PDA

View Full Version : Can't get it right



Bubba
06-08-2010, 01:13 PM
It must be deliberate- can't for the life of me figure out why it is so difficult to render honors.

Knows how to bow though regards

Bubba

aandw
06-08-2010, 01:16 PM
what is going on while the pic was taken?

ducknwork
06-08-2010, 02:26 PM
aandw,

My guess would be the Pledge of Allegiance or National Anthem, given the salutes from military members and the non military guy with his hand over his heart.

When and where is this picture from?

Bubba
06-08-2010, 02:44 PM
aandw,

My guess would be the Pledge of Allegiance or National Anthem, given the salutes from military members and the non military guy with his hand over his heart.

When and where is this picture from?

The Ft. Hood Memorial service. Notice how those in uniform are standing tall and even the other guy in civvies is respectful enough to render the appropriate salute. Not the Bower in Chief though.

The crotch salute returns regards

Bubba

ducknwork
06-08-2010, 02:47 PM
Maybe he wore his flag lapel pin that day...that would make it all better, right?

Franco
06-08-2010, 02:49 PM
One would have to live in denial not to realize that BHO and his wife have always hated what the USA has stood for.

I'm not surprised.

This Presidency is our darkest hour!

aandw
06-08-2010, 03:51 PM
i don't think he hates america, he just has a completely different view of what it should be than i.

dnf777
06-08-2010, 06:37 PM
Uhhh....sorry to break up the little Obama-bashing party with some truth, but here is a photo from the Ft. Hood service:

http://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/Obama-fort-hood-texas_nov112009.jpg

road kill
06-08-2010, 06:45 PM
Uhhh....sorry to break up the little Obama-bashing party with some truth, but here is a photo from the Ft. Hood service:

http://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/Obama-fort-hood-texas_nov112009.jpg

Yeah....what is Michelle lookin' at??
Is the flag down there??:cool:






rk

starjack
06-08-2010, 06:46 PM
show and word and we are still in are darkest hour

dnf777
06-08-2010, 06:48 PM
Yeah....what is Michelle lookin' at??
Is the flag down there??:cool:






rk

probably the same thing that woman clutching her daughter is......nothing but sorrow

dnf777
06-08-2010, 06:57 PM
Uh-oh! Your boy is guilty too!! Looks like he's lamenting eating too much polish sausage rather than properly saluting the colors!

http://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/images.jpghttp://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/bush_hand_heart-789605.jpg

road kill
06-08-2010, 06:59 PM
Uh-oh! Your boy is guilty too!! Looks like he's lamenting eating too much polish sausage rather than properly saluting the colors!

http://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/images.jpghttp://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/bush_hand_heart-789605.jpg


Ah yes, the GOLD standard!!:D



rk

depittydawg
06-08-2010, 07:31 PM
Ah yes, the GOLD standard!!:D



rk

Laura looks pretty excited too.

road kill
06-08-2010, 07:34 PM
Laura looks pretty excited too.
She's taken!!:rolleyes:



rk

dnf777
06-08-2010, 07:40 PM
She's taken!!:rolleyes:



rk

That poor woman! I can only imagine the embarrassment and humiliation she had to endure! At least he was rich. Reminds me of the rich kid who always got invited to the parties because he would buy the beer!

depittydawg
06-08-2010, 10:05 PM
Ah yes, the GOLD standard!!:D



rk

Who's the hispanic guy? Anybody check his papers?

Buzz
06-08-2010, 10:13 PM
Uh-oh! Your boy is guilty too!! Looks like he's lamenting eating too much polish sausage rather than properly saluting the colors!

http://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/images.jpghttp://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/bush_hand_heart-789605.jpg

Just another example of the double standard they apply to Obama. I can only imagine that these people comb through every frame of film and audio recorded on the guy to find any possible example to show that Obama hates America.

Wonder if Obama wipes his a$$ in the approved manner?

david gibson
06-09-2010, 12:03 AM
Just another example of the double standard they apply to Obama. I can only imagine that these people comb through every frame of film and audio recorded on the guy to find any possible example to show that Obama hates America.

Wonder if Obama wipes his a$$ in the approved manner?

doesnt take much combing to find your man approves of people that bombed the pentagon and shout "GD America" over and over. oh yeah, and his wife was never proud of being an american until somewhere in 2008. can you say it with a "capital "B"?

no double standard, obama is a leftist asholle and we will never forget it. its really not hard, is it? and anyone who follows a man like that is, well, pretty low down too. and i'll say that to anyones face that fits it!

dnf777
06-09-2010, 07:48 AM
doesnt take much combing to find your man approves of people that bombed the pentagon and shout "GD America" over and over. oh yeah, and his wife was never proud of being an american until somewhere in 2008. can you say it with a "capital "B"?

!

My oh my! Not only is that a dead horse by now, but my gosh, you guys pummelled the carcass into the ground! But its always amusing to hear it again. Care to address the photo though? It looks like GWB is made sick to his stomach by hearing the pledge? (of course I don't believe that, but I'm trying to show how ridiculous your claims against Obama are!)

road kill
06-09-2010, 07:53 AM
My oh my! Not only is that a dead horse by now, but my gosh, you guys pummelled the carcass into the ground! But its always amusing to hear it again. Care to address the photo though? It looks like GWB is made sick to his stomach by hearing the pledge? (of course I don't believe that, but I'm trying to show how ridiculous your claims against Obama are!)
What would it take for you to realize that Obama's vision of America is NOT the same as yours?


Or is it............




rk

ducknwork
06-09-2010, 08:17 AM
doesnt take much combing to find your man approves of people that bombed the pentagon and shout "GD America" over and over. oh yeah, and his wife was never proud of being an american until somewhere in 2008.

There is nothing remotely disputable in this paragraph. Period.

dnf777
06-09-2010, 09:10 AM
Guys. Obama is not my dog in this race.
I just don't want to see him fail, or else we all fail.
Bush and the modern republicans are NOT my vision of this country either. I hope its not your's either! Obama's certainly not helping get us out of it, but the hole we're in is almost exclusively a result of 8 years of runaway deficit spending, unecessary wars, and poor gov't oversight of greedy corporate practices. We were headed right for the toilet, in fact, I'd say we were and still are clinging to the rim!

What choice to we have? More Bush/Cheney policies that were CERTAIN to doom us? Obama? All of the above, bought and sold at corporate political clearinghouse.

Bash Obama all you want for fiscal policy....hell, I have, and will continue to join you on that. We may disagree on his environmental/energy policy, but we can debate that too.

The majority of the Obama bashing I see here however, is childish name calling and trumped up accusations designed to incite hatred and revolt. As big of a screw up that Bush and Cheney were, I never question their love for their country. When we stoop to that level, ALL hope for progress or cooperation towards a common goal are GONE. So when I see this happening, I have to wonder if the modern repubican party would rather see the country fail, than Obama succeed??

huntinman
06-09-2010, 09:46 AM
Guys. Obama is not my dog in this race.
I just don't want to see him fail, or else we all fail.
Bush and the modern republicans are NOT my vision of this country either. I hope its not your's either! Obama's certainly not helping get us out of it, but the hole we're in is almost exclusively a result of 8 years of runaway deficit spending, unecessary wars, and poor gov't oversight of greedy corporate practices. We were headed right for the toilet, in fact, I'd say we were and still are clinging to the rim!

What choice to we have? More Bush/Cheney policies that were CERTAIN to doom us? Obama? All of the above, bought and sold at corporate political clearinghouse.

Bash Obama all you want for fiscal policy....hell, I have, and will continue to join you on that. We may disagree on his environmental/energy policy, but we can debate that too.

The majority of the Obama bashing I see here however, is childish name calling and trumped up accusations designed to incite hatred and revolt. As big of a screw up that Bush and Cheney were, I never question their love for their country. When we stoop to that level, ALL hope for progress or cooperation towards a common goal are GONE. So when I see this happening, I have to wonder if the modern repubican party would rather see the country fail, than Obama succeed??

Wrong... obama fails... the country wins. The things he has succeeded at so far are not good for the country. The sooner we send him back to his Rezko financed home the better.

Buzz
06-09-2010, 09:58 AM
The majority of the Obama bashing I see here however, is childish name calling and trumped up accusations designed to incite hatred and revolt. As big of a screw up that Bush and Cheney were, I never question their love for their country. When we stoop to that level, ALL hope for progress or cooperation towards a common goal are GONE. So when I see this happening, I have to wonder if the modern repubican party would rather see the country fail, than Obama succeed??

Thanks for sharing that. I feel the same way. Obama isn't my guy either. I did not vote for him in the primaries. I couldn't believe that the guy would give a convention speech in 2004, run for the Senate in 2006, and then jump right into the 2008 presidential race. I thought he was way too wet behind the ears. In fact during the primaries in 2008 I worked my behind off against him. I plugged my nose and voted for him in November and hoped for the best because McCain/Palin scared the hell out of me after 8 years of Bush. He's done plenty to upset me, in fact this morning I sat down and typed a very critical letter and sent it off to the White House.

The only reason I defend him at every turn here because my perception of much criticism here is as you say, childish name calling and trumped up accusations.

dnf777
06-09-2010, 10:05 AM
Also, I find it ironic that much of what Obama is criticized for, is in many cases just a continuation of Bush's policies! Secretive gov't, ignoring the will of the people, ramming things down our throats, massive deficit spending, unpopular expensive wars......these are all things I loathed about Bush's administration, and also now with Obama.

Like I said, I'll join the chorus on most of these points....but to then turn around and give the helm back to the republicans???? NO WAY. Guns, Bibles, and more tax cuts won't solve the problems we currently face. Hopefully the time is ripe for a 3rd party candidate......and one who WON'T sell out to corporate lobbyists before even taking office!

BonMallari
06-09-2010, 10:14 AM
Guys. Obama is not my dog in this race.
I just don't want to see him fail, or else we all fail.
Bush and the modern republicans are NOT my vision of this country either. I hope its not your's either! Obama's certainly not helping get us out of it, but the hole we're in is almost exclusively a result of 8 years of runaway deficit spending, unecessary wars, and poor gov't oversight of greedy corporate practices. We were headed right for the toilet, in fact, I'd say we were and still are clinging to the rim!

What choice to we have? More Bush/Cheney policies that were CERTAIN to doom us? Obama? All of the above, bought and sold at corporate political clearinghouse.

Bash Obama all you want for fiscal policy....hell, I have, and will continue to join you on that. We may disagree on his environmental/energy policy, but we can debate that too.

The majority of the Obama bashing I see here however, is childish name calling and trumped up accusations designed to incite hatred and revolt. As big of a screw up that Bush and Cheney were, I never question their love for their country. When we stoop to that level, ALL hope for progress or cooperation towards a common goal are GONE. So when I see this happening, I have to wonder if the modern republican party would rather see the country fail, than Obama succeed??

IMHO dnf 777 your hatred for everything related to the Bush/Cheney administration has you rationalizing that they were so evil that anything is better so you have convinced yourself that the current admin has got to be better....you fell into EXACTLY what the rest of the country including some members of my family bought into from the current administration...

BHO may not have been your candidate,but from my perspective when I read your posts I see nothing but anger toward the years 2000-08 and all things associated with those years..you may not like this bs sandwich either that is currently on the plate but you are trying to convince yourself that if you imagine real hard it will somehow transform itself into a prime rib variety or at least something more palatable....;)

dnf777
06-09-2010, 11:18 AM
,but from my perspective when I read your posts I see nothing but anger toward the years 2000-08 and all things associated with those years..you may not like this bs sandwich either that is currently on the plate but you are trying to convince yourself that if you imagine real hard it will somehow transform itself into a prime rib variety or at least something more palatable....;)

Why shouldn't I? Or anyone else who loves this country? We stood by and watched a man enact policies, launch wars, and cut taxes we couldn't afford bring our country to the brink of collapse! Anyone here like that? I sure as hell didn't, and don't want to see it happen again.

I can't say I voted for him, but I sure wanted him to succeed. But at every turn, they chose the wrong direction for our country, and nearly destroyed it.

No, I don't find Obama palatable. MANY things will not be palatable if we are to climb out of this hole. Now we will be forced to make the sacrafices that Bush often spoke of, yet never seemed to ask us to pay. We are being forced to take second seat to many other countries when it comes to education, technology, infrastructure developement......Maybe if the rest of the world suffers worse than we do, we'll remain the strongest, but we have to quit using the credit cards to support our lifestyle! We gotta spend more time in school, and less time on the nintendos. Hell, some people may need to quit holding out for that management position they deserve and pick up a shovel or basket and do some of the work that the illegals are doing because "Americans won't do it"!!

Sorry for the rant, but hopefully there's some common ground in there!
I do agree that Obama can talk the talk, but so far, has not walked the walk.
But I'd rather see him succeed, than see all of us fail.

BonMallari
06-09-2010, 11:25 AM
Why shouldn't I? Or anyone else who loves this country? We stood by and watched a man enact policies, launch wars, and cut taxes we couldn't afford bring our country to the brink of collapse! Anyone here like that? I sure as hell didn't, and don't want to see it happen again.

I can't say I voted for him, but I sure wanted him to succeed. But at every turn, they chose the wrong direction for our country, and nearly destroyed it.

No, I don't find Obama palatable. MANY things will not be palatable if we are to climb out of this hole. Now we will be forced to make the sacrafices that Bush often spoke of, yet never seemed to ask us to pay. We are being forced to take second seat to many other countries when it comes to education, technology, infrastructure developement......Maybe if the rest of the world suffers worse than we do, we'll remain the strongest, but we have to quit using the credit cards to support our lifestyle! We gotta spend more time in school, and less time on the nintendos. Hell, some people may need to quit holding out for that management position they deserve and pick up a shovel or basket and do some of the work that the illegals are doing because "Americans won't do it"!!

Sorry for the rant, but hopefully there's some common ground in there!
I do agree that Obama can talk the talk, but so far, has not walked the walk.
But I'd rather see him succeed, than see all of us fail.

You just proved my point.....I also think you have more allies on here than you think that are fed up with govt in particular and not just partisan politics

huntinman
06-09-2010, 11:29 AM
Why shouldn't I? Or anyone else who loves this country? We stood by and watched a man enact policies, launch wars, and cut taxes we couldn't afford bring our country to the brink of collapse! Anyone here like that? I sure as hell didn't, and don't want to see it happen again.

I can't say I voted for him, but I sure wanted him to succeed. But at every turn, they chose the wrong direction for our country, and nearly destroyed it.

No, I don't find Obama palatable. MANY things will not be palatable if we are to climb out of this hole. Now we will be forced to make the sacrafices that Bush often spoke of, yet never seemed to ask us to pay. We are being forced to take second seat to many other countries when it comes to education, technology, infrastructure developement......Maybe if the rest of the world suffers worse than we do, we'll remain the strongest, but we have to quit using the credit cards to support our lifestyle! We gotta spend more time in school, and less time on the nintendos. Hell, some people may need to quit holding out for that management position they deserve and pick up a shovel or basket and do some of the work that the illegals are doing because "Americans won't do it"!!

Sorry for the rant, but hopefully there's some common ground in there!
I do agree that Obama can talk the talk, but so far, has not walked the walk.
But I'd rather see him succeed, than see all of us fail.

Wrong again. For the first 6 years of President Bush't time the economy roared along. It wasn't till the Dems got control of congress that things started to go haywire. Give credit or blame where it is due.

ducknwork
06-09-2010, 12:01 PM
What choice to we have? More Bush/Cheney policies that were CERTAIN to doom us? Obama?


Also, I find it ironic that much of what Obama is criticized for, is in many cases just a continuation of Bush's policies!

Oh my, you make this waaaay too easy. So basically you are saying that a vote for Obama is the same as a vote for McCain? After all, 'nothing' changed, right?

depittydawg
06-09-2010, 12:08 PM
Oh my, you make this waaaay too easy. So basically you are saying that a vote for Obama is the same as a vote for McCain? After all, 'nothing' changed, right?

I'd second that. There is very little that would have been different had McCain won the election. Very little at all. Here's why. The Senate has called the shots on everything from reform to budgets. Obama has been completely incapable of getting Senate leadership in his corner on reform. McCain would not have fared any better.

ducknwork
06-09-2010, 12:09 PM
Guns, Bibles, and more tax cuts won't solve the problems we currently face.

Wrong. Honestly, the Bible could save our country from many, many of the problems we face now. Now don't go getting all worked up thinking I am preaching and telling you all that you are going to hell for not going to church...BUT if we all lived by the guidelines laid down in the good book, we'd be on a better road. Name any problem that the country is facing now and it could be traced back to some form of immorality as it's root cause. Try it. Just to make it easy, 'most' problems can be traced back to GREED, something that the Bible strongly condemns. Think about it for a minute. What is a HUGE problem in our nation today? Buying on credit. Why do you buy on credit? Because you are greedy and don't believe in delayed gratification while you save for what you can reasonably afford.



Obama's certainly not helping get us out of it, but the hole we're in is almost exclusively a result of 8 years of runaway deficit spending, unecessary wars, and poor gov't oversight of greedy corporate practices.

Living modestly and not being greedy would get rid of those little issues...all things that are taught in the Bible.

depittydawg
06-09-2010, 12:10 PM
Wrong again. For the first 6 years of President Bush't time the economy roared along. It wasn't till the Dems got control of congress that things started to go haywire. Give credit or blame where it is due.

???? Selective memory I suppose.

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 12:23 PM
I'd second that. There is very little that would have been different had McCain won the election. Very little at all. Here's why. The Senate has called the shots on everything from reform to budgets. Obama has been completely incapable of getting Senate leadership in his corner on reform. McCain would not have fared any better.

Its going to snow during the month of June in Louisiana, we agree on something. Although I think McCainís beliefs on some things are more in line with my own.

I can say one thing, if we the people donít take this country back and quit putting people in office with their own person agendas/gains regardless of political party we are heading for disaster.

Kevin

Henry V
06-09-2010, 12:23 PM
Wrong again. For the first 6 years of President Bush't time the economy roared along. It wasn't till the Dems got control of congress that things started to go haywire. Give credit or blame where it is due.

Please post some data to support your assertion about the economy and name the specific policies that the incompetent dems pushed and Bush approved that brought it down.

And, interestingly the credit goes to credit. Borrow and spend in the public and private sector works to grow the economy for the short term. When the private credit bubble burst you end up in the deep whole that we are no slowly climbing out of.

menmon
06-09-2010, 12:28 PM
It would not matter if Jesus was President, they would not be happy right now because life is tough all over for many.

The Gulf Coast States have not felt this economic crisis like the rest of the country until now, and if you spoke with the average guy he was angry at governement for bailing out wall street, detroit, etc. Now it hitting home with the desaster in the gulf and now government can't do enough. It is funny when it is you in need of help. Think about it

aandw
06-09-2010, 01:31 PM
It would not matter if Jesus was President, they would not be happy right now because life is tough all over for many.

The Gulf Coast States have not felt this economic crisis like the rest of the country until now, and if you spoke with the average guy he was angry at governement for bailing out wall street, detroit, etc. Now it hitting home with the desaster in the gulf and now government can't do enough. It is funny when it is you in need of help. Think about it

that is the worst post i've read on here to memory. you have a weird since of humor if you think something is funny about it or the people deserved this. maybe you think God did this to punish them?
1. Jesus could fix the leak
2. everybody has been affected by the recession, obviously to different degrees
3. nothing wrong with being against bail outs, reward for failure. would have been like a wildfire, it would have been desolate for a while but what grew back would would have been greener and more resilient to fire
4. gov't's job is to protect our borders. but i do think the reaction should have been quicker and treated as if it was an invasion on our shores.

dnf777
06-09-2010, 01:35 PM
that is the worst post i've read on here to memory. you have a weird since of humor if you think something is funny about it or the people deserved this. maybe you think God did this to punish them?
1. Jesus could fix the leak
2. everybody has been affected by the recession, obviously to different degrees
3. nothing wrong with being against bail outs, reward for failure. would have been like a wildfire, it would have been desolate for a while but what grew back would would have been greener and more resilient to fire
4. gov't's job is to protect our borders. but i do think the reaction should have been quicker and treated as if it was an invasion on our shores.


Pat Roberston had no problem claiming Katrina was the wrath of God. Does that offend you?

If Jesus can fix the leak, what's he waiting for? Do you think He enjoys seeing his creation destroyed by greedy corporations? Is he punishing the shrimpers and fisherman of the Gulf Coast? What is your point? I don't understand where you're going with this.

menmon
06-09-2010, 02:10 PM
that is the worst post i've read on here to memory. you have a weird since of humor if you think something is funny about it or the people deserved this. maybe you think God did this to punish them?
1. Jesus could fix the leak
2. everybody has been affected by the recession, obviously to different degrees
3. nothing wrong with being against bail outs, reward for failure. would have been like a wildfire, it would have been desolate for a while but what grew back would would have been greener and more resilient to fire
4. gov't's job is to protect our borders. but i do think the reaction should have been quicker and treated as if it was an invasion on our shores.

You missed the point. The point was nobody likes it when the government spends money to help people in need. I have been hearing people complain about the dollars being spent to help people in need across the country. Now we (yes me included) here along the Gulf are in need of assistence, and I'm sure some person up in the midwest will complain about the money spent here and how his taxes are going up because of it.

aandw
06-09-2010, 02:27 PM
Pat Roberston had no problem claiming Katrina was the wrath of God. Does that offend you?

If Jesus can fix the leak, what's he waiting for? Do you think He enjoys seeing his creation destroyed by greedy corporations? Is he punishing the shrimpers and fisherman of the Gulf Coast? What is your point? I don't understand where you're going with this.

it didn't offend me but i certainly didn't agree with it. what offended me about his (sambo) post was he implied that the gulf coast people deserved this so they would feel an economic impact. no i don't think He enjoys this, but i also believe we have free will to make good and bad decisions and we are to deal with the consequences. i wasn't going anywhere with it just answering his questions. i was joking about Jesus being president (#1), we wouldn't have enough sense to elect him.

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 02:33 PM
You missed the point. The point was nobody likes it when the government spends money to help people in need. I have been hearing people complain about the dollars being spent to help people in need across the country. Now we (yes me included) here along the Gulf are in need of assistence, and I'm sure some person up in the midwest will complain about the money spent here and how his taxes are going up because of it.


Your correct Sambo, there is no way to make everyone happy. Personally I am all for spending tax dollars helping people affected from Natural Disasters. The gulf coast situation on the other hand should be the sole financial responsibility of BP and Trans Ocean not the American public.


Kevin

aandw
06-09-2010, 02:35 PM
You missed the point. The point was nobody likes it when the government spends money to help people in need. I have been hearing people complain about the dollars being spent to help people in need across the country. Now we (yes me included) here along the Gulf are in need of assistence, and I'm sure some person up in the midwest will complain about the money spent here and how his taxes are going up because of it.

i may have missed your point but i think you missed mine as well. i have no problem helping people in need. i think they should have done more quiker to keep so much oil reaching the shore. it is not and won't be a state problem. i think it is of national interest to protect our natural resources. as i said i think it should have been treated as an invasion on our nation. act now and do the paper work later.
also bailing out the big companies (wall street, detroit) would be the same as bailing BP "if" they go bankrupt because of their own greed. greed and incompetence drove the first bail outs.

dnf777
06-09-2010, 02:41 PM
it didn't offend me but i certainly didn't agree with it. what offended me about his (sambo) post was he implied that the gulf coast people deserved this so they would feel an economic impact. no i don't think He enjoys this, but i also believe we have free will to make good and bad decisions and we are to deal with the consequences. i wasn't going anywhere with it just answering his questions. i was joking about Jesus being president (#1), we wouldn't have enough sense to elect him.

Yeah, a long-haired Liberal who feeds the hungry and heals the sick without demanding to see a private insurance card wouldn't stand a chance! :D

I see your point. I guess I didn't interpret sambo quite as harshly as you did, that's all. I doubt ANYONE here wishes anything but the best for the people of La, Ms, Ala, and Florida. Hopefully the list won't grow! I went and bought a big bag of shrimp and boiled the other day, and nearly cried when I recall driving our boat up next to shrimpers in Trinity Bay and buying them right off the boat. They'd always throw in a few crabs too, since they weren't allowed to sell them. I miss that fishy, salt-water smell of the coast. I hope it can recover.

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 02:49 PM
also bailing out the big companies (wall street, detroit) would be the same as bailing BP "if" they go bankrupt because of their own greed.

BP is not pursuing deep water drilling and production out of greed. Sure they are turning a profit. But the bottom line is they are supplying you, I, and the rest of America with a product we cannot live without. Would you rather be 100% dependant of foreign oil?

Kevin

aandw
06-09-2010, 02:56 PM
Yeah, a long-haired Liberal who feeds the hungry and heals the sick without demanding to see a private insurance card wouldn't stand a chance! :D
I see your point. I guess I didn't interpret sambo quite as harshly as you did, that's all. I doubt ANYONE here wishes anything but the best for the people of La, Ms, Ala, and Florida. Hopefully the list won't grow! I went and bought a big bag of shrimp and boiled the other day, and nearly cried when I recall driving our boat up next to shrimpers in Trinity Bay and buying them right off the boat. They'd always throw in a few crabs too, since they weren't allowed to sell them. I miss that fishy, salt-water smell of the coast. I hope it can recover.

he did it out of love not because the gov't forced him to.:D
hard to beat fresh seafood. we used to go fishing off the florida keys, catch in the am clean it and eat it for supper. fresh yellow fin tuna seared in a skillet left raw in the middle is my favorite.

Franco
06-09-2010, 02:56 PM
The economy in south La. has been very good and is still very good. The people that are hurting financially are the commercial fisherman on the east side of the state and now the people working offshore. Obama needs to end the moritorium on offshore drilling. We don't shutdown the airline industry everytime there is a plane crash!

Rigs are being moved out of the gulf and to other parts of the world. Obama is making a bad situation worse and you will all feel the effects very soon at the gas pump!

YardleyLabs
06-09-2010, 03:00 PM
BP is not pursuing deep water drilling and production out of greed. Sure they are turning a profit. But the bottom line is they are supplying you, I, and the rest of America with a product we cannot live without. Would you rather be 100% dependant of foreign oil?

Kevin
So, you are suggesting that their primary objective is altruistic -- helping us poor folk to meet our desperate need for energy -- and that it is just good luck that they were able to make a small, $14 billion profit in 2009? Obviously, BP is in the business of producing a product for sale at a profit. I would not expect them to keep drilling for very long if the profit disappeared.

dnf777
06-09-2010, 03:04 PM
he did it out of love not because the gov't forced him to.:D
hard to beat fresh seafood. we used to go fishing off the florida keys, catch in the am clean it and eat it for supper. fresh yellow fin tuna seared in a skillet left raw in the middle is my favorite.

I gotta let the Jesus debate go...else risk offending someone! I mean no disrespect, but some may not see it that way. :(

I'm with ya on the tuna! Seared on the outside, raw in the middle is my favorite too. Throw on some mango-cayenne chutney, and it ain't long for the plate!

Franco
06-09-2010, 03:05 PM
14 billion profit is a small return compared to what they have invested. But then again, I have no problem with the private sector making money.

How much did Goldman Sachs make on speculating on oil prices and how much did they invest and how many people did they employ?

aandw
06-09-2010, 03:07 PM
BP is not pursuing deep water drilling and production out of greed. Sure they are turning a profit. But the bottom line is they are supplying you, I, and the rest of America with a product we cannot live without. Would you rather be 100% dependant of foreign oil?

Kevin

sorry about that. didn't mean to sound like that. i am for drilling here. i think we should be using all available resources, inland and off shore. i would rather be 0% dependent on foreign oil. no problem with turning a profit, i'm all for it. i thought one of the reasons they drilled so far out was the oil was a lighter crude and easier and cheaper to work with. i do have a problem with companies cutting corners and endangering people to make more profit.

Franco
06-09-2010, 03:09 PM
sorry about that. didn't mean to sound like that. i am for drilling here. i think we should be using all available resources, inland and off shore. i would rather be 0% dependent on foreign oil. no problem with turning a profit, i'm all for it. i thought one of the reasons they drilled so far out was the oil was a lighter crude and easier and cheaper to work with. i do have a problem with companies cutting corners and endangering people to make more profit.

The reason they drilled so far out is because the enviromentalist didn't want them drilling too close to shore where an accident might have a negative affect on land! BP could have tapped into the same reserve at 800 feet but that would have been too close to shore!

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 03:18 PM
So, you are suggesting that their primary objective is altruistic -- helping us poor folk to meet our desperate need for energy -- and that it is just good luck that they were able to make a small, $14 billion profit in 2009? Obviously, BP is in the business of producing a product for sale at a profit. I would not expect them to keep drilling for very long if the profit disappeared.

You answered your own question.

aandw
06-09-2010, 03:22 PM
then refer back to my comment "i think we should be using all resources, inland and off shore".
i heard on some "news" show had this happened in shallower water they could have fixed it. true or not?

depittydawg
06-09-2010, 03:32 PM
The reason they drilled so far out is because the enviromentalist didn't want them drilling too close to shore where an accident might have a negative affect on land! BP could have tapped into the same reserve at 800 feet but that would have been too close to shore!

Environmentalists have nothing to do with this. BP screwed up. They have a history of screw ups. Land, sea, shallow water, deep water, doesn't matter. From the evidence I've read BP is an extremely reckless company and their track record proves it. Given that, where the hell is the government regulation in this industry? And why hasn't Obama done ANYTHING about it yet? I hate to say it, but the conservatives were right. The guy is way over his head in this job... For most White House occupants this is about the time some of the on-the-job-training might start paying some dividends. I keep waiting Obama...

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 03:32 PM
then refer back to my comment "i think we should be using all resources, inland and off shore".
i heard on some "news" show had this happened in shallower water they could have fixed it. true or not?

If this same situation would be in 100 feet of water the chances of having it capped by now would be much better than 5280 feet of water.

menmon
06-09-2010, 03:34 PM
The economy in south La. has been very good and is still very good. The people that are hurting financially are the commercial fisherman on the east side of the state and now the people working offshore. Obama needs to end the moritorium on offshore drilling. We don't shutdown the airline industry everytime there is a plane crash!

Rigs are being moved out of the gulf and to other parts of the world. Obama is making a bad situation worse and you will all feel the effects very soon at the gas pump!

I agree with the need to lift the moritorium. However, Obama is in a pickle because as long as that well keeps pouring oil in the gulf and BP is unable to stop it, many think that we need to hold off drilling because of the potential that we can't stop another blowout.

It is bad for our economy here in Houston and if it does not change, jobs will be lost, but I get it why the government is taking this position. On another note, many companies are benefiting from emergency engineering and fabrication work associated with it.

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 03:38 PM
Given that, where the hell is the government regulation in this industry? And why hasn't Obama done ANYTHING about it yet?...

The regulating body is called MMS (Google it). Trust me when I say, if MMS wasnít involved with offshore drilling/production we would have far more loss of live and environmental damage.

What does Obama know about plugging a blow-out much less one in 5000 feet of water?

Kevin

YardleyLabs
06-09-2010, 03:40 PM
14 billion profit is a small return compared to what they have invested. But then again, I have no problem with the private sector making money.
I actually never suggested they were evil or that making money was bad. I would not invest in a company that was not making or expected to make money, and wouldn't want to work for such a company or buy goods from such a company either. Profits are the only guarantee that someone will be around tomorrow still trying to win my business. However, there is a big difference between respecting the fact that a company make money, and praising them for that as if it is an act of charity.

A lot remains to be investigated about the causes of this incident and the actions taken, rightly or wrongly, to clean it up. I suspect that we will find that the accident happened because corners were cut in an effort to reduce the cost of shutting down a non-productive (i.e. exploratory) well. Why replace that battery, we are shutting down in a couple of days anyway. Let's hurry it up a little, this is costing me a million dollars per day and I know what I need to know. Accidents almost always happen when and where we least expect them because that is when we relax our vigilance too soon.

I also believe that B.P. has been dong the best that it could, drawing without limitation on all the resources of the industry and available science to clean up the problem since it happened (in marked contrast to Halliburton and TransOcean, which appear to have focused all their efforts on legal defense). With 20/20 hindsight, we will probably fault them for not recognizing the severity of the leak from the beginning, and for placing too much confidence in the expected success of their initial containment efforts. Obviously, in retrospect, the plans they submitted to the government (and probably the plans submitted but other drillers as well) were completely inadequate. They have done far more than their plans called for, and have failed to contain a spill that is not as large as what they claimed they could manage successfully.

Whose "fault" is this? It is not the government's fault, unless we believe that the government had no business approving any plan given the inadequacy of our engineering and scientific experience for dealing with this type of problem. There is no reason whatsoever why we should expect our government to be able to "handle" this type of problem. The expertise and resources to handle this type of problem rests solely in the industry. There may be niche areas of expertise that the government can lend to the effort and there may be situations where the government can use its authority to expedite logistics. However, primary responsibility must remain with the industry.

Fault rests with the industry, or at least B.P. They sought permission to drill these wells and justified their requests with promises that the work could be done without any serious environmental risk and promises that they could manage whatever problems developed. B.P. was wrong. Either they were wrong because they engaged in criminal negligence unique to B.P., or they were wrong because the basic assumptions supporting industry wide plans are inadequate. The answer to that question is critical. If the industry wide plans are inadequate, how willing are we to have them continue drilling before they can update their safeguards?

In the meantime, I understand and share the frustration over the fact that this problem is still growing with no short term suggestion that thigs are going to get better soon. What I am not clear on is what we think the government can do to solve the problem directly. It can help with the social and economic dislocation being experienced by people on the Gulf. It can help enforce accountability. It can take the lead in answering the question of whether this is a B.P. problem or an industry problem and develop regulatory changes to reduce the odds of a recurrence (at a steep price in all likelihood). What it cannot do is to stop the leak or clean up the spill. There is not part of our government that has the resources or knowledge to do that and I don't really think that should change.

depittydawg
06-09-2010, 03:48 PM
The regulating body is called MMS (Google it). Trust me when I say, if MMS wasnít involved with offshore drilling/production we would have far more loss of live and environmental damage.

What does Obama know about plugging a blow-out much less one in 5000 feet of water?

Kevin

Obama's job isn't to fix the leak. His job is to figure out what is needed to make sure this doesn't happen again. You do this by regulation. From what I know of BP, had regulators been on the ball, they would have shut this place down before the 'accident' ever happened. Obama has not reformed the regulatory agencies of any industries since he took over. In fact, most of the corporate insiders placed within these agencies by the Bush crowd are still in their positions. It's been nearly a year and a half since Obama took over. What the hell is he waiting for?

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 03:53 PM
I actually never suggested they were evil or that making money was bad. I would not invest in a company that was not making or expected to make money, and wouldn't want to work for such a company or buy goods from such a company either. Profits are the only guarantee that someone will be around tomorrow still trying to win my business. However, there is a big difference between respecting the fact that a company make money, and praising them for that as if it is an act of charity.

A lot remains to be investigated about the causes of this incident and the actions taken, rightly or wrongly, to clean it up. I suspect that we will find that the accident happened because corners were cut in an effort to reduce the cost of shutting down a non-productive (i.e. exploratory) well. Why replace that battery, we are shutting down in a couple of days anyway. Let's hurry it up a little, this is costing me a million dollars per day and I know what I need to know. Accidents almost always happen when and where we least expect them because that is when we relax our vigilance too soon.

I also believe that B.P. has been dong the best that it could, drawing without limitation on all the resources of the industry and available science to clean up the problem since it happened (in marked contrast to Halliburton and TransOcean, which appear to have focused all their efforts on legal defense). With 20/20 hindsight, we will probably fault them for not recognizing the severity of the leak from the beginning, and for placing too much confidence in the expected success of their initial containment efforts. Obviously, in retrospect, the plans they submitted to the government (and probably the plans submitted but other drillers as well) were completely inadequate. They have done far more than their plans called for, and have failed to contain a spill that is not as large as what they claimed they could manage successfully.

Whose "fault" is this? It is not the government's fault, unless we believe that the government had no business approving any plan given the inadequacy of our engineering and scientific experience for dealing with this type of problem. There is no reason whatsoever why we should expect our government to be able to "handle" this type of problem. The expertise and resources to handle this type of problem rests solely in the industry. There may be niche areas of expertise that the government can lend to the effort and there may be situations where the government can use its authority to expedite logistics. However, primary responsibility must remain with the industry.

Fault rests with the industry, or at least B.P. They sought permission to drill these wells and justified their requests with promises that the work could be done without any serious environmental risk and promises that they could manage whatever problems developed. B.P. was wrong. Either they were wrong because they engaged in criminal negligence unique to B.P., or they were wrong because the basic assumptions supporting industry wide plans are inadequate. The answer to that question is critical. If the industry wide plans are inadequate, how willing are we to have them continue drilling before they can update their safeguards?

In the meantime, I understand and share the frustration over the fact that this problem is still growing with no short term suggestion that thigs are going to get better soon. What I am not clear on is what we think the government can do to solve the problem directly. It can help with the social and economic dislocation being experienced by people on the Gulf. It can help enforce accountability. It can take the lead in answering the question of whether this is a B.P. problem or an industry problem and develop regulatory changes to reduce the odds of a recurrence (at a steep price in all likelihood). What it cannot do is to stop the leak or clean up the spill. There is not part of our government that has the resources or knowledge to do that and I don't really think that should change.


Good post Jeff. I agree with 99% of it.

One thing that needs to be done is distinguish the differences between deep water drilling and shelf (or shallow water) drilling. These two are just as different as apples and oranges. Shelf drilling should not be affected by this.



Kevin

kb27_99
06-09-2010, 03:59 PM
Obama's job isn't to fix the leak. His job is to figure out what is needed to make sure this doesn't happen again. You do this by regulation. From what I know of BP, had regulators been on the ball, they would have shut this place down before the 'accident' ever happened. Obama has not reformed the regulatory agencies of any industries since he took over. In fact, most of the corporate insiders placed within these agencies by the Bush crowd are still in their positions. It's been nearly a year and a half since Obama took over. What the hell is he waiting for?

So itís Bush's fault? LOL don't answer that.

Obama has been to busy trying to destroy healthcare in this country to worry about anything else. Hope this helps put things into perspective for you. ;-)

Kevin

road kill
06-09-2010, 04:07 PM
Obama's job isn't to fix the leak. His job is to figure out what is needed to make sure this doesn't happen again. You do this by regulation. From what I know of BP, had regulators been on the ball, they would have shut this place down before the 'accident' ever happened. Obama has not reformed the regulatory agencies of any industries since he took over. In fact, most of the corporate insiders placed within these agencies by the Bush crowd are still in their positions. It's been nearly a year and a half since Obama took over. What the hell is he waiting for?

Not true, Obama's guys are in charge of the agency that oversees the petroleum industry.

BP's corporate, personal ties to White House emerge
BY HELENE COOPER AND JOHN M. BRODER
NEW YORK TIMES
05/30/2010

WASHINGTON ó Three years ago, the national laboratory then headed by Steven Chu received the bulk of a $500 million grant from the British oil giant BP to develop alternative energy sources through a new Energy Biosciences Institute.

Chu received the grant from BP's chief scientist at the time, Steven E. Koonin, a fellow theoretical physicist whom Chu jocularly described as "my twin brother." Koonin had selected the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory at the University of California at Berkeley, over other universities in the United States and Britain, in part because of Chu's pioneering work in alternative fuels.

Today, Chu is President Barack Obama's energy secretary, and he spent Tuesday in Houston working with BP officials to try to find a way to stop the flow of oil from the ruptured well in the Gulf of Mexico.

Koonin, who followed Chu to the Energy Department, is recused from all matters relating to the disaster because of his past ties to BP, said Stephanie Mueller, an Energy Department spokeswoman.

The relationships among Chu, Koonin and BP illustrate the complexity of the ties between the company and the government now playing out along the Gulf Coast as they struggle to cope with one of the nation's worst environmental disasters. Just as the Pentagon and military contractors develop symbiotic business, technical and political interdependencies, the government in this case needs BP's offshore drilling technology and well-control equipment; the company needs the government's logistical and scientific expertise, including that of Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning scientist.

Some critics say the Obama administration has relied too heavily on BP's assessment of the blowout and its solutions for addressing it. But government officials say that BP is legally responsible for plugging the well and cleaning up the mess. And they acknowledge that the government lacks the know-how to deal with the problem on its own.

There is no evidence that Chu or Koonin have represented BP's viewpoints in internal deliberations or sought to influence administration policy in a way that would benefit BP. But John Simpson of Consumer Watchdog said: "From what I've seen, the Energy Department's response has been less than rapid to this oil spill. This whole thing just underscores that corporate interests have created, over time, these relationships that give them unfair access to policymakers."

That darned Bush!!!



rk

YardleyLabs
06-09-2010, 04:13 PM
...We don't shutdown the airline industry everytime there is a plane crash!

Rigs are being moved out of the gulf and to other parts of the world. Obama is making a bad situation worse and you will all feel the effects very soon at the gas pump!...
You are right. However, it is not at all unusual for all planes of a specific type to be grounded following an accident if the accident appears to have resulted from mechanical failure. If the issue is that we cannot drill safely at 5000 feet, then we need to figure out why. A moratorium may well be appropriate during the investigation. When everyone says "Gee, we could have fixed this at 800 feet," my reaction is "Why didn't you stick to drilling at 800 feet?" Drilling was allowed at 5000 feet only because the oil companies said that was safe. Saying that it is the fault of environmentalists who prevented drilling at shallower depths, does not excuse anyone for drilling at depths that cannot be managed safely.

YardleyLabs
06-09-2010, 04:15 PM
...

That darned Bush!!!



rk
What's your point Stan? Are you suggesting inappropriate collusion?

road kill
06-09-2010, 04:20 PM
What's your point Stan? Are you suggesting inappropriate collusion?
Did you read the article Jeff?
Obama's guys are in charge.
D/D said they were Bush's guys.
They are not.
They were appointed by Obama.

It is what it is.

Sooner or later a leader///check that.....a MAN stands up and says it's on ME!!!

So far I have not seen Obama or the Democrats take ownership of anything, it's always Bush's fault and the "middle of the roaders" here parrott that position because you got nothin else.

You know what ownership is??





rk

menmon
06-09-2010, 04:24 PM
Still making this thing political! Who cares about the fish and ducks as long as your guy get elected.

huntinman
06-09-2010, 04:28 PM
Still making this thing political! Who cares about the fish and ducks as long as your guy get elected.

Doen't matter who gets elected...I would take Hillary or Biden over the telepromter.

YardleyLabs
06-09-2010, 04:33 PM
Did you read the article Jeff?
Obama's guys are in charge.
D/D said they were Bush's guys.
They are not.
They were appointed by Obama.

It is what it is.

Sooner or later a leader///check that.....a MAN stands up and says it's on ME!!!

So far I have not seen Obama or the Democrats take ownership of anything, it's always Bush's fault and the "middle of the roaders" here parrott that position because you got nothin else.

You know what ownership is??





rk
On almost a daily basis on CNN, Obama stands up and says he is responsible for fixing this problem as President. He doesn't say the problem is his fault. It isn't. It's B.P.'s fault. He does say that the MMS has been too cozy with the industry for a long time and that it didn't improve under his watch, and that he is now going to change that. He doesn't take responsibility for the fact that it was too cozy before he became President, but he has directly accepted responsibility for the failure of his administration to change that over the last 15 months. One person has already left under pressure and others may follow, and the mandate of the entire organization is being redefined. What responsibility has he evaded that you believe he should have claimed?

road kill
06-09-2010, 04:39 PM
On almost a daily basis on CNN, Obama stands up and says he is responsible for fixing this problem as President. He doesn't say the problem is his fault. It isn't. It's B.P.'s fault. He does say that the MMS has been too cozy with the industry for a long time and that it didn't improve under his watch, and that he is now going to change that. He doesn't take responsibility for the fact that it was too cozy before he became President, but he has directly accepted responsibility for the failure of his administration to change that over the last 15 months. One person has already left under pressure and others may follow, and the mandate of the entire organization is being redefined. What responsibility has he evaded that you believe he should have claimed?


I am not BLAMING him for the oil spill.

AGAIN Jeff, D/D said these were Bush's guys....they are NOT!!

Obama appointed them.

Therefore, if we establish that Bush did NOT appoint them, Obama did.....it is still Bush's fault!!:rolleyes:




GEEZ!!

YardleyLabs
06-09-2010, 05:03 PM
I am not BLAMING him for the oil spill.

AGAIN Jeff, D/D said these were Bush's guys....they are NOT!!

Obama appointed them.

Therefore, if we establish that Bush did NOT appoint them, Obama did.....it is still Bush's fault!!:rolleyes:




GEEZ!!


From Bloomberg

"May 25 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Minerals Management Service employees, some of whom were assigned to inspect offshore drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico, accepted gifts from oil and gas companies and used government computers to view pornography, the Interior Department said.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar ordered a broader investigation today into ethics violations at the agency that oversees offshore oil drilling after a report found lapses by staff in the Lake Charles, Louisiana, office between 2000 and 2008.

"The investigation by the department’s inspector general followed a 2008 probe of the agency that found illegal drug use and inappropriate sexual relationships between staff and industry contacts in an MMS office in Lakewood, Colorado.

“This deeply disturbing report is further evidence of the cozy relationship between some elements of MMS and the oil and gas industry,” Salazar said in a statement.

"Several MMS staffers named in the report have resigned, been terminated or referred for prosecution and those still with the agency were placed on administrative leave, according to the statement. Salazar said he’s ordered an investigation into whether ethics violations persisted after he put in place new rules last year.

"The inspector general also will investigate whether MMS staff failed to adequately inspect or enforce safety regulations aboard the Deepwater Horizon, the Transocean Ltd. drilling rig leased by BP Plc, Salazar said in the statement. The rig sank after an April 20 explosion and fire caused by a well blowout, resulting in the deaths of 11 workers and an ongoing oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico.

"Dividing MMS

"Salazar said on May 19 he was replacing the MMS with three agencies, separating energy development, enforcement and revenue collection. The reorganization will take 30 days to complete, he said.

"The MMS generated more than $13 billion on average each year for the past five years by leasing rights to drill and collecting royalties from oil and natural gas companies such as BP and Exxon Mobil Corp. The agency is second only to the Internal Revenue Service in the amount of money it contributes to the federal government."

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-25/mms-employees-took-gifts-viewed-porn-report-finds-update1-.html

It sounds to me like the fundamental issues concern employees that are part of the civil service staff, not employees that are appointed politically. MMS is an organization that has aggressively recruited people from the industry so that they will have the requisite knowledge. The other side of the coin is that MMS staff routinely return to private sector jobs in the industry. As far as I can determine, the staff there in 2009 were the same staff there in 2008. Elizabeth Birnbaum was the only political appointee. One of her problems was the difficulty of managing staff that were located all over the country in areas where drilling was active while she was based in DC. She had been in office 10 months when she resigned rather than face involuntary transfer. The inspector general report disclosing the scandalous conditions in the unit was requested by Salazar and was not completed until March 2010. Based on scandals that had arisen in 2008, Salazar had already issued new ethics guidelines to try to curb inappropriate behavior shortly after taking office in 2009. You can do your own math on allocating responsibility. It seems to me that responsibility for the genesis of the problem dates back several years and only grew with neglect. Action began to be taken to improve the situation beginning in early 2009, but may or may not have been effective.

Hew
06-09-2010, 05:18 PM
The majority of the Obama bashing I see here however, is childish name calling and trumped up accusations designed to incite hatred and revolt. When you rag on the GOP you do it out of love and when anybody else rags on the Obama/Dems they're haters looking to revolt. :rolleyes: And perhaps most pathetically hypocritical of all, here you are whining about Obama bashers when you did the EXACT same thing in the same friggin' thread (post a picture, likely out of context, to pretend Bush doesn't respect the flag). I don't think you've gone one day without posting some anti-Bush or anti-GOP screed; usually accompanied by some innacurate factoid or self-serving anecdote. As big of a screw up that Bush and Cheney were, I never question their love for their country. That's patent horsesh_t. You have, on a number of occasions, claimed that Cheney sent us to war in Iraq to line his pockets. You have claimed that Bush didn't care about the troops he sent to war. You have claimed that you always respectfully address Bush/Cheney when you don't (I frankly don't care what you call them, but I'd rather not see your self-serving back patting about pretending that you're always respectful of them when you're clearly not). When we stoop to that level, ALL hope for progress or cooperation towards a common goal are GONE. So when I see this happening, I have to wonder if the modern repubican party would rather see the country fail, than Obama succeed?? Perhaps you should instead wonder if you and the Democrat party would rather see Obama succeed than the country.

......................

Hew
06-09-2010, 05:29 PM
The only reason I defend him at every turn here because my perception of much criticism here is as you say, childish name calling and trumped up accusations.
Gee, and here all this time I thought you "defending Obama at every turn here" was based on priniciple, when in reality it's just a tit-for-tat response to all the hatin' that you and DNF just decried. Blind hate is bad and blindly defending is good, right?

dnf777
06-09-2010, 07:15 PM
......................

You haven't seen me start any of that crap. Nor do I rarely post except to point out the hypocrisy of finding a clip and taking it out of context.

IOW, stop the childish attacks, and I'll stop revealing the hypocrisy that upsets you so much!

There's a difference between criticizing policy, and posting pictures of eagles $3itting on the president. And I know that YOU know the difference. I don't recall you ever doing that crap, but just bustin' on me when I respond to it, which is fair game.

Since I'm not allowed to even mention my service, I'll just say that it bothered me greatly to hear Rumsfeld whining about having to provide troops with proper gear. I was infuriated by Bush joking about finding WMDs while our troops were fighting and dying. I was ashamed to see the greatest country in the world having bake sales and church raffles to send their kids body armor. Got news for ya.....as an American, I'm allowed to bitch about that kind of travesty! You may not like to hear it, but that won't change the facts. As the proud American that I know you are, I don't see how that doesn't raise you hackles either?

david gibson
06-09-2010, 07:31 PM
You haven't seen me start any of that crap. Nor do I rarely post except to point out the hypocrisy of finding a clip and taking it out of context.

IOW, stop the childish attacks, and I'll stop revealing the hypocrisy that upsets you so much!

There's a difference between criticizing policy, and posting pictures of eagles $3itting on the president. And I know that YOU know the difference. I don't recall you ever doing that crap, but just bustin' on me when I respond to it, which is fair game.

Since I'm not allowed to even mention my service, I'll just say that it bothered me greatly to hear Rumsfeld whining about having to provide troops with proper gear. I was infuriated by Bush joking about finding WMDs while our troops were fighting and dying. I was ashamed to see the greatest country in the world having bake sales and church raffles to send their kids body armor. Got news for ya.....as an American, I'm allowed to bitch about that kind of travesty! You may not like to hear it, but that won't change the facts. As the proud American that I know you are, I don't see how that doesn't raise you hackles either?

wow, hew made no mention of that, and i have not even been part of this conversation, and that post is a month old - must really have upset you. do you have nightmares about it?? and you say you dont take this potus forum stuff personally?....??

its funny, we accuse each side of hypocrisy, and i'll admit each side is guilty, your left as much as the right. the difference is your side is in power and zerO said he was not going to be like the previous administrations. remember all the talk about transparency? all the campaign promises? but its politics as usual after he pledged that it would not be like that, thats why it gets our dander up. change and hope has become same and hype.

yet you think we have no right to bring those matters to light because you can point out where bush did it. you should be just as angry as we are that the "change" hasnt come to fruition. perhaps thats why you get so riled up. frustration that camelot did not return as He promised to you.....

Hew
06-09-2010, 11:34 PM
Got news for ya.....as an American, I'm allowed to bitch about that kind of travesty!
Knock yourself out...that's part of what makes the country tick. But when others do the same thing, and you then hysterically characterize their bitching as "inciting hatred and revolt" it would appear to me that you're trying to criminalize their bitching, and thus limit their free speech rights...the rights that you wore a uniform to protect. That, friend, is the apex of hypocrisy.

dnf777
06-10-2010, 07:02 AM
Knock yourself out...that's part of what makes the country tick. But when others do the same thing, and you then hysterically characterize their bitching as "inciting hatred and revolt" it would appear to me that you're trying to criminalize their bitching, and thus limit their free speech rights...the rights that you wore a uniform to protect. That, friend, is the apex of hypocrisy.

Hew, as others also pointed out, there is a line. Maybe you need your bifocals readjusted if you can't see it.

You don't hear me complaining about criticizing policy. Hell, I WISH some of the righties here would engage in policy discussion, rather than name calling! As my other post indicated, I'll join the gripe wagon on many issues.

Is a snapshot in time of Obama standing at attention without his hand on his heart a great policy issue affecting the lives of everyday Americans? Is it hampering the oil spill clean up efforts? Is it impeding the balancing of our budget? No, no, and NO! I don't give a rat's a$$ if Bush did the same thing, I'm just trying to reel in the hypocrisy by pointing out similar pictures....and seeing if it stirs the same kind of reaction? Of course, it didn't! :rolleyes:

ducknwork
06-10-2010, 07:12 AM
I agree with the need to lift the moritorium. However, Obama is in a pickle because as long as that well keeps pouring oil in the gulf and BP is unable to stop it, many think that we need to hold off drilling because of the potential that we can't stop another blowout.



How many rigs are out there? How long have they been drilling/pumping? How many accidents of great magnitude have occurred? Pretty low risk, I'd say.

Lift the ban. The odds are greatly stacked in the favor of it not happening again.

dnf777
06-10-2010, 07:28 AM
How many rigs are out there? How long have they been drilling/pumping? How many accidents of great magnitude have occurred? Pretty low risk, I'd say.

Lift the ban. The odds are greatly stacked in the favor of it not happening again.

I would agree, with certain stipulations.

How deep do we lift the ban for? How about an HONEST risk assessment by a third party to determine where the technology currently allows for SAFE drilling.

An HONEST assessment of spill containment and mitigation technology, to see what risk we should be willing to accept, because as long as we drill, there WILL be accidents. Law of Systems.

This is where gov't can and should step in, along with experts in the industry, and academia. We've GOT to stop the corrupting flow of money and cozy relationships that got us into this mess, in part.

Hew
06-10-2010, 07:44 AM
Hew, as others also pointed out, there is a line. Maybe you need your bifocals readjusted if you can't see it. You've already said where you draw your line: whatever you say, no matter how insulting or absurd is fine; whatever anyone else says that you disagree with is over the line. I mean, really, who can't see the glaring difference between a photoshopped pic of Obama and making the claim that Cheney got us into war so he and his cronies could get richer? :rolleyes:

You don't hear me complaining about criticizing policy. Hell, I WISH some of the righties here would engage in policy discussion, rather than name calling! As my other post indicated, I'll join the gripe wagon on many issues.

Is a snapshot in time of Obama standing at attention without his hand on his heart a great policy issue affecting the lives of everyday Americans? Is it hampering the oil spill clean up efforts? Is it impeding the balancing of our budget? No, no, and NO! I don't give a rat's a$$ if Bush did the same thing, I'm just trying to reel in the hypocrisy by pointing out similar pictures....and seeing if it stirs the same kind of reaction? Of course, it didn't! Oh, I get it now...you're fighting the hypocrisy you see by hypocritically posting similar pictures. Your take on the old saw about "fighting fire with fire," eh? And again, quite miraculously, you're on the right side of the line and everyone else is on the wrong side. That's funny how it always seems to work out that way. :rolleyes:
..............

david gibson
06-10-2010, 09:31 AM
Hew, as others also pointed out, there is a line. 1) Maybe you need your bifocals readjusted if you can't see it.

You don't hear me complaining about criticizing policy. Hell, I WISH some of the righties here would engage in policy discussion, rather than name calling! As my other post indicated, I'll join the gripe wagon on many issues.

Is a snapshot in time of Obama standing at attention without his hand on his heart a great policy issue affecting the lives of everyday Americans? Is it hampering the oil spill clean up efforts? Is it impeding the balancing of our budget? No, no, and NO! I don't give a rat's a$$ if Bush did the same thing, 2) I'm just trying to reel in the hypocrisy by pointing out similar pictures....and seeing if it stirs the same kind of reaction? Of course, it didn't! :rolleyes:

1) maybe you need your noodle re-balanced to understand that each side and even each individual sees a different line.

2) sir, please relax and reflect a second. if someone points out an obama flaw - hand not on heart etc, you say its ok for you to point out the same bush flaw, but when i defend my pic with the fact that bush was desecrated as well then according to you it doesnt count and i shouldnt justify it because of the past. i dont remember if it was you or yardley, but one or both of you chastised me for the eagle/obama/poop pic for legitimizing it because joker/hitler pics were done of bush way back when.

sorry, you cant have it both ways. either the past counts or it doesnt.

it appears to me to be a basic human flaw that many of us cant see our own hypocrisies.

menmon
06-10-2010, 12:25 PM
How many rigs are out there? How long have they been drilling/pumping? How many accidents of great magnitude have occurred? Pretty low risk, I'd say.

Lift the ban. The odds are greatly stacked in the favor of it not happening again.

There is a bunch and they need to lift the ban, but when you start talking about risk, you need to compare apples to apples. Deepwater is new, meaning only for the past few years that have been drilling at these depths. Clearly they know how to drill for it, but what they have proven with this is that they don't have the capabilities to fix an accident. That is what needs to be addressed. Something else that needs to be addressed is the gathering systems, the pipe running along the bottom of the ocean that brings the oil to shore.