Does Reichert really have that much influence? Experience as KC Sheriff? Why was that a reason to support him for Congress? Tobias sounds wacked.

Very interesting exchange. I still don't quite get Tobias' politics, though.

Tobias doesn't sound wacked at all. He sounds like a guy very passionate about issues that are important to him and has decided to support the candidacy of politicians he feels are more likely to effectively support those positions. That said, I doubt very much Reichert gives a shit about biodiesel. Also, Reichert doesn't really enjoy any influence in Congress right now other than he's a member of the controlling party. Tobias would be better served to withdraw his support and use different avenues (lobbying groups, NGO's, etc.) to further biodiesel initiatives.

I see he watched the ABC docudrama over the weekend ("Clinton's lack of action during his administration, his policies of appeasement, and gutting of our foreign intelligence abilities").

That is just flat out false.

Anyone who has read the likes of Richard Clarke, Suskind, and Bob Woodward over the past couple years would know that Clinton took the threat that terrorism poses much more seriously than the neoclowns.

It sounds like he's already a lobbyist - doing favors for those in power so they will further his agenda. His agenda sounds good so I hope it works.

If you read his blog, he's a committed conservative Catholic. He's big on family values and fiscal conservatism, which Democrats are rarely very good at. And he has the "Clinton-is-evil" virus. Basically, I think he's one of the last-gasp Old Republicans who can't bring himself to believe that his party has left him so far behind. The old line is that you can "disagree on the gay issue" and still be a part of things, but Bush has proven that to be laughably false. He's also proven the "fiscal conservatism" to be laughably false, but that IS still a core value for many older-style Republicans.

One of the hallmarks of being a REAL conservative is that you don't go changing your politics willy-nilly. I think he's still in denial about where his party has gone, though, and thinks they will come back someday. In essence, he thinks it's still 1981. How he overlooks the conflict between "big oil is evil" and the Bush-Cheney Big Oil connection is a little hard to fathom, though.

I just glanced through the blog and I think you're right, Fnarf. He's positioning himself as a pragmatist, but he's a religious idealogue. It's really fascinating how easy it is to use religion to get people to vote against their own best interests.

This guy sounds like a true centrist. He falls to the left on some issues, and to the right on other issues. He is a bit inconsistent, but then most humans are. He leans Republican, but isn't a foaming-at-the-mouth right-wing wacko, and disagrees with some of the party line. My brother is a bit like that. Sometimes he votes for Dems, and sometimes for Repubs. He voted for Bush, but now views that as a big mistake, and is likely to vote Dem this fall.

It is exactly this type of voter that drives candidates (of both parties) to distraction. How do they run to the middle, and yet keep their more extreme base happy? Tobias seems to be sticking with the Republicans, for now. But really, given some of his viewpoints, someone like him could go either way.

Cantwell helped with his Grays Harbor venture. Is he supporting her or McGavick?

What Fnarf said: the reason they're called conservatives and liberals is that one side is generally slow to change and the other is very quick to change, among other things. One could argue that Bush and his cronies are in complete violation of the conservative philosophy.

Also, man, Eli, you really jumped on him. I think his explanation effectively explained his case (not that that makes him any more right or wrong, but it at least makes sense), and it appears that you imposed your black and white views over his shades of grey in your further questioning. Not all liberals see things the same way and not all conservatives see things the same way.

This is the kind of voter the Dems should be courting. I can't IMAGINE a better issue to make sweet sweet love with than one that combines NATIONAL SECURITY and ENVIRONMENTALISM. It's like a gift from above. Who's the Democrat who's smart enough to start hammering on Biodiesel as a weapon against the terrorists? Sadly, my old trope still has some truth to it: Republicans lean towards evil, and Democrats lean towards stupid.

I'm not sure why Martin's personal beliefs mean anything to any of you, and what it has to do with his business, Seattle Biodiesel. Heck, it's good to see lefts/rights agree on something: BIODIESEL

National security, environment, local farmers, biodiesel supports it all. Who cares if one resonates more than the next.

This makes me wonder. Is there someone somewhere in Texas that supports Hilary Clinton, produces cluster bombs (say because our provision of them to nations like Israel to use against civilians makes us a more responsible part of the world community), and is a strident Unitarian?

It's pointless to try to attribute any higher political ideals to Martin's actions. His actions have always been based on profit motive. His ethics have been slippery at best since he was a kid. Martin was kicked off the Medford, OR school board as the student representative when he was caught stealing an SAT test and trying to sell it to other students. (Medford Senior High School '82.) He was also voted as 'most likely to be involved in the next Watergate' by his fellow students. Of course he's a Republican. How fitting that he's now co-hosting events with Karl Rove.

For many conservatives, political identification is akin to religious identification. They vote for "their" party rather than based on any rational calculus. They'll even vote against their own interests, or come up with wild explanations that reconcile beliefs that are inconsistent with the party platform (witness Mr Tobias).

If someone doesn't evolve beyond their inherited religious/political identification by the time their 23, they never will. Dems should waste no time courting folks like Tobias.

hypocrite

He talks about energy independence but has located his biodiesel plant on the coast so that he can import palm oil from other countries, he hates having us dependent on the saudis but indonesia is fine.
read this and you will understand, http://www.cspinet.org/new/200506021.html

wtf? just follow the money. He's being pragmatic, in his own mind. Acquiring $1/gallon produced means serious cash. Throw enough early capital at a vougue industry with heavy subsidies in the NW, no less, means profits and popularity. Prediction: Next reception will be with Nader or possibly Hillary.

A Karl Rove supporter, but yet Mr.Tobias hasn't voted since 2005, and his "So-Called" wifey is not even a registered voter? What a shame you Palm Oil non voting hypocrite!