silence, the monies available for universal health care, the baby boomer generation, generic drugs, the economics of expired patents, placing ceilings on oil and gas, speculation on whether Our Young, Roving Correspondent is a Republican, U.S. energy policy, the Manhattan Project, the U.S. energy infrastructure, hybrid cars, James Howard Kunstler’s The Long Emergency, alternative energy in China, the emerging middle class in India, the trucking industry, the expense of overhauling the energy infrastructure and the possible burden on the working class, Los Angeles, and the transportation grid.

[LISTENER’S NOTE: Due to a technical snafu, the final minute of this conversation was unexpectedly cut off. We apologize for this podcast’s abrupt ending.] [INTERVIEW NOTES: The interview was conducted by telephone.]

1 Comment

  1. Carl Sheeler

    A long delayed thanks for the opportunity during my misearbly failed US Senate campaign. A few musings about the Democratic Party presidential front-runners and an apology to those who may think these ramblings are elitist keeping in mind my own beginnings were quite humble and knowledge can be a terrible thing.

    While Barrack has the clear history of social activism, it is not surprising that Hillar seems to have carved out the niche of economically disenfranchised based on polling demographics suggesting significantly stronger support by those individuals/households earning below $100,000. Why would a millionairess suceed doing so by targetting this group? It’s a numbers game. The upside is there’s a great deal of these folks who love old Bill and believe she will do as he was perceived to have for the economic woes they/we now suffer under Herr Bush. It’s the Clinton name association with a veneer absent real substance… but how much research are these folks doing really? The downside is this demographic tends not to come out and vote as much as their more well to do liberal cousins.

    On the Barrack side, his appeal is kitchy to the yet to be tainted, ideals of youth who when energized can go Ron Paulesque in their support which worked with “I’ll do what I say” Iowans, but not so with the Northeast youth (sub-30 y/o crowd)relied upon in New Hampshire. The better read and more affluent think its about the desire to unify with plenty of Mensa policy types to aid this other than globally savvy savior.

    The big joke. A little research of the Clinton era mojo of “hand up, not hand out” was Bill significantly cut funding of social welfare programs and the military machine that put trillions into our country’s coffers and eased the need to raise taxes. Sorry about thhose multiple tours for the patriotic troops since the defense end strength was dramatically reduced, which may have encouraged the perspective of our weak on national security posture.

    The bigger joke is when in recent memory did an elected official put the populous before the financial benefactors who funded their message… a la follow the money trail and ask whether those making big donations have the same agenda as our middle class?

    Do we genuinely expect the Hillary Express that has deep affiliations with the corporate and defense industry types going to go all JFK/FDResque from her Lieberman-light leanings once elected or adhere to her DINO roots that are evident from her political positions?

    It doesn’t take a Karl Rove or James Carville to know that lemmings will jump the cliff with less of a push than a leading promise “change”. Who’s asking where’s the beef?

Leave a Reply