World Politics

[buckwheat]

Yeah thanks for the help.

Here's some more help.

Try to keep the insult/substance ratio below 50%. You've attacked Rhubroma with bile many times but have not addressed his points.

OTOH, maybe you should be focusing on the problems in your neck of the woods. I imagine you have your hands full at this point in time.

cool your jets bhuweat.
That text you used was unnecessary, do you have bad eyesite?

That toaster remark towards ChrisE was awsome. I need to use that sometime when I am trying to post replies to you and romperoom.

Hey dude, I'm sorry if I have too much "energy" for your tastes.

 

[Anonymous]

Thank goodness that I do not have to read the posts, but I can see that he has posted 5 in a row. Someone must be a mailman. Watch out people, we have not seen this kind of rage since Jackhammer.

 

[patricknd]

Thank goodness that I do not have to read the posts, but I can see that he has posted 5 in a row. Someone must be a mailman. Watch out people, we have not seen this kind of rage since Jackhammer.

ssshhh, you'll wake it up again

 

[Oncearunner8]

Short memory huh?

Were you one of the geniuses casting their vote for the deliverer of the "Drill baby, Drill," mantra?

How can anyone be that cynical that they are voting for a person who has such a demonstrably lower intelligence than themselves?

Palin is still the leader of the Republican party, am I wrong?

I see I have to keep this real simple for you?

Connect the dots type of thing.

I am going to use your word….Dude I would never vote for that piece of trash! I have no idea where you have me confused with that but I have never taken up for her. Go check the posts. I am critical of President Obama but I have never called him a communist. I think I said he had many things that look like a socialist agenda. I did not say that was all bad either. You have me pegged as something I am not. Toaster …maybe ….Republican never. I tend to be more in the quarter deck or Starboard side.

I did like it when you called ChrisE a toaster it was classic put down.

Rubromer takes time to try and get all intelligent with his posts.....why?????

 

[buckwheat]

Thank goodness that I do not have to read the posts,

Why, because you'll be confronted with the limp wristed pablum you spew?

but I can see that he has posted 5 in a row. Someone must be a mailman. Watch out people, we have not seen this kind of rage since Jackhammer.

Who are you, Newt Gingrich? Now you're taking shots at mailmen?

Anyway, there's no rage. Incredulity yes. Rage, no.

If you're getting food for the quality of your thoughts you must be very trim, eh?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Why, because you'll be confronted with the limp wristed pablum you spew?



Who are you, Newt Gingrich? Now you're taking shots at mailmen?

Anyway, there's no rage. Incredulity yes. Rage, no.

If you're getting food for the quality of your thoughts you must be very trim, eh?

Sometimes it is better to be quiet and thought a...........

Dude, man please let it go already. I agree with many of the points you make, but you are embarrassing me. There is a chance you could convince me to vote for Palin. This crowd is not the enemy, or at least they weren't before.

 

[buckwheat]

I am going to use your word….Dude I would never vote for that piece of trash! I have no idea where you have me confused with that but I have never taken up for her. Go check the posts. I am critical of President Obama but I have never called him a communist. I think I said he had many things that look like a socialist agenda.

I'd ask, like what, health care? Very similiar to Nixon's proposals, the Republican proposals of '94 and Romney's plan MA got. I think we got a terrible bill but.....

I did not say that was all bad either. You have me pegged as something I am not. Toaster …maybe ….Republican never. I tend to be more in the quarter deck or Starboard side.

I did like it when you called ChrisE a toaster it was classic put down.

Rubromer takes time to try and get all intelligent with his posts.....why?????

I do enjoy Rhubroma's posts immensely myself.

Fair enough. I think Obama being a Socialist is completely off. He's definitely not even as liberal as E. Kennedy, Cuomo, McGovern, Dukakis or even some Republican Senators of recent vintage, so that's just thoughless sloganeering by simple people, the likes of Palin, who you don't appear to want to be associated with.

I would suggest he's somewhere right of Nixon, Ford and Eisenhower. In their general vicinity.

The country is so effed up that I think Schwarzenegger would be preferable to Obama. Someone with a backbone who could tell people such as Sarah Palin to STFU.

Even Armstrong, (whom I despise), might be better should he decide to go into politics. We'd get common sense policies and a guy strong enough to make decisions and tell the hand wringers to eff off. We'd get common sense health care. He'd probably get the heck out of Iraq and Afghanistan quickly, (he was against the wars.) He'd make religion a private matter. Not like these "Conservative" Christians, who pervert a beautiful thing at every turn.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I am going to use your word….Dude I would never vote for that piece of trash! I have no idea where you have me confused with that but I have never taken up for her. Go check the posts. I am critical of President Obama but I have never called him a communist. I think I said he had many things that look like a socialist agenda. I did not say that was all bad either. You have me pegged as something I am not. Toaster …maybe ….Republican never. I tend to be more in the quarter deck or Starboard side.

I did like it when you called ChrisE a toaster it was classic put down.

Rubromer takes time to try and get all intelligent with his posts.....why?????

I was gonna try to tell Buck that but who has the energy? Wouldn't the Starboard (or right side) be the Republican side though? Personally I'd place you more on the poop deck than the quarter deck.

The toaster was an awesome put down, I have filed it away for future use. Trouble is ChrisE is one of the only posters around here who is worthy of it and it's been done.

I got no problem with anybody who tries to take a little extra time to post something intelligent around here, even though it goes very much against the status quo.

 

[buckwheat]

Dude, man please let it go already. I agree with many of the points you make, but you are embarrassing me. There is a chance you could convince me to vote for Palin. This crowd is not the enemy, or at least they weren't before.

Oh Hugh,

I'm embarrassing you? How's that?

To quote ChrisE you look a little schizo here. You agree with my points, but I'd convince you to vote for Palin? Hmm....

They weren't the enemy, but one makes their point and then they are the enemy?

And it's not like the other side, Scott and company, aren't relentless.

You think Scott ever lets it go? Karl Rove? Sarah Palin?

ChrisE, rather than letting it go continued to stare into the noonday Sun to prove his unprovable argument.

When you do "let it go" as you put, Reagan becomes a great President, and Carter, (who you like) becomes the worst POTUS ever.

When you let it go, GWB becomes POTUS, and we find ourselves in the situation we're in now.

You're a LeMond fan, should he let it go, even though the fanboys paint him as nuts?

Hugh, I fight my battles, you fight yours. If you want to let it go, be my guest.

 

[fatandfast]

Oh Hugh,

I'm embarrassing you? How's that?

To quote ChrisE you look a little schizo here. You agree with my points, but I'd convince you to vote for Palin? Hmm....

They weren't the enemy, but one makes their point and then they are the enemy?

And it's not like the other side, Scott and company, aren't relentless.

You think Scott ever lets it go? Karl Rove? Sarah Palin?

ChrisE, rather than letting it go continued to stare into the noonday Sun to prove his unprovable argument.

When you do "let it go" as you put, Reagan becomes a great President, and Carter, (who you like) becomes the worst POTUS ever.

When you let it go, GWB becomes POTUS, and we find ourselves in the situation we're in now.

You're a LeMond fan, should he let it go, even though the fanboys paint him as nuts?

Hugh, I fight my battles, you fight yours. If you want to let it go, be my guest.

Buckbeat my brother you should have a field day as summer sets in more bike riding for the herd and more research on your part. These shaved leg rubes will be easy pickins' for your intellect. You are probably trying get the foam off your lips as you think of the seasonal feeding frenzy you are immersed in. Don't get a bike or your debate flesh rewards will surely go down. Your DNA will reveal the always right gene

 

[trompe le monde]

Perhaps, although I think we really are speaking of the difference between positive and negative liberties.

I'm more concerned with what the govt is not allowed to do to any individual than what the govt is allowed to do for any individual.

This is tedious but interesting (or at least I thought so).

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/

Well I found it much more tedious than interesting, kind of an over-blown semantics lesson.

The distinction between positive and negative freedom can be generally summarized by the answers to two straight-forward questions:
-Who governs me?
- And what is my sphere of non-intereference?

Negative freedom is much more interested in the second question as it assumes rather straightforwardly that people by and large govern themselves whereas positive freedom is probably more interested in the first question, in which determining 'who' governs me isn't exactly straightforward. People who favour positive freedom usually have some sort of working definition of what 'the good life' entails and that it should be strived for in a way by everyone.

Keep in mind that the author of this distinction, I. Berlin, was an exile from some at the time Communist country I'm too lazy to look up in google, so he did favour negative freedom as positive freedom can easily lead to paternalism, in that some centralized entity, agency, a Sasquatch if elected governor of Alaska, tells you how some aspects of your life should be lived AND you have to accept it, like it or not. Still, there are debates as to how 'thick' or how 'thin' the interference, if you can call it that, of positive freedom should be so it isn't by itself a very clear cut or tidy distinction.

If you get this already, I apologize for the digression as it isn't merely a semantic lesson but actually a distinction between trying to determine the limits of personal autonomy and determining 'who' gets to govern what you/I/Sasquatches can do within those limits.

I realize this is a digression from the current narrative of oil spills and culpability or whatever is going on at the moment, so please, carry on.

 

[Oncearunner8]

I was gonna try to tell Buck that but who has the energy? Wouldn't the Starboard (or right side) be the Republican side though? Personally I'd place you more on the poop deck than the quarter deck.

The toaster was an awesome put down, I have filed it away for future use. Trouble is ChrisE is one of the only posters around here who is worthy of it and it's been done.

I got no problem with anybody who tries to take a little extra time to post something intelligent around here, even though it goes very much against the status quo.

Oh my God......I am even calling myself a right wing nut. Yeah I am More Port than Starboard.

I agree with the poop deck assesment. Heck I spend sometime out on the fan tail. I figure that is more aprop now.

 

[Hugh Januss]

The distinction between positive and negative freedom can be generally summarized by the answers to two straight-forward questions:
-Who governs me?
- And what is my sphere of non-intereference?

Negative freedom is much more interested in the second question as it assumes rather straightforwardly that people by and large govern themselves whereas positive freedom is probably more interested in the first question, in which determining 'who' governs me isn't exactly straightforward. People who favour positive freedom usually have some sort of working definition of what 'the good life' entails and that it should be strived for in a way by everyone.

Keep in mind that the author of this distinction, I. Berlin, was an exile from some at the time Communist country I'm too lazy to look up in google, so he did favour negative freedom as positive freedom can easily lead to paternalism, in that some centralized entity, agency, a Sasquatch if elected governor of Alaska, tells you how some aspects of your life should be lived AND you have to accept it, like it or not. Still, there are debates as to how 'thick' or how 'thin' the interference, if you can call it that, of positive freedom should be so it isn't by itself a very clear cut or tidy distinction.

If you get this already, I apologize for the digression as it isn't merely a semantic lesson but actually a distinction between trying to determine the limits of personal autonomy and determining 'who' gets to govern what you/I/Sasquatches can do within those limits.

I realize this is a digression from the current narrative of oil spills and culpability or whatever is going on at the moment, so please, carry on.

I did get most of that from it, it helps to know that the writer was coming from a totalitarian regime. The biggest problem I have with the personal freedom crowd is that they seem to ignore the fact that we have shrunk the world down to the point where it affects your neighbors every time you even sneeze.
I say a man can not truly be free until he can joy ride his neighbor's Ferrari without consequences.

 

[Anonymous]

Not trying to minimize the disaster, but some perspective might help.

Federal OCS Oil Spills: 1971 to 2007
According to the 2002 NRC report, “Oil in the Sea,” 95.28 percent of oil seepage in North America was not related to the petroleum industry (drilling, producing, transportation, processing, etc.).10 MMS has comprehensive spill data for petroleum spills of one barrel or greater for the last 37 years. All
of the statistics below are specific to petroleum spills of one barrel (42 U.S. gallons) or greater of crude oil, condensate, or refined petroleum product such as diesel, lube oil, mineral oil, etc. OCS oil production refers to both crude oil and condensate (a liquid light oil product from natural gas production). Oil spill losses during the current decade continue to show a decline from previous decades. Technological advances are a major factor in this continued improvement.
General Observations:11
 Between 1971 and 2007, OCS operators have produced almost 15 billion barrels of oil. During this period, there were 2,645 spills which totaled to approximately 164,100 barrels spilled (equal to 0.001% of barrels produced) or about 1 barrel spilled for every 91,400 barrels produced.

This record has improved over time. Between1993 and 2007, the most recent 15-year period, almost 7.5 billion barrels of oil were produced. During this period there were 651 spills totaling approximately 47,800 barrels spilled (equal to 0.0006% of barrels produced) or approximately 1 barrel spilled for every 156,900 barrels produced.

http://myfloridahouse.com/FileStores/Web/HouseContent/Approved/Web%20Site/uploads/documents/energy_exploration/Oil%20Spills%20%20and%20Oil%20Spill%20Governance.pdf


This article goes on to say the regs put in place after the Valdez has had a positive impact in this trend.

My point here is to try and suggest that maybe the govt regulators and private business have done a pretty good job (up until this latest spill) keeping oil out of the oceans. To recoil in horror and just have the "shut it down" mentality might not completely square with all of the facts.

I'm not an expert, but 42 gallons of crude spilled for evey 6,589,800 gallons produced does not seem all that bad. Then if you consider that, of all the oil that contaminates the oceans, Mother Nature is responsible for more than 95% of the oil spilled... one can only draw the conclusion that we need to regulate/fine and punish Mother Nature (Buck, that was a joke).

EDIT:

Also, Oil and Gas concerns from the Countries of Mexico, Cuba, Russia and Brazil are either currently building platforms or are drilling in the gulf and China has intentions to drill in Cuban waters. Oil and Gas concerns from Spain, Norway, India, Malaysia, Venezuela and Viet Nam are current lease holders in Cuban waters.

 

[Moondance]

Ahhh, stay classy BNP...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dELv_bYZTL4

Confirms every stereotype about these stupid, far-right parties. Who knows, it might actually win him some votes tomorrow.

 

[ChrisE]

Thank goodness that I do not have to read the posts, but I can see that he has posted 5 in a row. Someone must be a mailman. Watch out people, we have not seen this kind of rage since Jackhammer.

You're not missing anything. Just a bunch of mindless whack drivel. If buckwheat had 2 brains he would be twice as stupid.

I will let you know when he writes something intelligent. *crickets*

 

[buckwheat]

You're not missing anything. Just a bunch of mindless whack drivel. If buckwheat had 2 brains he would be twice as stupid.

I will let you know when he writes something intelligent. *crickets*

You're the arbiter of what's stupid?

Read me a bedtime story.

Tell me about cultural evolution!

 

[Hugh Januss]

You're not missing anything. Just a bunch of mindless whack drivel. If buckwheat had 2 brains he would be twice as stupid.

I will let you know when he writes something intelligent. *crickets*

Oh great, just when it has quieted down in here, here comes Chris to crank it back up again.

 

[buckwheat]

Buckbeat my brother you should have a field day as summer sets in more bike riding for the herd and more research on your part.

Research, I thought it was common knowledge that Reagan was feeble and the Shuttle a boondoggle. I used to read the paper every day. The press used to have some independence, integrity and backbone before 9/11.

These shaved leg rubes will be easy pickins' for your intellect.

Most of them are real decent people, even the ones I don't get along with here. I try not to talk too much while riding other than about where were going. "Nice day," "however fast you want to go." No politics even post ride. I've never said anything in rebuttal or anything, not even once. Ruins a day.

Here this is fun and games.

You are probably trying get the foam off your lips as you think of the seasonal feeding frenzy you are immersed in.

Oh no. Most of the posters here are quite intelligent.

Don't get a bike or your debate flesh rewards will surely go down..

I have a couple which are getting a lot of use. I ride about 2 to 300 miles a week.

Your DNA will reveal the always right gene

Really? There's no such gene.

I think every post up here, the poster thinks they're always right. I'm just persistent!

 

[buckwheat]

Oh my God......I am even calling myself a right wing nut. Yeah I am More Port than Starboard..

I may have confused you with someone else and even you caused confusion.

I don't know if you noticed but I was kinda caught up with what I was saying.

 

[Anonymous]

I think every post up here, the poster thinks they're always right. I'm just persistent!

One minor correction. As President of the "beat on Scott" club, HJ knows he's right, the rest of us just think it to be so.

 

[Hugh Januss]

One minor correction. As President of the "beat on Scott" club, HJ knows he's right, the rest of us just think it to be so.

Are you saying that I know I'm right and everyone else thinks I'm right?

 

[Oncearunner8]

Oh great, just when it has quieted down in here, here comes Chris to crank it back up again.

Hugh it is almost like there is some sort-a collusion happening. I swear it is as if my brain is talking to Chris E. Drunk at some midtown bar and as if he is posting the truth up in this piece! LMAO

The last time something happened like the big azz bear night I ended up driving the mirrors of my sled somewhere near the Easttex freeway and baytown freeway....geaux figure.... it is as if I was trying to flee a drunk or something. Ole the good ole days...gone bye....... I wish I was in New Orleans..............to live the dreams of the crescent city!

 

[Anonymous]

Are you saying that I know I'm right and everyone else thinks I'm right?

Nope. We think we are right whereas you know you are. It was funnier in my head. Been a loooong day.

Is it OK to call you El Presedente?

 

[Oncearunner8]

Are you saying that I know I'm right and everyone else thinks I'm right?

Hugh your right and .......You know IT! lmao