[Micael]

Just out of curiosity, what would YOUR "ultimate response" be to this crisis? Nothing?

Probably to go on vacation, maybe host a party or two and invite Paul McCartney. Then I'll act tough on TV, talk about kicking *ss, etc., so people will know I'm serious. Oh and then I'll say that I haven't spoken to the BP CEO because, you know, "those people" will just tell you what you want to hear, and I'll want action, and not words. Then a few days later I'll meet with him to show I'm ooo so decisive and engaged.

[semprini]

I love threads like these. There really ARE people out there that think **** Cheney is part of The Pentaverate.

[solarus]

It's this unique inability to see how details such as cost-cutting production and safety measures factor into the overall scheme of higher production, expansion, Drill-Baby-Drill, and profitability which plays out in internet politics. CEOs, their chief engineers, nor the reading public are stupid.

You won't get any argument from me that meetings should be more open than they were. Our discussion is proof positive that that the mere appearance of impropriety is a bad thing We only disagree on how much of an issue safety is likely to have been discussed in those meeting, and something tells me we won't come to an agreement.

With that been said, drill-baby-drill still makes sense, but only once better enforcement of regulations and safety plans have been put in place. Not that alternative fuels don't have their place and should remain a goal to become economically viable but that its just not going to happen over night - a transition has to occur slowly and surely to be truely effective. And now more so than even before the recession, $1,000 heating bills, and $4 gas isn't the way to go.

[clemgrad85]

Probably to go on vacation, maybe host a party or two and invite Paul McCartney. Then I'll act tough on TV, talk about kicking *ss, etc., so people will know I'm serious. Oh and then I'll say that I haven't spoken to the BP CEO because, you know, "those people" will just tell you what you want to hear, and I'll want action, and not words. Then a few days later I'll meet with him to show I'm ooo so decisive and engaged.

Don't forget to play golf in between thinking about the people of the Gulf when you wake up in the AM and then again thinking about them at bed time. Of course, in between, might as well play a little golf....if you say it fast, it sounds like "gulf"....and then it sounds like you're thinking about them!

[clemgrad85]

What? You mean there might be racists in South Carolina? And they might be in either party? You jest. That's OK, I'll take this guy over DeMint sight unseen, felony or not. His waterloo remark exemplifies the negativity and lack of concern about the country because of a focus of defeating whatever Obama developed. It's worked to some extent, and the country has been the worst for it.

Well....that pretty much explains the problem with our country right there. You probably would vote for this guy and there are many democrats who will likely vote for him as well....and why?.....because he's a democrat. Of course, if you have ever seen an interview with Greene, you would probably see he is a bit nutty and can't answer questions very clearly. As a matter of fact, Vic Rawl (the guy who lost the race to Greene) is on the TV right now trying to explain how this happened. But yet, good ole davidra would vote for Greene. That really doesn't surprise me good doc!

By the way.....why can't the State democratic party just ask folks to write in the candidate that they think probably should have won, the white guy? That should pretty much fix this mystery.

[davidra]

Probably to go on vacation, maybe host a party or two and invite Paul McCartney. Then I'll act tough on TV, talk about kicking *ss, etc., so people will know I'm serious. Oh and then I'll say that I haven't spoken to the BP CEO because, you know, "those people" will just tell you what you want to hear, and I'll want action, and not words. Then a few days later I'll meet with him to show I'm ooo so decisive and engaged.

Nice dodge. I can conclude that indeed, you would do nothing. Shall I ask again? You are so smart, and perceptive....surely you have a better way. Please...please...share your wisdom with us.

[davidra]

because he's a democrat. Of course, if you have ever seen an interview with Greene, you would probably see he is a bit nutty and can't answer questions very clearly.

Actually, I would vote for him because he's not DeMint. I'd be willing to bet he'd be more receptive to collaboration and have less of an agenda of negativity. In fact, any higher primate would be better than DeMint.

[clemgrad85]

Actually, I would vote for him because he's not DeMint. I'd be willing to bet he'd be more receptive to collaboration and have less of an agenda of negativity. In fact, any higher primate would be better than DeMint.

Just making my point doc....it doesn't matter what someone stands for, what criminal activities occur, if democrat, all is good. I'm going to have to start calling you "DS" for Double Standard.

As I've said before, I'm all for Republicans doing all they can to block the Obama Socialist agenda. Why wouldn't they try and block such an agenda? And besides, he is representing the people who elected him....I think that is what he supposed to do, correct? Didn't you elect Obama for his socialistic agenda?

Speaking of the Obama Agenda....here is one of your NC democrat boyz getting fiesty. This is the 2nd such video recently where a democrat gets physical for no apparent reason:



Now....I don't think Congressman Etheridge is a member of the Tea Party....but yet I thought only Tea Party folks were violent? Odd. Of course, I don't blame him for being upset for someone telling him he is for the Obama agenda....that will be unpopular come November.

[semprini]

Let's see here. Republican people complained about what they considered the disrespectful way Bush was treated by Democratic (and Independent) people. And now that someone besides a Republican is in office, Republicans act exactly the same way that they previously criticized. That's called hypocrisy.

I don't see it that way. I criticized Bush when he deserved it (like expanding Medicare) but I did complain when people criticized him with no logic or reasoning behind it. Democrats blasted him when the unemployment rate hit 4.5% when that was not an unreasonable figure. (Democrats saying 9% is acceptable these days...now THERE'S hypocrisy for ya.) Typically, the disrespect towards Bush was "he's dumb," "he's the worst president ever," "he can't tie his own shoes," etc.. If you're going to gripe about someone, base it something quantitative rather than falling back on default insults. (People said his tax cuts raised the deficit without realizing that the Treasury saw record revenues after the cuts were enacted. JFK also realized the same thing and he pushed for tax cuts.)

Part of the reason I believe Obama deserves criticism for the way he's handling the oil spill is the fact that he threatened lawsuits for weeks before he even TRIED to speak to BP's CEO. His instinct is to sue, not solve, because that's all he's ever done. He wanted someone to tell him whose a** to kick, but didn't ask for advice on how to protect the coast or to aid in capping the well. (He also threatened legal action against Arizona and their watered down version of the US immigration law before he read the bill.) His entire career has been one of find a target, back it into a corner, and reap the political windfall. We haven't seen leadership, a willingness to accept responsibility, or even a comprehension of what's going on (as when he didn't know the circumstances of how the head of the MMS left her position).

[davidra]

Just making my point doc....it doesn't matter what someone stands for, what criminal activities occur, if democrat, all is good. I'm going to have to start calling you "DS" for Double Standard.

As I've said before, I'm all for Republicans doing all they can to block the Obama Socialist agenda. Why wouldn't they try and block such an agenda? And besides, he is representing the people who elected him....I think that is what he supposed to do, correct? Didn't you elect Obama for his socialistic agenda?

I would gladly vote for an independent who ran against DeMint. It's you that's making it a party thing. I intend to likely vote for an independent for governor in my state, so please don't show your shallowness and commitment to party regardless of anything else so publicly. Frankly, it makes you look hypocritical. Of course, that's no surprise.

And you continue to use "Obama socialistic agenda" when as many people have pointed out to you in other threads, his "agenda" is not socialist, as noted by the US Socialist party and anybody else who can read and understand definitions. Please. You continue to embarass yourself by going for an inflammatory and incorrect description just because it's easier than actually thinking about individual issues.

[clemgrad85]

I would gladly vote for an independent who ran against DeMint. It's you that's making it a party thing. I intend to likely vote for an independent for governor in my state, so please don't show your shallowness and commitment to party regardless of anything else so publicly. Frankly, it makes you look hypocritical. Of course, that's no surprise.

And you continue to use "Obama socialistic agenda" when as many people have pointed out to you in other threads, his "agenda" is not socialist, as noted by the US Socialist party and anybody else who can read and understand definitions. Please. You continue to embarass yourself by going for an inflammatory and incorrect description just because it's easier than actually thinking about individual issues.

Thanks again for your OPINION.....I'll stick to my opinion and what I believe is his agenda. I've said before, I don't expect you to agree with me....and I really don't have a problem with that. But davidra, it is my opinion and I believe that is his agenda. You can believe that he walks on water and does no wrong and is perfect.....your opinion....and I'll believe that the man is just in way over his head....my opinion. The cool thing is we can have different opinions in this country and not have to worry about being thrown in jail for it. GO TIGERS!

[Kenanator]

Wow.... To answer your question, no, there is no president school. Prior experience generally includes successfully guiding several large or multinational corporations, serving multiple legislative terms, governing a state, military experience, etc. etc. I'm still not sure if you were kidding or if you actually think incoming presidents are devoid of any beneficial and therefore qualifying prior experiences....?

Which is why the right liked Sarah Palin so much, because she was a "mavericky, Washington outsider"....

[clemgrad85]

Which is why the right liked Sarah Palin so much, because she was a "mavericky, Washington outsider"....

And yet at the time she had a ton more experience than Obama and the media still said she had no experience, but said nothing of Obama's lack of experience. back at ya.

[Kenanator]

And yet at the time she had a ton more experience than Obama and the media still said she had no experience, but said nothing of Obama's lack of experience. back at ya.

And what experience did she have over Obama?

As a mayor?

As Mayor of Wasilla, Palin Cut Own Duties, Left Trail of Bad Blood - washingtonpost.com

Or as a half term governor?

[semprini]

[QUOTE=tcrunner;2508282]Because of a vast assortment of ways in which the US didn't exactly uphold its highest values while under Bush, very visceral exchanges have taken place, which is reasonable given the extreme circumstances of war without end, torture, truth-manipulation, etc, etc, etc. What you're complaining about are the equivalent of protest posters, or at worst drive-by potshots, not actual arguments. Yet, they do hint at the arguments which have, in fact, been made.

Given the economic requirement to heavily invest now to prevent a complete collapse of your economic system, pointing out that 9% unemployment is high, though to be expected, is only being honest. You'd prefer a return to Bush's unique Labor Dept which fudged the unemployment numbers, by not including the under-employed and those whose unemployment insurance had been exhausted?

The Keynesian "spend your way out of it" has only greatly increased our debt. Unemployment wasn't supposed to go over 8% if the stimulus passed. European nations are finally realizing that their "investments" are dragging their economies to collapse with Germany and Britain planning big cuts. They're slowly learning that they can't keep spending money that doesn't exist.

And if you want to discuss under-employment, then Bush's under-employment rate was 10.4% in late 2003, and 8.9% in early 2008. Under Obama, under-employment was 19.1% last month.

Unfounded.

President Barack Obama Says He Hasn't Spoke With BP CEO - cbs2chicago.com

Really? Love to see the proof that Obama never asked for that advise. Please share. (An Op-Ed, by its definition, doesn't count)

OK, it's either that he hasn't tried to gather info or he's failing to act on any information he's being given.

Scientists accuse Obama over oil spill - MSNBC Articles

Again with the misrepresentations ("before he read the bill")? If legal grounds and/or precedent exist to justify the suit, what problem do you have with this? "Perception"?

His Attorney General hadn't read it, the head of Homeland Security hadn't. Obama said "But now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen." If he truly read the law, he would know that approaching someone out to get ice cream is not allowed under the law. He's either ignorant of the law or he's lying about what it really says.

Current US immigration law (that Holder and Obama have sworn to uphold) says that ICE agents can stop anyone at anytime and ask to see their papers. Arizona's law doesn't go that far.

It's not the purpose of the presidency to know why a bureau head left since they are not a member of the Cabinet, but instead, report to the Interior.

When that bureau is a major player in an "unprecedented disaster" that the President has said in which he's fully engaged, and the head of that bureau leaves rather quickly when the disaster hits, I believe the president should be aware of such things.

[clemgrad85]

And what experience did she have over Obama?

As a mayor?

As Mayor of Wasilla, Palin Cut Own Duties, Left Trail of Bad Blood - washingtonpost.com

Or as a half term governor?

Better yet, please explain what experience Obama had which made him even the least bit qualified to be President of the United States? And please don't include his 2 (?) years as Senator where he wasn't around most of the time. And by the way, I am not saying I'm a huge Sarah Palin fan, my only point was that she had experience leading people. Unless there is something I'm missing in his bio, I don't see where he ever led anything. This lack of leading, in my opinion, is why he is all over the place and appears (to me) to be quite unorganized in.

[clemgrad85]

Actually, it appears that your belief precedes your opinion. Therefore, there is an illlogical disconnect which is why this kind of thread-pollution occurs.

It's Obama's socialist agenda that is doing the polluting. And by the way, it is not just little ole me that is of the opinion that his agenda is leading us towards socialism....so the fact that such brain power as you, davidra, and other liberals in here disagree with me, does not bother me in the least.

[xForsaken]

It's Obama's socialist agenda that is doing the polluting. And by the way, it is not just little ole me that is of the opinion that his agenda is leading us towards socialism....so the fact that such brain power as you, davidra, and other liberals in here disagree with me, does not bother me in the least.

i guess sitting in the far right hand seat of politics/conservatism would lead you to believe that Obama is leading you down the garden path to Socialism.
I just look to the south, yes south, Chavez is about as Socialist as they come. Now I look at what your looking at, and have to say the following; I wonder what they thought of down in the good ol U.S of A when THEY VOTED HIM INTO OFFICE? Yes, you voted him in. Perhaps you personally did not vote him in, but a majority of voting Americans, your friends, neighbors, family members, and total strangers, listened, read, watched what he said and did, and voted him in to office. Obama is no more Socialst then I am. Perhaps a little further left then you would like, but he is no Socialist.
Chavez on the other hand, well, he is just plain stupid. Admit it, yours and mine political winds tend to swing from one extreme to another, for 8 long years the left had to live under what they considered to be almost facist ideals and programs. It has simply swung the other way. Will Obama get relelected, hmmmm quite likely.... people forget, and you forget it was the unwashed masses that voted him in. Do you have the same sort of grass roots support? I dont think even now, that you do.

[AKraemer]

It's Obama's socialist agenda that is doing the polluting. And by the way, it is not just little ole me that is of the opinion that his agenda is leading us towards socialism....so the fact that such brain power as you, davidra, and other liberals in here disagree with me, does not bother me in the least.

Okay. Just because thousands of right-wing reactionary fear-mongers who couldn't even tell you the difference between socialism, fascism, and communism believe that Obama's politics are leading America toward being a socialist state, that doesn't make it so.

Thousands of left-wing kooks predicted that Bush II's agenda would have us jack-booted and saying "Heil, Cheney" after 8 years and that didn't happen, either.

If America fails, it'll be because of the morons on both sides who started to believe their own rhetoric and dragged the electorate down with them. Contrary to your beliefs, apparently, hyperbole does not count as intelligent debate.

[Kenanator]

Better yet, please explain what experience Obama had which made him even the least bit qualified to be President of the United States? And please don't include his 2 (?) years as Senator where he wasn't around most of the time. And by the way, I am not saying I'm a huge Sarah Palin fan, my only point was that she had experience leading people. Unless there is something I'm missing in his bio, I don't see where he ever led anything. This lack of leading, in my opinion, is why he is all over the place and appears (to me) to be quite unorganized in.

So, in layman's terms. Conservatives with little experience = "washington outsiders", "folksy" and are OK. Democrats with little experience = "unfit to lead..."