World Politics

[buckwheat]

Republicans and Democrats alike are corrupt.They have turned D.C. into their own personal bank.
Hate to burst your bubbles but its ALL self interest.
Gramps told me many many years ago,"for every dollar,theres three crooks."
The only thing your vote does is decide who takes out of your pocket.

Good Lord!

I guess "Gramps" was hanging with that chick who's bringing chickens to pay the Doctor when she didn't have the cash.

Self Interest? You're Ayn Rand? I thought you were expired.

"Gramps" was quite a sage. Let me tell ya.

"Gramps" got paid in bones, clams, bread, sheckles.........??????

 

[Colm.Murphy]

Here is an interesting development from France.

http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2010/06/02/karachi-sarkozy-mis-en-cause-par-la-police-luxembourgeoise_1366741_823448.html

Lance's buddy.... Birds of a feather?

 

[Anonymous]

Let the demonization begin.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100607/us_nm/us_natgas_blast_texas

 

[patricknd]

Let the demonization begin.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100607/us_nm/us_natgas_blast_texas

another unforeseeable accident. you know, like the challenger.

 

[Anonymous]

another unforeseeable accident. you know, like the <snipped for the love of God>.

Great. Just great.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Let the demonization begin.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100607/us_nm/us_natgas_blast_texas

You lost me here. What demonization are you talking about?

 

[buckwheat]

You lost me here. What demonization are you talking about?

He thinks BP is being demonized.

It was just an unpreventable accident according to him btw.

 

[Anonymous]

He thinks BP is being demonized.

It was just an unpreventable accident according to him btw.

Your perception, no doubt. You may actually want re-read the posts.

When all the facts are known there will be plenty of blame & penalties to heap on whomever deserves it. In the meantime, let's all hope they "plug the damned hole."

 

[Anonymous]

53 days since the oil disaster and the President of the USA has not spoken directly to BP's CEO or any BP board members.

The evidence of incompetence in the current administration is mounting.

 

[buckwheat]

Your perception, no doubt. You may actually want re-read the posts.

When all the facts are known there will be plenty of blame & penalties to heap on whomever deserves it. In the meantime, let's all hope they "plug the damned hole."

Nice diversion.

We apparently can't discuss BP's criminality here because it is some kind of distraction from plugging the hole.


You're also the guy who trusts business more than government. You should be overjoyed that BP is handling this because business is so much more efficient and trustworthy than government aka "We the People."

Way to not take a stance on anything and argue piffle.
Thanks

 

[buckwheat]

another unforeseeable accident. you know, like the challenger.

Actually foreseeable.

Now you're getting it halfway.

I know it was torturous for you to get the basic idea but first steps are important.

 

[Anonymous]

Nice diversion.

We apparently can't discuss BP's criminality here because it is some kind of distraction from plugging the hole.


You're also the guy who trusts business more than government. You should be overjoyed that BP is handling this because business is so much more efficient and trustworthy than government aka "We the People."

Way to not take a stance on anything and argue piffle.
Thanks

Yeah, imagine wanting all available information from investigations (which are barely underway) before hanging someone or some entity (or both).

Normally how this stuff works is we find out what happened, who's responsible and then we throw the book at them. Is that OK with you?

We apparently can't discuss BP's criminality here because it is some kind of distraction from plugging the hole.

I don't think AG Holder has established that yet, unless I missed something.

 

[Anonymous]

Actually foreseeable.

Now you're getting it halfway.

I know it was torturous for you to get the basic idea but first steps are important.

Yup. Like determining where the fault lies before you jump to conclusions.

 

[patricknd]

Actually foreseeable.

Now you're getting it halfway.

I know it was torturous for you to get the basic idea but first steps are important.

i knew you couldn't resist

 

[buckwheat]

Yeah, imagine wanting all available information from investigations (which are barely underway) before hanging someone or some entity (or both).

Normally how this stuff works is we find out what happened, who's responsible and then we throw the book at them. Is that OK with you?



I don't think AG Holder has established that yet, unless I missed something.

I thought it was understood that this is just speculation.

Now that you let me know I have the power to hang some BP people, maybe I'll threaten a couple.

 

[Anonymous]

I thought it was understood that this is just speculation.

Now that you let me know I have the power to hang some BP people, maybe I'll threaten a couple.

Perhaps it was more than just BP's failures.

"Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., in opening a congressional hearing into the spill, said Congress wanted to explore "the role of regulatory failure" in the accident and what President Barack Obama has acknowledged for years has been a "cozy relationship" between government regulators and the oil and gas industry.

While the cause of the accident at the BP PLC well and spill has yet to be pinpointed, information uncovered so far raises the question of where the Minerals Management Service, the Interior agency that oversees offshore drilling, was in ensuring that wells are drilled safely, said Bingaman.

Salazar promised an overhaul of federal regulations and said blame for the BP spill rests with both industry and the government."

http://www.wkrg.com/gulf_oil_spill/article/lawmakers-give-salazar-grilling-over-oil-drilling/887847/May-18-2010_1-44-pm/

 

[Anonymous]

Wow.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965?RS_show_page=0

 

[buckwheat]

Perhaps it was more than just BP's failures.

"Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., in opening a congressional hearing into the spill, said Congress wanted to explore "the role of regulatory failure" in the accident and what President Barack Obama has acknowledged for years has been a "cozy relationship" between government regulators and the oil and gas industry.

While the cause of the accident at the BP PLC well and spill has yet to be pinpointed, information uncovered so far raises the question of where the Minerals Management Service, the Interior agency that oversees offshore drilling, was in ensuring that wells are drilled safely, said Bingaman.

Salazar promised an overhaul of federal regulations and said blame for the BP spill rests with both industry and the government."

http://www.wkrg.com/gulf_oil_spill/article/lawmakers-give-salazar-grilling-over-oil-drilling/887847/May-18-2010_1-44-pm/

Yes, but you have no point whatsoever.

Your side always wants to deregulate or eliminate government.

When there is police corruption, the police themselves aren't eliminated. The corruption is rooted out and the enforcement capabilities are strengthened.

Your arguments are childish and stupid.

It's like all these Republicans like Jindal want government aid. If they had gotten their way there would be no government to aid them because they and you are always arguing that government is the problem.

 

[Anonymous]

Yes, but you have no point whatsoever.

Your side always wants to deregulate or eliminate government.

When there is police corruption, the police themselves aren't eliminated. The corruption is rooted out and the enforcement capabilities are strengthened.

Your arguments are childish and stupid.

It's like all these Republicans like Jindal want government aid. If they had gotten their way there would be no government to aid them because they and you are always arguing that government is the problem.

Nice diversion with the police and all. Sorry to break it to you but the only thing more inept than big business is big govt.

Jindal's power is limited. He can't waive rules regarding the erection of sand berms and accepting help from foreign nations oil skimming ships. Jindal's not made a 'no govt' argument that I'm aware of. Go ahead and post a youtube where he makes a 'no govt' argument and I'll apologize. Unless you can't read, you know I've not staked a 'no govt' position either, so feel free to stop with your hysterics.

If we know anything we know that corrupt big business is dangerous and if you or anyone else is relying on the corrupt govt to solve big issues/problems then you will be disappointed time after time.

It's cool if you want to take out your frustrations here. Probably theraputic in a way.

 

[buckwheat]

Nice diversion with the police and all. Sorry to break it to you but the only thing more inept than big business is big govt.

Jindal's power is limited. He can't waive rules regarding the erection of sand berms and accepting help from foreign nations oil skimming ships. Jindal's not made a 'no govt' argument that I'm aware of. Go ahead and post a youtube where he makes a 'no govt' argument and I'll apologize. Unless you can't read, you know I've not staked a 'no govt' position either, so feel free to stop with your hysterics.

If we know anything we know that corrupt big business is dangerous and if you or anyone else is relying on the corrupt govt to solve big issues/problems then you will be disappointed time after time.

It's cool if you want to take out your frustrations here. Probably theraputic in a way.

More hysterical absolute nonsense. Reagan said govt was the problem. He and his descendents tried to rip the guts out of any regulation.

You didn't 'stake out a no govt position?'

Whatever dude.

There would have been even less oversight had McCain and the drill baby drill crowd won, and much more effective and comprehensive oversight if we had someone way to the left of Obama like Nader in office.

You have no argument and no logic whatsoever. Keep up with your delusions.

You're like a seven year old who will say anything from any side of the equation to distract and distort.



Did you even read the links you posted?

Then you come up with this screwiness.

"Yup. Like determining where the fault lies before you jump to conclusions."

ChrisE pegged you perfectly. You have no stance at all.

 

[trompe le monde]

I will defer to people smarter than me, but Paul Krugman argued a year ago that not having a small government saved the economic malaise from sliding into a second great depression.

Krugman - Averting the Worst.

 

[buckwheat]

Hitting the nail on the head.

I will defer to people smarter than me, but Paul Krugman argued a year ago that not having a small government saved the economic malaise from sliding into a second great depression.

Krugman - Averting the Worst.

The Republicans defer to GWB, Cheney, Palin and Tea baggers.

What more can you say.

 

[Anonymous]

More hysterical absolute nonsense. Reagan said govt was the problem. He and his descendents tried to rip the guts out of any regulation.

You didn't 'stake out a no govt position?'

Whatever dude.

There would have been even less oversight had McCain and the drill baby drill crowd won, and much more effective and comprehensive oversight if we had someone way to the left of Obama like Nader in office.

You have no argument and no logic whatsoever. Keep up with your delusions.

You're like a seven year old who will say anything from any side of the equation to distract and distort.



Did you even read the links you posted?

Then you come up with this screwiness.

"Yup. Like determining where the fault lies before you jump to conclusions."

ChrisE pegged you perfectly. You have no stance at all.

Wow. I've been outed. 'No position' makes me quite an enigma.

Nader as president? Now there's a frightening thought.

Less oversight of MMS if McCain won? You didn't read the Rolling Stones piece did you? There is no oversight at MMS and hasn't been in some time, if ever, which goes a long way to making my point (which is lost on you).

Here I go out of my way to post something from a source you should consider credible and you don't even bother to read it.

Feel free to quote any post where I've argued for "no govt". Nevermind, I'll save you the effort. There is no post from me arguing for 'no govt.' As usual, you assign me a position which I do not hold. All in all, a pretty common Alinsky tactic from the hysterical left.

Party on.

 

[Anonymous]

The Republicans defer to GWB, Cheney, Palin and Tea baggers.

What more can you say.

Yep, bigger govt is better on every level. $13,000,000,000,000 in debt and adding $1,000,000,000,000 + year over year. Thank God for the Spend-Then-Tax crowd.

Yeah, that Krugman fella has it all figured out. Big beaurocracy works. Just look at California, New York State, Greece, Spain, Potugal, Italy, Hungary, England....

 

[trompe le monde]

Yep, bigger govt is better on every level. $13,000,000,000,000 in debt and adding $1,000,000,000,000 + year over year. Thank God for the Spend-Then-Tax crowd.

Yeah, that Krugman fella has it all figured out. Big beaurocracy works. Just look at California, New York State, Greece, Spain, Potugal, Italy, Hungary, England....

Your view is much too simplistic.

Table on Page 428 of this Macroeconomics text on google books.

Funny thing about your list is that the countries mentioned aren't even the largest offenders of 'governmental bloat'. In the link I quoted, Sweden tops the list in which their government spending accounts for over 55.4 percent of their economy. Denmark is at 55.2%. France at 53.8%. Belgium at 50%. Why, even the economic saviour of Europe, Germany, has their government account for 46.8% of spending for their entire economy. The US is at 36.4%, a full 10.4% less than Germany. Spain has a smaller governmental impact on the economy than Canada does and yet Canada is not deep in the throws of near 20 per cent unemployment like Spain is. How can you explain that away with your simplistic 'Big government produces economic ruin' equation?

You can look at the size of government issue in a few ways. One way would be to suggest that if a country is prospering than it requests or requires more social services in order to redistribute some wealth for those left behind. Another way would be with the idea that some services, such as health care for example, should not be open to the free market and should be in some way managed by the government. Both ways require and even demand the need for a larger government.

So to suggest big government is the problem without looking at some of the norms of a nation's civil mandate or even which sectors drive their economy is a bit narrow minded.