PDA

View Full Version : the hearing....



david gibson
06-17-2010, 01:28 PM
anyone watching? hayward is dodging answers right and left and pi$$ing the democrats like waxman off. not defending him - but to his credit - the CEO of a company the size of BP does not get involoved in day to day operations like well design, tests, etc. he is simply not going to be involved at that level, although he should be involved in setting certain standards and procedures and have a means to ensure they are carried out.


but overall, i cant help thinking that the run-around answers he is giving are just like the answers politicians give all the time, so here they are getting a taste of their own medicine.....

YardleyLabs
06-17-2010, 01:36 PM
I agree that there is no way a CEO would be involved in operational details on an exploratory well. However, I also agree that the CEO sets the tone that governs how people define their priorities. It seems very clear that safety was not a high priority in the company.

huntinman
06-17-2010, 01:36 PM
It's really a ridiculous waste of time. A bunch of elected fools who probably know next to nothing about anything trying to show off for the cameras and grill this BP CEO. On an intellectual level, he could probably run rings around most of these politicians. All of these televised congressional hearings are a total waste of time, regardless of the subject. Unless of course they could come up with a good reason to start impeachment proceedings on Obama.

gman0046
06-17-2010, 01:43 PM
huntinman, I agree with you on that one.

Blackstone
06-17-2010, 01:45 PM
anyone watching? hayward is dodging answers right and left and pi$$ing the democrats like waxman off. not defending him - but to his credit - the CEO of a company the size of BP does not get involoved in day to day operations like well design, tests, etc. he is simply not going to be involved at that level, although he should be involved in setting certain standards and procedures and have a means to ensure they are carried out.


but overall, i cant help thinking that the run-around answers he is giving are just like the answers politicians give all the time, so here they are getting a taste of their own medicine.....

If he gave them hard answers, would they understand what he is talking about? I doubt it. How many of them know anything about deep water offshore drilling? This may be more for show than anything else. They want to show the public how tough they are getting on the problem. In actuality, the time to get tough on how the operation was being run was before the drilling started.

mjh345
06-17-2010, 01:51 PM
Not watching the hearing...... I'd rather watch paint dry, as these hearings are usually a bunch of nothing for political posturing that accomplish nothing.

I wouldn't expect Hayward to know all the nuts and bolts of a company that size. However if you really wanted to have an effective hearing they should inform BP what they are going to be asking about & make BP bring along the people who can testify to that subject matter. Additionally they should issue a Subpeona duces tecum requiring them to bring all relevant documents handbooks etc. needed to be responsive to the hearing.

Too often these are staged events where the "Congressional factfinders" posture and act indignant when Hayword or whomever can't answer there "probing" questions. Hayward acts chastised and responds that he will be happy to have his people get that information for them ASAP. By then the "Congressional factfinders" have moved on to posturing and whoring for the voters on something else, while Hayward is back in the UK smoking cigars at the club and joking with his mates about how he snowballed the bumbling Congressional "factfinders"

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 01:54 PM
If he gave them hard answers, would they understand what he is talking about? I doubt it. How many of them know anything about deep water offshore drilling? This may be more for show than anything else. They want to show the public how tough they are getting on the problem. In actuality, the time to get tough on how the operation was being run was before the drilling started.

And, just what year was BP allowed to start drilling that well?

huntinman
06-17-2010, 02:05 PM
If he gave them hard answers, would they understand what he is talking about? I doubt it. How many of them know anything about deep water offshore drilling? This may be more for show than anything else. They want to show the public how tough they are getting on the problem. In actuality, the time to get tough on how the operation was being run was before the drilling started.

And, just what year was BP allowed to start drilling that well?

It's Bush's fault....we know:rolleyes:

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 02:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackstone http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=631240#post631240)
If he gave them hard answers, would they understand what he is talking about? I doubt it. How many of them know anything about deep water offshore drilling? This may be more for show than anything else. They want to show the public how tough they are getting on the problem. In actuality, the time to get tough on how the operation was being run was before the drilling started.

And, just what year was BP allowed to start drilling that well?

It's Bush's fault....we know:rolleyes:
__________________
Bill Davis

I honestly do not know what year BP started drilling that well. Was that too tough a question to ask?

ducknwork
06-17-2010, 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackstone http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=631240#post631240)
If he gave them hard answers, would they understand what he is talking about? I doubt it. How many of them know anything about deep water offshore drilling? This may be more for show than anything else. They want to show the public how tough they are getting on the problem. In actuality, the time to get tough on how the operation was being run was before the drilling started.

And, just what year was BP allowed to start drilling that well?

It's Bush's fault....we know:rolleyes:
__________________
Bill Davis

I honestly do not know what year BP started drilling that well. Was that too tough a question to ask?


Is your google broken? Or were you trying to place blame on Bush? (we probably already know the answer, regardless of how you attempt to BS us) Well, looks like it backfired on you. Your boy was POTUS. Now proceed in giving us the standard excuse that he wasn't president long enough. Please. We are all waiting with bated breath.


In February 2010, Deepwater Horizon commenced drilling an exploratory well at the Macondo Prospect (Mississippi Canyon Block 252), about 41 miles (66 km) off the southeast coast of Louisiana, at a water depth of approximately 5,000 feet (1,500 m).[22] Exploration rights were acquired by multinational oil company BP in 2009[23] and the prospect is jointly owned by BP (65%), Anadarko (25%) and MOEX Offshore 2007 (10%).[24] Deepwater Horizon was still working on the Macondo site on 20 April 2010, when a violent explosion occurred leading to destruction of the rig.[25][26][16][27]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon

BTW, learn how to quote a post. It's really annoying when you screw it up repeatedly.

dnf777
06-17-2010, 02:29 PM
Holy Crap! I'm agreeing with huntinman and mjh!

This is nothing but an orchestrated photo op for congressmen to take home and air in thier districts come campaign season. "see how tough I am?" shots.

If they really wanted answers, they would have the CEO and a few of his VPs of operations, safety officer, and that specific well's foreman, all present and sworn in.

This is a sham...a joke....and anyone who thinks this is "getting tough" is a freakin' idiot!

ducknwork
06-17-2010, 02:30 PM
I forgot to type what I was going to type before that!

I just wish they would postpone this dog and pony show until after the leak is under control. Is it really necessary to do it now? Would it not make more sense to concentrate everyone's efforts elsewhere, like maybe stopping the leak or cleaning stuff up? This honestly disgusts me.

depittydawg
06-17-2010, 02:31 PM
anyone watching? hayward is dodging answers right and left and pi$$ing the democrats like waxman off. not defending him - but to his credit - the CEO of a company the size of BP does not get involoved in day to day operations like well design, tests, etc. he is simply not going to be involved at that level, although he should be involved in setting certain standards and procedures and have a means to ensure they are carried out.


but overall, i cant help thinking that the run-around answers he is giving are just like the answers politicians give all the time, so here they are getting a taste of their own medicine.....

It depends on the company and CEO. Whether he was personally involved 2 months ago or not is meaningless at this point. He has been involved since then and he should, certainly at this point and time, know exactly what they were doing and exactly what went wrong. My only question is, why aren't republican lawmakers outraged at this????

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 02:32 PM
A Texas republican's view of the $20 billion escrow fun agreed to by BP


http://www.wpbf.com/video/23935874/index.html?source=CNN

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 02:36 PM
[quote=Roger Perry;631252]


Is your google broken? Or were you trying to place blame on Bush? (we probably already know the answer, regardless of how you attempt to BS us) Well, looks like it backfired on you. Your boy was POTUS. Now proceed in giving us the standard excuse that he wasn't president long enough. Please. We are all waiting with bated breath.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon

BTW, learn how to quote a post. It's really annoying when you screw it up repeatedly.

Thanks for informing me when the well was started, and no, I was not trying to blame Dumbya. Just asking a question I did not know the answer to.

depittydawg
06-17-2010, 02:40 PM
I forgot to type what I was going to type before that!

I just wish they would postpone this dog and pony show until after the leak is under control. Is it really necessary to do it now? Would it not make more sense to concentrate everyone's efforts elsewhere, like maybe stopping the leak or cleaning stuff up? This honestly disgusts me.

Politicians do what they do. And believe it or not, it is important too. Other than the joker in the hot seat, nobody in that hearing is responsible for doing anything to plug the hole or clean up the mess. There job is to find out what happened. They need to do it.

david gibson
06-17-2010, 02:40 PM
It depends on the company and CEO. Whether he was personally involved 2 months ago or not is meaningless at this point. He has been involved since then and he should, certainly at this point and time, know exactly what they were doing and exactly what went wrong. My only question is, why aren't republican lawmakers outraged at this????

most of them are:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When asked for details on the drilling pipes, Hayward said "I simply was not involved in the decision-making process." When pressed for an answer, Hayward said "You'll get it as soon as I can make it available to you."

The evasions were too much for Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Tex.). When Hayward claimed it was tough to keep track of more than 100 BP wells drilled each year, Burgess shot back: "Yeah, I know. That's what's scaring me right now."

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) chimed in that "Indeed, Mr. Hayward, we are a little frustrated." Rep. Phil Gingrey (R. Ga.) bluntly added: "You're copping out."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

sorry you failed in your attempt to point fingers

david gibson
06-17-2010, 02:43 PM
A Texas republican's view of the $20 billion escrow fun agreed to by BP


http://www.wpbf.com/video/23935874/index.html?source=CNN

a pretty ill-advised stance to take for certain. i dont see a line forming behind him, so dont paint the whole right with that brush. even fox news is dressing him down for that.

mjh345
06-17-2010, 02:45 PM
A Texas republican's view of the $20 billion escrow fun agreed to by BP


http://www.wpbf.com/video/23935874/index.html?source=CNN

He had better hope that allm of his voters are in the oil business. I can't imagine the average voter will be pleased with Mr. Barton apologizing to the CEO of BP at a Congressional hearing.

I wonder if he gets any oil lobby money? DUH!!

depittydawg
06-17-2010, 02:45 PM
most of them are:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When asked for details on the drilling pipes, Hayward said "I simply was not involved in the decision-making process." When pressed for an answer, Hayward said "You'll get it as soon as I can make it available to you."

The evasions were too much for Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Tex.). When Hayward claimed it was tough to keep track of more than 100 BP wells drilled each year, Burgess shot back: "Yeah, I know. That's what's scaring me right now."

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) chimed in that "Indeed, Mr. Hayward, we are a little frustrated." Rep. Phil Gingrey (R. Ga.) bluntly added: "You're copping out."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

sorry you failed in your attempt to point fingers
Glad to hear there is at least some outrage from the Right. I wasn't pointing fingers. I simply commented on your post. You said the Democrats were outraged and said nothing of Republicans. Thanks for clearing it up. All I saw of the hearing was about 1 minute earlier today. It was a republican and all he did was whine about Obama.

david gibson
06-17-2010, 02:47 PM
Glad to hear there is at least some outrage from the Right. I wasn't pointing fingers. I simply commented on your post. You said the Democrats were outraged and said nothing of Republicans. Thanks for clearing it up. All I saw of the hearing was about 1 minute earlier today. It was a republican and all he did was whine about Obama.

at the time only dems had spoken, except for bartons stupid comments. its just that i love seeing waxman and dingle get flustered... ;-)

depittydawg
06-17-2010, 02:51 PM
Holy Crap! I'm agreeing with huntinman and mjh!


This is a sham...a joke....and anyone who thinks this is "getting tough" is a freakin' idiot!

You're right on the money here. It is a joke. Unless there is follow up, which so far on every major issue before congress there has not been. It is likely all smoke and mirrors. As was the Presidents speech. He said all the right things. He said what people wanted to hear. And since then, he has done nothing.

huntinman
06-17-2010, 02:52 PM
A Texas republican's view of the $20 billion escrow fun agreed to by BP


http://www.wpbf.com/video/23935874/index.html?source=CNN

I give him credit for having the balls to tell it like it is. Obama is a shakedown artist along the lines of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Intimidation is his MO. We have laws in place and a court system that can handle any illegalities. BP caved in due to public pressure, but their image is already shot. They probably couldn't have been hurt much by telling Obama to take a flying leap. But just like all the other CEO's who have caved in to Obama's gang, BP did as well.

david gibson
06-17-2010, 02:57 PM
You're right on the money here. It is a joke. Unless there is follow up, which so far on every major issue before congress there has not been. It is likely all smoke and mirrors. As was the Presidents speech. He said all the right things. He said what he thought people wanted to hear. And since then, he has done nothing.

based on the reaction to tuesdays nights speech i think that is more accurate.

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 03:00 PM
I give him credit for having the balls to tell it like it is. Obama is a shakedown artist along the lines of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Intimidation is his MO. We have laws in place and a court system that can handle any illegalities. BP caved in due to public pressure, but their image is already shot. They probably couldn't have been hurt much by telling Obama to take a flying leap. But just like all the other CEO's who have caved in to Obama's gang, BP did as well.

So what you are saying is that the American people should be on the hook and pay for BP's screw up?

"There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, fool me once, shame on—shame on you. Fool me—you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush—Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/report.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/report.php?p=631282) http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

Looks like Obama did not want to get fooled even once.

Franco
06-17-2010, 03:06 PM
To keep it in perspective, offshore drilling has been going on in the GOM since WW2.

Standard Oil which became Amaco which was purchased by BP was the first.

As pointed out on another threadthere was a BP accident in the Bay Of Campeecee many years ago. That well was a joint venture of the Mexican Federalized Oil Company PEMEX and BP.

With 10's of thousands of offshore wells having been drille since WW2, I'd say the record is pretty damn great!

But, all it takes is for one major acident and everyone becomes an Environmentalist. I don't think any of us could imagine what our lives would be like had those wells not been drilled.

We all learn from our experiences and I am confident tha going forward major accidents like the current one will be diverted.

This is NOT a time to play politics. It is a time to put down the political posturing and get the well capped and the gulf cleaned up.

La. has done a great job of blocking much of the spill from entering the marshes in S La. Those areas affected will be burned and new growth will generate along with new silt deposits from the mighty Mississippi River.

road kill
06-17-2010, 03:21 PM
Holy Crap! I'm agreeing with huntinman and mjh!

This is nothing but an orchestrated photo op for congressmen to take home and air in thier districts come campaign season. "see how tough I am?" shots.

If they really wanted answers, they would have the CEO and a few of his VPs of operations, safety officer, and that specific well's foreman, all present and sworn in.

This is a sham...a joke....and anyone who thinks this is "getting tough" is a freakin' idiot!
That would be the people that voted Obama and this cast of fools in!!:D


rk

mjh345
06-17-2010, 03:38 PM
With 10's of thousands of offshore wells having been drille since WW2, I'd say the record is pretty damn great!
.
I would strongly disagree. The only acceptable standard is perfection.
Their "fail-safe" procedures failed in a number of ways. The BOP alone failed in 3 seperate places

Fail-Safe means Fail-Safe. I'm sure the license to drill was based on the assurances that they had Fail-Safe procedures in place that would make this spill impossible. Something caused the impossible to become reality

This had to be the result of corner cutting, or poor engineering or a combination thereof; in combination with way to cozy a relationship between the regulated and the regulators. BP is at fault in any case.

mjh345
06-17-2010, 03:40 PM
This is NOT a time to play politics. It is a time to put down the political posturing and get the well capped and the gulf cleaned up.

.

Agreed!!!!!

depittydawg
06-17-2010, 03:48 PM
Agreed!!!!!

Only problem is nobody knows how to do it.

aandw
06-17-2010, 03:49 PM
It depends on the company and CEO. Whether he was personally involved 2 months ago or not is meaningless at this point. He has been involved since then and he should, certainly at this point and time, know exactly what they were doing and exactly what went wrong. My only question is, why aren't republican lawmakers outraged at this????

i was thinking the same thing about the CEO of the USA

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 03:53 PM
i was thinking the same thing about the CEO of the USA

He was outraged, did you not listen to President Obama the other night?

david gibson
06-17-2010, 03:54 PM
its really pretty simple to see what happened - any business is interested in the bottom line, and that philosophy gets passed down the chain of command. petroleum engineers, just like any other project manager, are graded on how efficiently they get the job done, and in the vast majority of situations promotions and bonuses are based on your numbers. unfortunately, some companies get far too engrossed in the money side and make and allow short cuts as long as the money numbers support it. BP has clearly done this for a very very long time, lets not forget Texas City.

i visit a lot of potentially very dangerous facilities, like cement kilns that burn hazardous waste as fuel, and thankfully dont see these types of practices but very rarely. one good aspect is that the hazardous waste industry literally opens their doors and files to their customers and third parties like me to comb through at will. if only all risky businesses were so transparent.

road kill
06-17-2010, 03:55 PM
He was outraged, did you not listen to President Obama the other night?

No....did you?

I've had enough of his campaigning.
He has not got a CLUE how to lead or manage.




rk

huntinman
06-17-2010, 03:58 PM
So what you are saying is that the American people should be on the hook and pay for BP's screw up?

"There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, fool me once, shame on—shame on you. Fool me—you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush—Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/report.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/report.php?p=631282) http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

Looks like Obama did not want to get fooled even once.

That is not anywhere near what I said. I said Obama is a thug. I said we have a legal system to handle any laws that are broken or damages that BP is responsible for and does not pay. From what I can see so far, it looks as though BP knows they are going to have plenty of damages to pay for and they intend to do it. 20 bil in Obamas fund backs that up. I just don't think we need a dictator telling businesses what they have to do, just to get his poll numbers up. Our legal system can handle it. Lets just say that some sort of evidence came out that BP was not at fault and it was one of the other companies involved who was negligent...do you think BP would see any of that money again?

The American people should not have to pay for BP's screw up, we are already paying for our own screw up in the oval office.

aandw
06-17-2010, 04:01 PM
He was outraged, did you not listen to President Obama the other night?

57 days later, he is on top of things all right. :rolleyes:

Roger Perry
06-17-2010, 04:04 PM
That is not anywhere near what I said. I said Obama is a thug. I said we have a legal system to handle any laws that are broken or damages that BP is responsible for and does not pay. From what I can see so far, it looks as though BP knows they are going to have plenty of damages to pay for and they intend to do it. 20 bil in Obamas fund backs that up. I just don't think we need a dictator telling businesses what they have to do, just to get his poll numbers up. Our legal system can handle it. Lets just say that some sort of evidence came out that BP was not at fault and it was one of the other companies involved who was negligent...do you think BP would see any of that money again?

The American people should not have to pay for BP's screw up, we are already paying for our own screw up in the oval office.

So if BP declares bankruptcy and there is not any money in an escrow fund who do you think would end up paying? The American tax payers that is who!!!!!!!!!!!!:shock:

david gibson
06-17-2010, 04:05 PM
That is not anywhere near what I said. I said Obama is a thug. I said we have a legal system to handle any laws that are broken or damages that BP is resposible for and does not pay. From what I can see so far, it looks as though BP knows they are going to have plenty of damages to pay for and they intend to do it. 20 bil in Obamas fund backs that up. I just don't think we need a dictator telling businesses what they have to do, just to get his poll numbers up. Our legal system can handle it. Lets just say that some sort of evidence came out that BP was not at fault and it was one of the other companies involved who was negligent...do you think BP would see any of that money again?

The American people should not have to pay for BP's screw up, we are already paying for our own screw up in the oval office.

how about how he put it in the speech? "we will make BP pay..." sounded more like retaliatory bullying instead of just ensuring that they cover the costs and losses. trying to make himself sound tough.

i like what Neil Cavuto just said:

"the only thing worse than BP pretending they are sorry is congress pretending that it cares"

huntinman
06-17-2010, 04:17 PM
So if BP declares bankruptcy and there is not any money in an escrow fund who do you think would end up paying? The American tax payers that is who!!!!!!!!!!!!:shock:

So that gives Obama the right to force companies to do whatever he demands even though he does not have the legal authority to do it? By that logic, he could force any company to do anything. maybe he thinks guns are bad...would it be OK if he told all gun manufacturers they could not make guns in the US? If you are so willing to give up freedom, at some point we will not be free.

depittydawg
06-17-2010, 04:32 PM
No....did you?

I've had enough of his campaigning.
He has not got a CLUE how to lead or manage.




rk

I did. Like I said, he talked big and tough, but still hasn't followed up.

huntinman
06-17-2010, 05:02 PM
No....did you?

I've had enough of his campaigning.
He has not got a CLUE how to lead or manage.




rk

That's because telepromters don't have a brain! Garbage in...garbage out.

Roger Perry
06-18-2010, 11:28 AM
That is not anywhere near what I said. I said Obama is a thug. I said we have a legal system to handle any laws that are broken or damages that BP is responsible for and does not pay. From what I can see so far, it looks as though BP knows they are going to have plenty of damages to pay for and they intend to do it. 20 bil in Obamas fund backs that up. I just don't think we need a dictator telling businesses what they have to do, just to get his poll numbers up. Our legal system can handle it. Lets just say that some sort of evidence came out that BP was not at fault and it was one of the other companies involved who was negligent...do you think BP would see any of that money again?

The American people should not have to pay for BP's screw up, we are already paying for our own screw up in the oval office.

You just have to go back to the last administration to see who the real thugs were. Who else would have attacked a country unable to defend itself based on lies of weapons of mass destruction.

By the way, I just heard that the following leaked out from the Bush administration:

A guy walks in and asks the bartender, "Isn't that Bush and Powell sitting over there?"
The bartender says, "Yep, that's them." So the guy walks over and says, "Wow, this is a real honor. What are you guys doing in here?"
Bush says, "We're planning WWIII."
And the guy says, "Really? What's going to happen?"
Bush says, "Well, we're going to kill 140 million Iraqis this time and one blonde with big tits."
The guy exclaimed, "A blonde with big t*ts? Why kill a blonde with big t*ts?"
Bush turns to Powell, punches him on the shoulder and says, "See, smartass! I told you no one would worry about the 140 million Iraqis!"

david gibson
06-18-2010, 11:41 AM
You just have to go back to the last administration to see who the real thugs were. Who else would have attacked a country unable to defend itself based on lies of weapons of mass destruction.

By the way, I just heard that the following leaked out from the Bush administration:

A guy walks in and asks the bartender, "Isn't that Bush and Powell sitting over there?"
The bartender says, "Yep, that's them." So the guy walks over and says, "Wow, this is a real honor. What are you guys doing in here?"
Bush says, "We're planning WWIII."
And the guy says, "Really? What's going to happen?"
Bush says, "Well, we're going to kill 140 million Iraqis this time and one blonde with big tits."
The guy exclaimed, "A blonde with big t*ts? Why kill a blonde with big t*ts?"
Bush turns to Powell, punches him on the shoulder and says, "See, smartass! I told you no one would worry about the 140 million Iraqis!"

dude when you say stuff like that you lose all credibility.

Cody Covey
06-18-2010, 11:42 AM
he had some to begin with?

badbullgator
06-18-2010, 11:52 AM
he had some to begin with?


Not really.....

Henry V
06-18-2010, 11:56 AM
dude when you say stuff like that you lose all credibility.
Yes, Roger. You should post stuff like this instead..

I know nothing about her but she is BUTT UGLY!
Thats a man baby!


Can you say coyote ugly.


Still UGLY and I think she might be hiding a penis


Well, there are strong rumours that she is a Lesbian. Since I personally do not agree with that stuff I don't think she belongs on the Supreme Court. Flat out it is not natural.


I like the comment "She's a fat, white, female? Van Jones". Anyone thinking Rosie O'Donnell with a better educational pedigree?

david gibson
06-18-2010, 12:01 PM
Yes, Roger. You should post stuff like this instead..

if you are going to quote me initially, then please dont add additional quotes that are not mine without putting the OP's name there. i never said any of those things about kagan and the way you post it makes it appear like i did.

geeeze dude, i have said plenty of controversial things on here, surely you can do better than that. i'll even help you out:

" i hate liberals"

there you go. you can put my name on that one.