kapkomet

No, it should happen. I only said this because I can't possibly agree with Strange.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 07:03 PM) So the solution is to let everyone in this case get f***ed like everyone else in the past, and hopefully conservatives in congress are not-retarded enough to amend laws for future environmental disasters. I'll make this excruciating simple; your arguments on every issue always imply some grand, underlying conspiracy and yet-to-be-revealed facts. Oh, it won't be independent! It's all just a political power grab! It couldn't possibly be in the best interests of those affected! It's all about REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH! EVIL SOCIALISM! They're all the same unsupported assertions. "Oh, you'll see! You'll all see! Then you'll be sorry!" while convienently hand-waving away any and all real-world, actually-happened counter examples. Like Exxon-Valdez or the various other times the courts f***ed it up, we're just supposed to sit back and let them f*** it up again. Then, in 20 years, maybe we can fine BP to make things right! But we have to trust them now! It's because it is. The actions that have occured have lined up on a beautiful little timeline here. It's what has become established behavior for this administration. Stimulus. Health care. GM/Chrysler. Now cap and trade and the handling of yet another privately held company to beat them with a f***stick. 1) Build strawman or crisis situation 2) Don't let the crisis go to waste, by 3) Stepping in after it festers and builds to "negotiate" fair deal on behalf of himself representing all that is utopia, pure and blessed as the white and driven snow. It's old, it's a 2 year old playbook by this man and his pals... and one stolen from FDR and even further back, Woodrow Wilson. If you don't like the system, actually go through the right channels and amend the processess the proper way. Why doesn't that happen? Because it would never fly, and you people know it, because deep down, you know that doesn't represent what should be done in our country. Our president has taken the executive power and has now (again) become the legislator, judge, and executioner all in one. THAT is the problem, not that some judge f***ed up. By the way, f***ups happen. It's wrong, but it's imperfect, because humanity is imperfect, unlike our Mess-----iah.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 07:07 PM) If there was a proposed amendment to the Oil Pollution Act expressly allowing the establishment and management of such a fund, would you be opposed to it? No. That would be at least the right way to do it. Although, interestingly enough, Congress would just rubber stamp it, because that's what they do for Barackus Castro. But at least it would have been a feigned right way to do it instead of the shakedown that occured (I like it, because that's what happened).

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 02:27 PM) Indeed they could and I don't necessarily have a problem with that if that is how our courts decide to punish them. DING DING DING. But our president gets to do that. Barackus Castro here.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 02:58 PM) Actually, if anything - judging from Obama's comments about BP after the meeting, the federal government offered BP crucial cover for themselves as a corporation. The reason that this got agreed to so quickly is that it was PR for Obama and it was PR for BP. They basically said that they would pay these claims anyway, all they did was agree to put the money in escrow so that its there for people when BP gets taken over by another company by the end of the year and the BP name disappears. Wrong. Obama threatened to completely shut these guys down if they didn't agree. They had no choice, and it wasn't about a way out. It was about survival as a corporation.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 04:24 PM) Well no s*** it's a redistribution of wealth... if I bust the windows out of your car and I am responsible for the costs to repair it, I'm "redistributing" my "wealth" back to you because I f***ed up your windshield and it's my fault. I wonder who is responsible for reminding her to breathe? The difference is, you and that other person have a legal channel to address this issue, not the government entity itself stepping in to take the money and put it where it sees fit. (And before you say it, the fund sure as hell will not be "independant" in any way, shape, or form).

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 10:57 AM) Well, go ahead and defend it. You've flailed miserably so far. I'll make this really simple for you, but you won't get it because you all are getting off on the control of the constutution here. Since when does the executive have the power to legislate, arbitrate, and judge (aka, otherwise rape our constutition)? It's pretty simple, really. The courts have jurisdiction over this and have for over 200 years. Now you all run around and scream about Exxon Valdez and how it took too long and BP needs to PAY PAY PAY NOW NOW NOW. If you don't like that, AMEND the constitution, don't just piss all over it because it doesn't say what you want it to. THAT'S how you change it, you don't just rip it to shreds when it doesn't serve your purpose like you all have condoned our dope of a president to do. What you have done is allowed an egotistical maniac take over something for political gain. Oh, but you all won't see it that way. He's the Mess---- iah. He's using this for his political gain just like I said he would way back in this conversation. He let it go on purpose (NEGLIGENCE) to gain the power to negotiate yet another redistribution of wealth opportunity. It's like taking candy from a baby with you people. You know what this egomaniac will do with every single "crisis" ... let it fester and then swoop in and "SAVE" everyone. Yet, you are making this asshat to be a hero, yet again, while he stomps on every constitutional firewall for his political gain.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 08:43 PM) Kap is correct. She's just saying that it's vital that Harry Reid be defeated in the election. If he is re-elected, THEN we'll be forced to rise up and murder him. Voting for her is the only way to save Reid's life. It's really a very compassionate statement. Hell, I didn't even think of that. Good point!

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 09:08 PM) I'm on top of things, BP's going to pay people put out of work by this spill, Americans have to change their energy use, and screw that Kap teabagger that's always hatin' -Obama That's awesome.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 08:44 PM) To me it's simple: If you detested government involvement in fixing the bank collapses, you should detest any government involvement in helping the private sector. Really? Better stop all manufacturing of aerospace components, military equipment, and anything/everything that's provided for the government through the private sector. There is a difference. Why is it so hard to figure out? Oh... because everyone wants a chance to mock racist, stupid ass, bigoted, capitalist conservatives. Got it.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 07:49 PM) You're right context is key. Maybe it would be wise to use a different euphemism for electoral defeat in the context of discussing the justifications for armed American insurrection. Just sayin'. Um hmm. Keep painting her as a nutso fanatical b****.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 08:06 PM) Here's the problem and where the logic of many conservatives breaks down: Bailing out banks a banks mess to protect the economy from diving into a deep depression is bad because government should get involved. Bailing out an oil companies mess because it is polluting water and ruining an ecosystem is a a great idea and a role of the government. Your theory is full of s***. Bailing out banks should have NEVER happened. Conservatives didn't want that. This is an issue of national/federal security and national interest. You're not "bailing them out", you are providing resources (NOT necessarily money - actual resources) to get s*** done.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 07:46 PM) Kap, there's something delicious that you decide to announce that Obama has done too little and too much simultaneously. Sure... he does nothing so he can resdistribute more wealth. It makes perfect sense, actually.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 07:15 PM) Kap, please stop white-knighting terrible companies and crazy politicians. This lady is crazy and has crazy ideas, especially when put into context. TAKE OUT HARRY REID! I'm soooooooo supportive of BP and crazy lady.

A f***ing two hour and 15 minute video? MMMMMMMkay.

Y'all loves you some context, don't you? Kill Harry Reid! TAKE HIM OUT! Yea, literally! Seriously?

So, "negotiations" would imply that there had to be two sides to this. What got threatened against BP to make them essentially let Barackus the Great take over their boardroom?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 11:54 AM) AND, how about a meeting with BP that lasts longer than 20 minutes... Because it took him only 20 minutes to take over their corporation.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 16, 2010 -> 07:59 AM) So I'd expect that if I look back to 2005, I'd see you spouting off in here about Bush being criminally negligent as well, right? No, because he actually responded. It took your hero 50+ days to get even semi serious... and that took "negotiations" to take over BP.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 15, 2010 -> 09:03 PM) the root cause of the high prices are the absurdly high health care costs in the United States... and these costs keep increasing. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100614/ap_on_...11_health_costs Employers to see costs up 9.5% this year. Projected to go up another 9% next year. This will get passed down to employees. Those damn insurance companies! But wait, their plans must be government approved... ohohohohohohohohohohoh nononononononono... where's that cost curve bend gonna happen??!?!?!??!?!?! Wait for it... ... ... ... ... ... DENIED!

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Jun 15, 2010 -> 09:08 PM) Since the election, Kap like so many others has become an abyss of negativism, narcissism, and knowitall-ism, there's little point in arguing with him. Has Obama made massive errors on this? Presumably. Is Obama, in comparison to previous Presidents (or other options in the 2008 election), bereft of the competence required to handle an issue like this. No, but no single individual, or organization could control such a cluster-f. Could this be such a terrible disaster that it could make Obama a one term President. Yes. But because he's been a competent President, he would leave a number of positive legacy items, even as a one term President. Oh, the ironies of this post with a t w I S T of two years ago. The difference is, this guy is blowing it hard core and is still loved by the masses. The part you all want to gloss over is HE KNEW how bad this was day 3 - that's when all the offers of help started pouring in. What was he doing on day three? Flying on AFOne b****ing about AZ immigration and bashing Republicans for taking in part of the violence tendencies that this law was introducing. Negligence, baby. Barack Obama is 100% negligent. Period-io.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 15, 2010 -> 08:32 PM) You and Jas are just off your rockers on this. Seriously. You've seen me post here that ObamaCo is pretty much as bad as BushCo was on Katrina... but criminally negligent? The President? Just as responsible? Not enough LOL'ers in the world for that. BP was indeed criminally negligent, as we have clearly seen. What ObamaCo has been, much like BushCo after Katrina, is managerially and administratively inept in the extreme. That, I don't see how anyone could argue. Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/negligence Barack Obama has departed from the conduct expected of the chief executive of the United States. Barack Obama had a duty to protect this country and has failed to do so. Again, he KNEW how bad this was and chose to ignore it. He has caused great harm to the United States of America by his failure to act. By legal defintion, he is negligent. Now, is there a case here? Absolutely not. There is a difference. Just as there is not a case here against Tony Hayward personally, but you bet your ass he's technically negligent as well. This isn't "impeachment" or any other such bulls***, I'm not saying that. But I AM saying he's negligent, and laws were broken.

Carmel frappas at McD's are pretty damn good. It's a wus drink, but good nonetheless.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 14, 2010 -> 11:13 PM) I scored the first run of the season for our softball season. That is the most useless "fact" ever, right there. BTW, our team is actually playing for the championship... it's a miracle.