Here's your hero Rand Paul, who wants us to go easier on BP, and thinks it's just a matter of "shit happens"! Whatcha think his vote would be on Big Oil..."/>

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Rand Paul says Obama being too tough on BP

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 07:43
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1195
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, May 21, 2010 7:24 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Here's your hero Rand Paul, who wants us to go easier on BP, and thinks it's just a matter of "shit happens"! Whatcha think his vote would be on Big Oil if he got in?? Hey; you see one beach, you seen 'em all, right? And the fishermen? Well, hell, they're private enterprise, it's just their tough luck.
Quote:

Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul is taking aim at President Barack Obama's handling of the oil crisis off the Gulf Coast.

The president, Paul told ABC, is being too tough on BP - the oil giant that controls the well that has been leaking thousands of barrels of oil a day in the Gulf since late last month.

"What I don't like from the president's administration is this sort of 'I'll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,'" said Paul who overwhelmingly won Tuesday's GOP Senate primary in Kentucky and is a favorite of Tea Party activists. "I think that sounds really un-American in his criticisms of businesses."

"I think it's part of this blame game society in the sense that it's always got to be someone's fault, instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen."

Since capturing the Senate nomination, Paul has faced a barrage of questions over his past criticisms of several federal regulations that intrude on the private sector, including provisions of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the national minimum wage.

"When does my honeymoon period start?" said Paul when he was again asked about his past statements Friday. "I had a big victory. I thought I got a honeymoon period from you guys in the media."

Aww, poor baby. That just shows how ignorant he is of politics...let's hope if he wins (which I doubt), he'll be better able to deal with the politics of WASHINGTON and not expect a "honeymoon period" from them!


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 7:34 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

This is a poor showing and a poor direction to take.

As a Libertarian, I believe in a degree of personal responsibility. The corporation in charge of that oil rig has a personal responsibility to its safe conduct. If it proves to be unsafe, they have a personal responsibility towards everyone damaged by it. That could mean fines and civil suits that completely liquify the company. Accidents do happen. However, this is one accident everyone knew might happen when they were going in. It's their responsibility to have a plan for fixing it.

If they require help from We the People to clean it up, then they owe us. Period.

--Anthony


"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 7:43 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Yeah, there is no "too big to spill" clause for any oil company. If they can spill the oil, they can damned well pay to clean it up, and pay to make the people whole again whose livelihoods they have wiped out with their negligence and irresponsibility.

Once again, we have the so-called "personal responsibility" people trying to tell us that all BP's profits should be privatized, and all their risks and fuck-ups should be socialized and paid for on our dime.

By the way, TransOcean, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon, which exploded and sank in the Gulf a month ago, voted last Friday - in the midst of possibly the largest oil spill in history - to give out over a billion dollars to shareholders as a dividend. You can't make this shit up.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0517/spill-rig-owner-approves-1-billion-di
vidend-shareholders
/


I'm sure Rand Paul will ask us to "go easy" on them, too.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 7:54 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Why would he want us to "go easy"? Or was that sarcastic? He'd be all in favor of them making big bucks for their shareholders, and all against anyone forcing them to pay for their mess!

Do note:
Quote:

GOP Blocks Bill to Raise Oil Companies' Liability to $10 Billion

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska objected Thursday when a group of Democrats tried to pass a bill to increase oil companies' liability after an oil spill from $75 million to $10 billion. With Murkowski's objection to the bill, the measure is stalled for now.

Murkowski, the top Republican on the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee criticized the bill as the wrong way to make local businesses whole because it would inadvertently help large global oil companies by driving smaller U.S. operators out of business. She said independent oil companies could not afford the increased liability costs associated with offshore drilling and would be forced from the market.

Rather than lifting the liability cap, Murkowski suggested that private businesses, such as shrimpers, be allowed to seek unlimited damages in state court.

But the three Democrats sponsoring the bill, Sens. Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, and Bill Nelson of Florida, vowed to find another way to pass their measure to force BP and other oil companies to pay for all of the damages they cause.

"When BP makes $5.6 billion in three months, when the top five companies make $25 billion in three months, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket," said Menendez.

He also rejected the suggestion that businesses affected by an oil spill should take oil companies to court to recoup their damages. "I know my distinguished colleague from Alaska knows what happened in the Exxon Valdez case -- that took 20 years for claimants to try to get their just response, and some of them fell off along the way because they couldn't hang in there and they lost everything," he said.

Lautenberg said that small companies should be able to afford the same liability as large corporations or they should not be drilling in the first place. "If you want to make the money, you have to pay the bills that go with it," Lautenberg said. "If an independent company causes that kind of damage and goes out of business, so be it."

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/13/gop-blocks-bill-to-raise-oil-c
ompanies-liability-to-10-billion/9


I'm sure Rand Paul would agree with her. I do not, in spades! You want to take a chance with our country's safety and health, you better be able to pay the price, as far as I'm concerned. Or better yet, we should stop drilling and start facing the realities.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 8:41 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
If they require help from We the People to clean it up, then they owe us. Period.


Damn straight.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 2:21 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Why aren't we hearing any defense of Rand Paul from his followers here? Don't they think BP should be free to pollute/spill/destroy anything they would like to, and that it's the responsibility of those who suffer from their actions to clean it up? They think he's so cool, surely they agree...?!


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 3:19 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


It seems Rand Paul is rapidly running out of defenders for ANY of his stances.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:21 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Does, doesn't it?

Is he aware that oil companies current receive SUPPLEMENTS and tax breaks from the government? Surely if he doesn't want them paying for the damage they cause, he doesn't want the government subsidizing them either. Why isn't he talking about that, I wonder (as if I didn't know?)

Strange, tho', that we're not finding his supporters coming in to rationalize his foot-in-mouth disease or agree with it or something...


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:24 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

Why should someone be expected to agree with a politician who is wrong?

I wouldn't expect anyone to defend Obama when he makes an error, not even his staunchest supporters.

I'd expect them to wince and go, "Oooh, that sucked."


--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:07 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Which is exactly what I do. But those who support Rand Paul are, in other ways on this forum, quite willing to come up with defenses or rationalizations...so why not now? If they can find ways to rationalize other things which are so obviously wrong, why are they silent on this?


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:30 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

Perhaps Rand Paul supporters are not as whackadoodle as everyone would like to believe.

I supported him. I liked the idea of a Ron Paul Junior. But I think his recent performance and statements are shite.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:47 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Oh, I would love to believe that. That there are libertarians who can also think for themselves is a lovely idea, as opposed to followers of both parties swallowing what they're told. I think I'll stick with that for now.

That still doesn't answer why the people HERE who back him and lauded him haven't come in to refute or rationalize his words. There aren't any HERE who usually stand up for things I find absurd who don't cling to them and defend them, so where are they?


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:54 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I'm here. I'm a Libertarian. I'm speaking up.

I'm sad that I don't count.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:02 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Perhaps Rand Paul supporters are not as whackadoodle as everyone would like to believe.

I supported him. I liked the idea of a Ron Paul Junior. But I think his recent performance and statements are shite.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad




I agree Ron Paul Jr. he is NOT! Harm to a person's property (be it by Government or corporation or a person)) is what the whole movement is about. How can a huge fucking oil spill that is ruining peoples lives be anything but a violation of "someones" liberty?....he is lost.

However his view on civil the civil rights laws are spot on. Well, it's true.......





NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:06 AM

KIRKULES


I think that BP has been the most environmentally responsible oil company in the word for years and this is just a terrible accident. Everyone that drives an automobile shares equal responsibility for this spill, they should and will help pay for the cleanup.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:09 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

Kaneman, he won't even remain firm in stance on civil rights laws. He ought to at least say what he believes in without any wishy washyness.

I know where I draw my lines on such laws and why. I'd respect him more if he held a firm, predictable conviction.

I lost a lot of respect for Mccain when he started angling for the presidency, and many of his cherished beliefs blew away in the wind of presidential ambition.

--Anthony





"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:11 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think that BP has been the most environmentally responsible oil company in the word for years and this is just a terrible accident. Everyone that drives an automobile shares equal responsibility for this spill, they should and will help pay for the cleanup.



Hello,

What a startling point of view, Kirk.

If a pizza deliveryman runs you over with his car, are all pizza customers responsible for the accident?

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:15 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Yeah, let's shut down the entire US economy and live in caves, like Saddam Hussein Obama Bin Laden Soetoro's fellow Taliban Al CIAduh cavemen.


Communist Operative Nikovich12

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:18 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello Pirate,

I'm not sure what you mean to say.

And is your objectionable Jewish satire aimed at Niki?

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:19 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Kaneman, he won't even remain firm in stance on civil rights laws. He ought to at least say what he believes in without any wishy washyness.

I know where I draw my lines on such laws and why. I'd respect him more if he held a firm, predictable conviction.

I lost a lot of respect for Mccain when he started angling for the presidency, and many of his cherished beliefs blew away in the wind of presidential ambition.



Gotta agree. I am a bit surprised that there aren't more people supporting Rand Paul's positions, though. Several of our own members here have defended BP and upheld caps on damages and the like. Maybe they support such things *in theory*, but less so when the reality of such a massive spill is washing up on their shores.

As for McCain, I respected the hell out of him going into the 2000 election. He's lost my respect more and more ever since. His latest flip-flop in "the dang fence" makes me even more glad that he wasn't elected our President.

Not many have commented on that jackass Blumenthal in Connecticut, but like Rand Paul, he was dead wrong, and I blasted his ass for it. He claims he "misspoke", and I call BS on that line of crap. Like you, Anthony, I'd actually have a modicum of respect for him if he'd just come right out and say that he lied about his service because he wanted the support and the votes. It's slimy, but at least it would be HONESTLY slimy. Instead, he keeps trying to run and hide from his own words, and it just makes him look worse. And I've written to the White House to let them know in no uncertain terms that they need to get the hell away from this idiot, and that backing him is going to do them unimaginable harm. And Blumenthal himself needs to apologize and withdraw from the campaign. He bet it all on a risky move, and he lost. Call it a career, and go do something else for the rest of your life; your public service career is over. Hey, maybe he could join the Marines and serve in Afghanistan!

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:22 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by piratenews:
Yeah, let's shut down the entire US economy and live in caves...




Don't you already live in a cave up in a holler, with your dozens of kinfolk?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:29 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think that BP has been the most environmentally responsible oil company in the word for years and this is just a terrible accident. Everyone that drives an automobile shares equal responsibility for this spill, they should and will help pay for the cleanup.



An "accident" suggests that it couldn't have been avoided or prevented. This is no "accident; it's all but an "on purpose", based on laziness, cheapness, negligence, and greed. BP knew they had problems with the blowout preventer (BOP) and its gaskets, they knew it was leaking hydraulic fluid and the rams might not be able to force the valve closed in an emergency, and they knew the risks of backing the drilling mud out of the hole before plugging the wellhead, according to sources who witnessed a loud and heated debate about just such things in the moments leading up to the "accident".

To make Anthony's pizza delivery driver analogy more appropriate, it's as if you're holding all the pizza customers in the world responsible for the actions of the delivery driver who just hit and killed someone, even though he was drunk out of his mind and driving at midnight with his lights off and ran a red light. I'm "responsible" for BP's "accident" the way you're responsible for every dead Iraqi since March 2003, and to the same degree.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 12:17 PM

KIRKULES


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think that BP has been the most environmentally responsible oil company in the word for years and this is just a terrible accident. Everyone that drives an automobile shares equal responsibility for this spill, they should and will help pay for the cleanup.



Hello,

What a startling point of view, Kirk.

If a pizza deliveryman runs you over with his car, are all pizza customers responsible for the accident?

--Anthony





Of course the pizza customer is liable and so is every person who eats that companies pizza. Who do you think pays the pizza boys car insurance. No business ever pays for anything, their customers do. That's why the idea of taxing businesses is so laughable, it's just a way of fooling gullible taxpayers into thinking big business is getting taxed, when in reality the tax is passed on to the consumer of their product.

You all are like a bunch of squeamish school kids touring a slaughter house a day after your parents took you out for a big steak dinner. You just need to face the fact that you share some of the responsibility for the slaughter of the cow and understand that your choices have consequences.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:04 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"You just need to face the fact that you share some of the responsibility for the slaughter of the cow and understand that your choices have consequences."

Hello,

I hate to say it, but I agree, Kirk.

We need to be willing to liquidate our oil company if necessary to pay for our liability in fostering our disaster.

And then we need to be willing to tax ourselves by fining our other industries whenever we let them step out of line. And if we have to sue ourselves (in the body of our industries) whenever we fail ourselves, then we should do it.

And we will continue to punish, and sue, and tax ourselves as much as is necessary until we learn to operate safe industries.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:36 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think that BP has been the most environmentally responsible oil company in the word for years and this is just a terrible accident. Everyone that drives an automobile shares equal responsibility for this spill, they should and will help pay for the cleanup.



Hello,

What a startling point of view, Kirk.

If a pizza deliveryman runs you over with his car, are all pizza customers responsible for the accident?

--Anthony





Of course the pizza customer is liable and so is every person who eats that companies pizza. Who do you think pays the pizza boys car insurance. No business ever pays for anything, their customers do. That's why the idea of taxing businesses is so laughable, it's just a way of fooling gullible taxpayers into thinking big business is getting taxed, when in reality the tax is passed on to the consumer of their product.

You all are like a bunch of squeamish school kids touring a slaughter house a day after your parents took you out for a big steak dinner. You just need to face the fact that you share some of the responsibility for the slaughter of the cow and understand that your choices have consequences.





So, Kirk, in your world, exactly how much responsibility DOES Colt share for the Columbine slaughter?



Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:44 PM

KIRKULES


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"You just need to face the fact that you share some of the responsibility for the slaughter of the cow and understand that your choices have consequences."

Hello,

I hate to say it, but I agree, Kirk.

We need to be willing to liquidate our oil company if necessary to pay for our liability in fostering our disaster.

And then we need to be willing to tax ourselves by fining our other industries whenever we let them step out of line. And if we have to sue ourselves (in the body of our industries) whenever we fail ourselves, then we should do it.

And we will continue to punish, and sue, and tax ourselves as much as is necessary until we learn to operate safe industries.

--Anthony


You have got it exactly right Anthony, but are we willing to pay the price. Safety is one of those areas in engineering where there is always disagreement. In aircraft design for example, it would be safer to have triple redundant hydraulic systems, but it adds additional weight which reduces efficiency and uses more fuel. At some point you have to decide what makes the most sense, a safe airplane that no one can afford to fly or a semi-safe airplane that is cheap for the masses. When you choose the practical choice it's done knowing the hundreds will die due to your choice, but what is the alternative. We should make oil rigs safer, but the question becomes what is safe enough. We could raise gas prices a dollar a gallon and use the money for safety improvements, but what if a spill occurs in spite of our efforts, do we continue to raise gas prices. The public screams bloody murder and claims conspiracy every time gas prices go up, how long do you think we'll have the will to continue to pay for safe oil wells. Over time alternative fuels might be possible, but if it is done to fast it will cost thousands of jobs and harm an already fragile world economy. I'm all for making oil rigs safer within reason, but we're fooling ourselves if we think we can insure 100% that an accident like this wont happen again.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:51 PM

KIRKULES


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So, Kirk, in your world, exactly how much responsibility DOES Colt share for the Columbine slaughter?





Exactly the same responsibility as Pizza Hut does if I throw one of their pizzas at you (assuming it's fresh and not to hot).

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:56 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So, Kirk, in your world, exactly how much responsibility DOES Colt share for the Columbine slaughter?





Exactly the same responsibility as Pizza Hut does if I throw one of their pizzas at you (assuming it's fresh and not to hot).



So in your fantasy world, if I were to load up a truck with barrels of gasoline bought from a BP station, and drive it through the front doors of their U.S. operations HQ, and light it off, that would be THEIR responsibility for providing me the gas, right? I mean, they'd have to share in some of the responsibility for their own immolation, you'd agree.



Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 23, 2010 4:26 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


There is no such thing as "cleaning up" afterwards. The gulf will be polluted for the foreseeable future, no matter how much money they spend. Some accidents are just too large to happen. Unlike other deepwater drilling operations, BP does NOT include a secondary blowout preventer (BOP) activator (requried by Norway and Brazil), and according to testimony
Quote:

a key part of the oil pipe's Blow Out Preventer was damaged days before the explosion
.

BOPs have had years of fundamental issues. If they fail on land or in shallow water, its much easier to add another BOP or activate a dormant BOP. But in deep water... a mile deep, in BP's case... stopping a blowout is damn-near impossible. So in deep water, a secondary BOP with a failsafe system should be mandatory. However, its possible even the one in use have a fundamental problem:
Quote:

A 2008 report authored by officials of BP America and Transocean and published by the Society of Petroleum Engineers raised new questions about whether the blowout preventers on deepwater wells such as the one the Deepwater Horizon was drilling could have a new problem.
Blowout preventers, or BOPs, which weigh 500,000 pounds and are roughly as tall as a five-story building, activate rams that punch a hole in the pipeline connecting the well to the surface, and then block the pipeline. The rams, the report said, may have "difficulty shearing today's high-strength, high-toughness drillpipe" used in deepwater wells.
The 10-page report, delivered at the 2003 Offshore Technology Conference in Houston, suggests that the industry was so focused on drilling that it was willing to pay higher maintenance costs to keep rigs operating and avoid downtime rather than address some of the fundamental problems with the blowout preventers.

"Floating drilling rig downtime due to poor BOP (blowout preventer) reliability is a common and very costly issue confronting all offshore drilling contractors," the report said, adding that every major disruption could cost $1 million.

The report said the reliability issues were directly related to the fact that drilling companies didn't have detailed design and functional specifications to give companies that manufactured blowout preventers.

The preventers were being rushed into the field with limited testing, and if one malfunctioned, the pressure to keep drilling meant it was fixed with little time spent trying to figure out what had caused the malfunction.

"Because of the pressure on getting the equipment back to work, root cause analysis of the failures is generally not performed," the report said. "In many operations, high maintenance is accepted as a necessary evil to prevent downtime."

The report said the problems were mostly with the control system that activates the large rams that punch through the pipe to stop the flow of oil. The control system has electrical and hydraulic components. The electrical circuits activate the hydraulic equipment that moves the rams. Each blowout preventer has two complete control systems as a backup.

"History has shown that more subsea problems have been associated with hydraulic components than the electrical," the report said. Hydraulic problems can only be fixed by bringing the top half of the blowout preventer to the surface.

Crews on the Deepwater Horizon have said they activated the blowout preventer from the deck of the rig before fleeing. The blowout preventer is also equipped with sensors that should trigger a shutdown automatically. U.S. rigs, unlike those in Norway and Brazil, don't have to be equipped with a device to pick up an acoustic signal sent from the surface that also can activate the blowout preventer.

"The control system has historically been a problem area," Shanks said during the telephone interview from Houston, where he's an industry consultant. "The preventer itself is just a big hunk of metal."



www.adn.com/2010/05/05/1265139/2003-report-warned-blowout-preventer.ht
ml#ixzz0olJIxoPi


------------------
I'd like to point out that Rand Paul THEN went on to talk about the coal mine accident in which 23 miners were killed. His take on that topic? "Shit happens." This, after the mine was cited so often for safety violations that it was on the verge of being... in fact, SHOULD have been... shut by the government. The day of the accident, the CEO of Massey Energy, Don Blankenship, went on the air spewing about how it wasn't is his company's "best interests" to operate an unsafe mine.
Quote:

Blankenship said that he didn't know of any steps his company could have taken to prevent the disaster, though the Montcoal mine had received 58 citations in February alone. Blankenship deflected suggestions that his company's coal mines are more dangerous than others.
And THEN the full safety history (repeated citations for unsafe ventilation, unsafe operations) was revealed, proving Blankenship to be a hypocrite and liar.
Quote:

The federal records... show the company was fighting many of the steepest fines, or simply refusing to pay them.


It's not like reasonable people can't see the likely outcomes of operating unsafely and/or without credible backups. But businesses are in business to MAKE MONEY, and safety and backup systems cost MONEY.

Rand Paul is shooting from the lip. He has NO knowledge of corporations, or of what the Founding Father WOULD have thought of modern corporations, seeing as they DIDN'T EXIST back then, being strictly limited by law in scope.


He's just another corporatist masquerading as a freedom-lover.


---------------------
Anthony: Corporations do NOT bear "personal responsibility". How can they? They are not "persons". Despite the fact that they seem to enjoy all of the privileges of personhood (privacy, freedom of speech etc) they were SPECIFICALLY CREATED TO LIMIT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

---------------

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 23, 2010 7:02 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"Anthony: Corporations do NOT bear "personal responsibility". How can they? They are not "persons". Despite the fact that they seem to enjoy all of the privileges of personhood (privacy, freedom of speech etc) they were SPECIFICALLY CREATED TO LIMIT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY."

Hello,

Corporate personhood has often irked me (what a bizarre concept!) However, if corporations are to be given personhood, then they must have responsibility as persons. We must hold them accountable for their actions, just as any individual.

Or, if we go with Kirk's take, and we are all of the corporation and the corporation is of us, then when we (in the form of a corporation) fail ourselves, we must be prepared for bloodletting and cancer cutting, starting at the site of the affected tissue (the corporation.)

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 23, 2010 1:54 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Kirk, Anthony- one can only assume responsibility for a consequence in direct proportion to authority over the cause. The problem with your viewpoint is that "we" don't decide on much of anything, since corporations are not exactly hotbeds of democracy and transparency. And the idea that "we" effectively vote with our dollars is a load of crap, since "we" don't have much choice not to participate anyway.

I do think that "we" are responsible, but only in the general sense that "we" even allow corporations to exist in the first place, or allow them to be so lightly regulated. After all, both Norway and Brazil require more safety of their offshore drilling operations... not everyone does things the way "we" do and some peeps do it better.

So ONE way to "vote" (aside from our dollars, which is indirect at best) is to vote with our VOTE. That IS what government is supposed to be all about, isn't it? Providing a forum where "we the people" can collectively decide on our goals and aspirations in a venue outside of the so-called "free market".

I know that concept is very troubling to pro-corporate libertarians, but I frankly don't understand why libertarians keep plugging the "small government, big business" mantra:

We've been there and done that about a hundred years ago. That was in the era of company towns, company goons and company scrip; the era of Upton Sinclair's meatpacking book "The Jungle" in which workers were (literally) ground up with the meat (President Roosevelt took Geezer's stance on the expose: I have an utter contempt for him. He is hysterical, unbalanced, and untruthful. Three-fourths of the things he said were absolute falsehoods. For some of the remainder there was only a basis of truth."... until his own inspectors backed up the accusations); the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire which killed 146 garment workers, mostly women and children; 12-16 hour days, brutal labor conditions; child labor; and pitiful pay.

And with all of that freedom to do what business does best, what did "business" do?

Run the economy into worst depression ever.

It seems to me that Rand Paul is refreshingly consistent and a welcome change from "politics as usual". Unfortunately, he's also horrifically ignorant of history and in denial of basic economic realities.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 23, 2010 11:18 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"I frankly don't understand why libertarians keep plugging the "small government, big business" mantra:"

Hello,

I feel like you're arguing with someone who isn't in the room having this conversation with you.

Was it when I showed dismay for corporate personhood, or when I said the corporation should be made to pay, even unto its liquidation, that you found me in favor of big business?

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 1:24 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Anthony- not you. Others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 1:30 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Anthony, I think you have some libertarian leanings, but haven't exactly drunk the Kool-Aid as of yet. You seem to believe that there are libertarian ideals which you'd like to see us as a nation move towards, but also realize that we aren't there yet, nor are we even close in many cases. I view your "libertarianism" pretty much the way I view Frem's "anarchism" - you'd love it if it were possible, but realize that it's more a suggestion for a direction for movement and an ultimate goal, but not one you're likely to see achieved in your lifetime.

And as such, I don't think it's really fair to lump you in with the "you libertarians" collective term (or pejorative, if it was meant that way). There do seem to be some here who think we can just flip a switch and become some sort of a libertarian paradise (antimason comes to mind), but I think most realize we're not there yet.

And hell, *I* wish we could get closer to some of those libertarian ideals. I wish people would act not just out of their own self-interest, but out of the long-term self interest of their communities, companies, and countries, as well as those of their planet. But we're a long way from there.


ETA - Oh, and I see Signy beat me to it and clarified things a bit!

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 3:57 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"I view your "libertarianism" pretty much the way I view Frem's "anarchism" - you'd love it if it were possible, but realize that it's more a suggestion for a direction for movement and an ultimate goal, but not one you're likely to see achieved in your lifetime."

Hello,

I think this is how most political parties and ideologies are. I assume that 'The Left' does not really want a police officer on every street corner, nor for every child to have a personal government-mandated nutritionist that sends approved shopping lists home for their parents to select groceries from.

I similarly assume that 'The Right' does not want 'Firearms for Tots' to be distributed in preschool, nor every state to have its own currency, nor to need a passport for entry into Texas, nor for kids to slog through oil slicks on their way to school, as they use BP issued 'at cost' homeless-hair sponges to pick up a load of crude for disposal.

Lately I have seen Republican become Rethuglican. I have seen Tea Party become Tea Bagger. I have seen Democrat become Dumbocrat. And Libertarian has become a dirty word looking for a punch line. This makes as much sense to me as equating Muslim to Terrorist or Catholic to Pedophile.

Bill Maher has recently been piling in on Libertarians as Rand Paul enters the national spotlight (which makes little sense to me), and he made the same sort of generalizations and assumptions about Libertarians that Signy did.

--Anthony





"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 4:06 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Well, Anthony, I guess the only thing I can say other than "Sorry for lumping you in with others through generalization" is, "Welcome to the big time."

Seriously. Tea-Party-nee-libertarians must have gotten on somebody's radar, if they're being talked about disparagingly and generalized about as a group. As you pointed out, it's happened to the rest of us; now's just your turn. I tend to get painted with some "liberal" ideals I don't hold because in general I *am* progressive (I like the idea of making progress; sue me).

Who was it who said that a conservative is someone who "stands athwart history yelling 'STOP!'"? Oh, yeah... That was William F. Buckley. Sorry, Bucky - history doesn't bide your time.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 4:06 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Dratted double posty badness! Die! Die!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 4:56 PM

FREMDFIRMA


You forgot Anarchist = Bomb throwin nihilist, Mikey.


As for Buckley, he got RUN OVER by history, and there's wasn't even a thump - never liked him, but I do sore miss the way he could use vocabulary as a weapon, and even if somewhat dishonestly, debate intelligently, instead of the lowbrow screaming, profanity and slurs which consist of most of the far-rights 'arguments' these days.

I mean, even evil has standards, right ?

-F

ETA: Btw, although much maligned, the PS2 Game FF-X2 actually covers some of that ideology problem, with the Youth League being the progressive-left and New Yevon being the conservative-right - and it handles their misunderstandings and tribulations from a perspective where both have merit, rather than takin sides so much, I thought it was one of the better qualities of the game, especially since it ties right in with Yunas way of solving problems by bringing folk together instead of driving them apart.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 5:02 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

You forgot Anarchist = Bomb throwin nihilist, Mikey.



Oh, c'mon, Frem. I don't really even have to mention that old chestnut, do I? I mean, everybody already KNOWS that!






What struck me about that Buckley quote was how it seemed to show that even he knew how hopeless his position was. The conservative movement is obsessed with getting us back to some mythical "good old days", which never were really that good. Unless you were male, white, and rich, that is. Then they were pretty dandy. But that's been true through MOST of history, and is no less true today.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 5:38 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

and he made the same sort of generalizations and assumptions about Libertarians that Signy did.
Except they are not generalizations, Anthony, they're observations made from real-life people like Wulf, Geezer, Rappy, Ron Paul and Rand Paul.

I realize there are two threads to libertarianism: the pro-corporate libertarians who are VERY well-represented here and in the media generally, and the non-corporate libertarians (like you) who are generally rather few and far between, and tend to shade over into anarchism.

I'm speaking to the corporate libertarians among us... those who are too weasely at the moment to come out in defense of Rand Paul, BP, and Massey Energy ... but who represent the vast majority of "libertarian" thinking.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 24, 2010 5:53 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Oooh - Interesting, Signy. And I was just thinking about that today, and it makes sense, really. There are right-leaning libertarians (and even HARD-right ones) and there are left-leaning libertarians. And there are even, I am sure, anarchistic libertarians.

I guess on that scale Anthony would more closely fit a left-leaning libertarian. While in some ways I'd fit more of a libertarian-leaning liberal lefty. Or 4L for short. :)

Anyhow, the closest things I've seen to defenses of BP from any of the right-wing libertarians here have been WhoZit's begging for many more dead birds and Kirk's proclamation that it is our fault for making BP not follow safety procedures and regulations. We're to blame because they didn't want to cap a well properly or test their equipment or properly maintain it. And I guess they're to blame for my car not passing inspection due to bald tires. If only gas weren't so cheap, I wouldn't be able to drive so much and wear out my tires!

As for Massey Energy, Rand Paul again insists that sometimes shit just happens. I mean, it's not like they'd been cited more than once a day this year or anything, and it's not like they could have used the fans to better-ventilate the mines or anything.

Oh. Shit. Never mind. Seems they had been cited more than once a day (58 times in the short month of February alone!), and they DID have the fans blowing the wrong way after all. Oh, well - accidents happen! It's not like this was anyone's fault or anything...

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 3:39 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


If I had to sum up left-leaning libertarianism it would be "Small government, small business".

Anthony, would you say that's about it?


The problem with that idea, as I keep telling Geezer, is that small businesses don't always REMAIN small. There are "economies of scale" which tend to promote bigness. For example, it's far cheaper (per unit) to produce 10,000 circuit boards than it is to produce one. Also, as businesses get bigger, they start rather naturally morphing into vertically- and/ or horizontally integrated operations... ie, monopolies... which improve efficiencies, but at the cost of competition. (NOTE: The hope of capitalists is competition reduction, even if it's only the burger joint owner who hopes the burger joint owner down the street goes belly-up.)

The problem is that since markets do what markets do... there really is no natural self-correction to monopolism, concentration of money, and ever-widening division of power (except in catastrophic economic depressions).... there has to be a LARGER power to define and oversee the structure. And the only larger power that I can see capable of taking on such already large powers is some form of government*.

Anthony, you would like to eliminate corporate personhood. So would I. But what created it in the first place? Rules, which our government sets forth as business law. The only way that I see to eliminating this artificial personhood is to make it officially ILLEGAL. In other words, change the rules of the game.

* There are other venues of action: workers unions, consumers unions, investors unions, and informal but widespread individual acts of conscience. But none of these have been very effective at slowing the growth of monopolies, or controlling abuses of power. (Of course, one could argue the same for government!) So maybe this is an area of fruitful discussion: How to control big business abuses with- and without- government involvement.

I have another idea which I will post in another thread, as it deserves its own discussion... but I'm out of time. Sorry guys.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 4:18 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that current business 'bigness' has been facilitated by rules specifically created to bolster big business. The government saw big business as advantageous for the nation, and proceeded to create rules and regulations that actually protected larger businesses. There has also been an unofficial policy of intervention on behalf of businesses in the form of union-breaking activity by policemen.

In the absence of all this government help, I imagine that businesses could not afford to get very large. Alternatively, if they DID become quite large, they'd be forced to maintain reserves and insurance against damage caused by their operations, else face liquidation whenever something went awry.

I have read about cases where, when a drug or product was found to have caused harm, that an isolated dummy or shell corporation has been created to absorb the damage. The imaginary corp is eliminated after a public court case and everyone goes 'Ra, Ra, Justice is served!' but the parent corporation actually responsible for everything is protected from damage or dissolution.

This weird game of inventing fake corps to take the rap for something is one example of a practice I'd like to see abolished in order to make corps truly responsible for their actions.

So, yeah, I think if we take away the rules that allow this sort of chicanery, corps will become smaller by necessity. I think it's possible to do big business without having a big businesses.

Maybe someone like Ford distributes cars throughout the world. But they are in the car design and distribution business. Say, 2,000 employees. They may not own a factory. But when they need a million cars built, they open up bids to car factories. Maybe ten car factories each win bids to produce 100,000 cars each, and maybe each of those factories has 1,000 employees. And then there may be dealership bids to see who is going to sell these cars. And maybe 1,000 dealers win the bid to sell 1,000 cars each in their areas. And maybe they each have 100 employees.

Lots of business, and lots of businesses.

Lets say a Ford proves to be defective. If an investigation reveals that it's a design flaw, then Ford is required to pay up for damages. If they can't afford it, then Ford goes bye-bye.

Let's say it's a manufacturing flaw? A good arrangement would make each factory responsible for its quality of construction. So Factory #8 might be found liable. If they can't pay for damages, Factory #8 is liquidated.

Let's say it's a dealership mechanic that introduced a flaw? Same deal, now each individual dealership is responsible for its behavior.

This is how I imagine big business would be conducted in a world without big businesses. This particular big business (one million cars) would be operated by 1,011 businesses each with specific areas of responsibility. Each would be personally responsible for its contribution.

There are probably more businesses in a real world situation. People to move the cars (untold trucking companies in various regions) for instance. But I think I present the idea well enough.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 5:30 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Which brings us around full-circle to the idea that branches off of the original thought behind the progressive income tax. The idea was that it wouldn't PREVENT someone from accumulating massive wealth; it would just make it ever more expensive to do so, as the top tax rates peaked at 91% of income (This was under the "good old days" under Eisenhower, by the way). Essentially, you have a sliding scale, so that the more money you start piling up, the more taxes you're paying, so that nobody really has the opportunity to win ALL the money on the board, if you will.

And this would work equally well for Wall Street financial reforms (banks must be capitalized at ever-higher rates, so that by the time a bank is in control of 5% of GDP, it's required by law to have one dollar in cash reserves set aside for every dollar it has loaned out or invested. And two dollars for "risky" investments). It doesn't forbid a bank from becoming a monster; it just puts a real-world cap on how big they're going to be able to get. And smaller banks get a competitive advantage by NOT having to be capitalized at those rates.

Ditto corporate taxes. If a corporation has "personhood", it has income taxes it needs to pay. And they should be on a progressive scale.


Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 6:11 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Anthony, PN’s comic, which has gotten sooo old I miss the crack at the end, was redone from a comic I put up, and he loves to call me Jew, operative, dyke; he’s latched onto a few things he just keeps repeating as if they have any reality to them. He does it to others, but seems to have a particular affinity for doing it to me, gawd knows why, but if it gives him pleasure, hey, who am I to object?

What Kirk said is right out of Rand Paul’s playbook. He’s clearly said that “accidents happen”, which is the silliest thing I’ve heard lately—and you’ll note not even hard-core Republicans agree with him. BP, and other oil companies, have been shown over and over to have given their finger to the laws and regulations, so many things were wrong with the Horizon that it’s actually astonishing it didn’t blow up or spill far earlier, and the MMS has been shown to be incredibly uncaring and egregious in their “oversight” of drilling rigs, and on and on. The situation obviously wasn’t an accident, it was BP cutting corners for profit and the MMS being in collusion with them to enable them to. It’s just partisan rhetoric copied from Rand Paul, nothing more.

Ooops, I see Mike expressed it for me. On the other hand, there it is, what I had expected and was surprised didn’t come sooner:
Quote:

You all are like a bunch of squeamish school kids touring a slaughter house a day after your parents took you out for a big steak dinner. You just need to face the fact that you share some of the responsibility for the slaughter of the cow and understand that your choices have consequences.
NOW he’s taking a page out of Crappy’s (or is it Wulf’s) playbook by rationalizing and hurling the “childish” thing because he has no facts or reason to back up his stance.

Anthony: right ON, perfectly put. We also need to stop SUBSIDIZING the oil industry, let prices go where they really SHOULD, and make things uncomfortable enough that we start pulling away from oil!

Kirk’s example of airplanes is inappropriate; airlines just like oil companies ignore safety aspects because of PROFITS; one only need check the facts on BP’s actions with regard to the DeepWater Horizon, as well as many other drilling rigs and many other companies, to discover how many corners they have DELIBERATELY cut in order to boost profits. In this case, the instances are many, well documented, and their culpability clear.

Well presented, Sig, thank you. I didn’t know Paul was giving the same excuse for that incident, when AGAIN, it was proven clearly that the coal company had skipped and/or ignored safety precautions in the name of profit, was under indictment, had been fined, etc., for such actions in the past. It was no “accident”, it was a predictable failure; employees have testified that they didn’t dare complain under threat of losing their jobs, etc., and again, those in charge shirked their responsibility and have been doing so for ages.

The rest of the discussion is about things I don’t have the knowledge to engage, so I’ll let it go at that. Still amusing to find the only person to speak up on Paul's ideology is Kirk, while our other Tea Pary/Republican/Rightists haven't joined the discussion.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 6:16 AM

STORYMARK


Where is ol' Rappy? He likes to demand that people take a position when the folks they support mess up. Shouldn't he be here either defending or decrying?



"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 7:15 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:


Well presented, Sig, thank you. I didn’t know Paul was giving the same excuse for that incident, when AGAIN, it was proven clearly that the coal company had skipped and/or ignored safety precautions in the name of profit, was under indictment, had been fined, etc., for such actions in the past. It was no “accident”, it was a predictable failure; employees have testified that they didn’t dare complain under threat of losing their jobs, etc., and again, those in charge shirked their responsibility and have been doing so for ages.



I'll go ya one better, Niki (and Signy as well, and Anthony might want in on this, too):

These incidents aren't "accidents", any more than a drunken doctor operating on someone and killing them is an "accident". There's provable negligence here, and there's definite loss of life (29 in the coal mine disaster, and 11 in the Deepwater Horizon fiasco). To me, that puts it into the criminal arena, with charges of intentional manslaughter at the very least, or even homicide. These companies took hatchets to the rules, they cut corners which they absolutely KNEW could very well result in deaths or injuries, and those deaths and injuries resulted from their actions in flagrant violation of all safety rules and regulations.

If a corporation has "personhood", they goddamned well have the ability to be charged with murder, and sentenced to death if convicted.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 7:43 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Yeah, I heard last night someone from the area saying it should be a "criminal investigation". I'll go along with that, I fully believe that what they--and the MMS--did was criminal!


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
This is what baseball bats are for, not to mention you're the one in a car...
Thu, April 18, 2024 23:38 - 1 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Thu, April 18, 2024 23:20 - 742 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, April 18, 2024 20:38 - 2271 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, April 18, 2024 20:24 - 6263 posts
FACTS
Thu, April 18, 2024 19:48 - 548 posts
Biden's a winner, Trumps a loser. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Thu, April 18, 2024 18:38 - 148 posts
QAnons' representatives here
Thu, April 18, 2024 17:58 - 777 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, April 18, 2024 16:51 - 3530 posts
Why does THUGR shit up the board by bumping his pointless threads?
Thu, April 18, 2024 12:38 - 9 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Thu, April 18, 2024 10:21 - 834 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, April 17, 2024 23:58 - 1005 posts
Sentencing Thread
Wed, April 17, 2024 22:02 - 364 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL