1 Huh?

2 We're all going to be rounded up in FEMA camps to be liquidated, because the elites hate peasants.
I'll see you there (from my guard tower.)

3 Thirst !

4 Would it help if we apologized?

5 HALIBURTON!!!!11!!!!

6

From the NY Daily News...it was a shakedown

tinyurl.com/25qxbnh

"Enter Vice President Biden, the designated Bad Cop.

Sources told the Daily News that Biden leaned forward and bluntly informed the Blight Brigade they had no choice: If they didnÂ’t do the right thing and put the cash in escrow, it would be done to them."

 

7 Conspiracy?  Yup.

BP the victim?  Nope.

Who's the victim?  Capitalism.

8 BP is the victim here and if you can't see that you are retarded.

9 Step 1 in a longterm goal of nationalizing the oil industry.  Also, Illuminati, Trilateral Commision, Jews, and Reverse Vampires.

10 >>>Sources told the Daily News that Biden leaned forward and bluntly informed the Blight Brigade they had no choice: If they didnÂ’t do the right thing and put the cash in escrow, it would be done to them." I didn't know you weren't allowed to settle out of court anymore.

11

Anyone have a Conspiracy Theroy to explain Heads on a Plane ?

http://tinyurl.com/2fqxb5p

 
I have had it with these mother@#!&n' heads on this mother@#!&n' plane!

12 Oh, no.  How did it come to this again?

13 Extortion is ok if it is done to the villian of the week.

14 Look, I don't want to argue. Minds are made up; facts are irrelevant. It doesn't matter what the news might be because the storyline is set. Drew kind of came to me and said he didn't feel like doing an update to the Barton post and I agreed -- i don't want to do it myself. So, whatevs. It's on google.

15 Love you, ace. 

16

Leaving aside the fact that there is no Constitutional authority for the President to do this . . .

The spectacle of a prospective prosecutor (Obama/Holder) cutting a side deal with a prospective criminal and civil defendant (BP), BEFORE any crminal charges are even filed, BEFORE there's even a grand jury hearing . . . does that not raise some serious ethics issues?

17 So you've just given up on secretly hating your readership then?

18

The oil spill was caused by Muslim jihadist fish out to terrorize their mortal enemy, the pelican.

19

Watch Hayward's non-answer when he was asked if there was a shakedown

tinyurl.com/2u2qebv

The sub-titles should read "Fuck yeah, there was"

20  Reverse Vampires.

Posted by: brak

 

There are vampires that walk backwards? Or do they exist in a parallel parking universe?

21 5:  The funniest thing I've seen here in ages.  You rule.

22 I think the problem some of us are having is that some of us can't be perpetually outraged and we are finding it wearying to be expected to be so all the time. Some people are naturally angry a lot. Some people aren't (or, like me, are angry a lot, but don't like being angry). I just really think all decisions on this have been made by Rush Limbaugh and I don't feel like fighting with him.

23

The spectacle of a prospective prosecutor (Obama/Holder) cutting a side deal with a prospective criminal and civil defendant (BP), BEFORE any crminal charges are even filed, BEFORE there's even a grand jury hearing . . . does that not raise some serious ethics issues?

Yeah..but Drew thinks it's wrong to mention that

24 Questions are a danger to yourself, and a burden to others.

25 >>>So you've just given up on secretly hating your readership then? I could do with less stridency and anger, yeah.

26 The International Communist Conspiracy has put fluoride in our water to corrupt our precious bodily fluids.

27 This post is part of a conspiracy to blow up the site.

28 Any company who believes in "climate change" has to be run by imbeciles and/or politically corrupt, irrational imbeciles.  So I cannot just dismiss talk of conspiracy as nutter stuff.  It may not be true, but it's not obviously untrue.

29 Agree this GOP rep is retarded and symbolizes how out of touch they are. anyone defending this guy is a teabaggin Nazi.

30 "Reverse Vampires" Is this a menstrual joke?

31 Oh, good, 'cause I didn't get to participate in da' hate yesterdate!

32 I, personally, blame space aliens.

33 >>>Yeah..but Drew thinks it's wrong to mention that No, drew thinks it's wrong that he spends his time putting up posts and gets treated like a traitor for doing so.

34 Don't forget Lizard-people, one of which is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

35

Thread for Ranting and Conspiracy Theories

And BP's awesome too. I think we should run on the plank that whatever BP did here they should keep on doin'.

Karl Henrik Von Svanberg got to Ace.

HOW MUCH ARE THEY PAYING YOU ACE? IS IT WORTH IT?

36 The funniest thing I've seen here in ages.  You rule.

Thanks....

By the time I got it written the "other" Barton thread was winding down.

37 If some of us aren't outrageously outraged, but think Barton's statement was ill-advised, can we treat this as an open thread? 

Mr. Y-not's former employees want to get him a nice bottle of tequila.  I know he likes Herradura anejo which runs I think around $60, but he's never had the super-expensive Herradura Seleccion Suprema anejo (which is several hundred dollars).  Does anyone know if it's worth it or have a favorite aged, sipping tequila they recommend? 

38

oh, so the government doesn't mind side deals, now?  okey, dokey.  Let me pay my portion of the nat'l debt today & you IRS can leave me alone for the rest of my life (& the life of any estate I leave).

 

39 Well I keep updating the pages for the two SC papers to see how the hearing is gonna play out for old Greene.

Have popcorn ready for the microwave.

40 >>>This post is part of a conspiracy to blow up the site. I gotta tell you that right now, at this moment, I don't care. I should care. This is a valuable site. Right now I don't care. I don't care.

41

Oh, the Deepwater Horizon mess is just the beginning. They're just getting warmed up.

("BP" satnds for "batting practice," y'know.)

42 BP = Birchers Petroleum.  You heard it from me first.  Hit the tip jar.  Or else.

43 So when Al Capone puts a gun to your head and says "you have no choice" that's called settling out of court now?

44 I think the problem some of us are having is that some of us can't be perpetually outraged and we are finding it wearying to be expected to be so all the time.

But, but, but. I can't be happy unless I'm angry....

I just really think all decisions on this have been made by Rush Limbaugh and I don't feel like fighting with him.

Well I know someguy who'd probably still think you're punching down.

45 Thread for Ranting and Conspiracy Theories

Finally!

46 Can we all at least agree that regardless of whether Obama is treating BP fairly or not, publicly defending BP is a really fucking stupid political move?

47 Well, he says, "I don't care" 3 times, so, that means it's important to him, right?

48

I once taped an interview I did with Kerry Thornley (Oswald's Marine bunkmate). Strange stuff.   Partial transcript:

http://tinyurl.com/2f6jfqy

49 BP = Soon to be Barrack Petroleum

50 Ok, I give. What is this about?

51 Well I know someguy who'd probably still think you're punching down.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose

 

Just when we thought that things couldn't get any worse.........

52 Reverse Vampires. So they pump blood into your neck? Wouldn't that raise a huge sac or something? And what would the vampire say, "I vant to supplement your blood!"? Just not the same.

53 Can we all at least agree that regardless of whether Obama is treating BP fairly or not, publicly defending BP is a really fucking stupid political move?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 17, 2010 05:00 PM (plsiE)

I didn't read the other thread.  Were people suggesting otherwise?

54

Weird!

I was just mucking around on the Internet reading about conspiracy theories and then I come here and see this thread.

I think this is in and of itself a conspiracy theory.

Anyway, Google Nivelles Gang aka Brabant Killers or Nijvel Gang, for a really fun conspiracy read. Took place in Belgium back in the early 1980s. A gang of killers embarked on an orgy of murder and faux robbery over a three or four year period. Conspiracy types tried to tie this activity to Operation Gladio and some unsavory elements in the Belgian government.

55 It was the Kwistians!

56 WTF? There's a load of butthurt here today. Guess reasonable people can't disagree after all. Still the best blog on the net. We can get bitchy with each other and move on.

57 Listen, given the amount of support BP has thrown in for the green police and O, I would be happy if they went down in flames for their trouble. I do worry a little bit about precedent though. But BP is really not someone worth saving from the wrath of the green monster.

58 Ace in my defense I don't really listen to Rush, mostly sports radio, so whatever his take was I had my take beforehand. I am probably biased though cause I don't like Obama and wouldn't approve of most of the shit he does. I blame people like Obama for forcing them to drill 5000 feet under the ocean.

59 Update from The State at 4:28 pm

The 63 executive committee initially rose to retire to another room to vote on the District 121 protest, where challenger Bobby Mayes protested his loss to Rep. Kenneth Hodges in the Colleton County district.

But one committee member, noting what he described as the lack of enough evidence to overturn the results of the primary, called for an immediate vote. The immediate vote was held, and the protest of the District 121 primary results was unanimously rejected.

http://tinyurl.com/2ak9bww

It appears the protest was rejected.

60 53 Ok, I give. What is this about? Posted by: Brad at June 17, 2010 05:00 PM (2GsJg) Go down to the Rep. Barton thread posted by DrewM. It gets above The Satanic Comment Barrier, just to give you an idea of the contentiousness level there.

61

24 I think the problem some of us are having is that some of us can't be perpetually outraged and we are finding it wearying to be expected to be so all the time.

Yep.  I run out of outrage by about noontime.

62 and the Alvin Greene stuff in South Carolina is like pixie dust on that wishful thought that Lee Atwater's DNA survives somewhere in South Carolina.

63 Ooops, that is a different race that was being protested. Not the Senate race.

64 separation of powers. Obama doesn't get to decide what the law is and what the verdict should be. That being said, there's got to be a way to put in caveats that destroying the Gulf Coast is bad. And will be punished...but it won't be punished like a banana republic.

65 >>>Can we all at least agree that regardless of whether Obama is treating BP fairly or not, publicly defending BP is a really fucking stupid political move? No we can't. Some jazz about Integrity and Hayek. And that's a fair argument-- but I could do, we could all really do, without the shrillness.

66
Drew was the one who was mocking people and calling them stupid for disagreeing with him. So now he's the victim?

67 Look, if someone doesn't answer my tequila question, I will know this is a conspiracy!!!  eleventy!!! 

Now I have to go pack some more, but I expect to return to read a lot of really useful suggestions! 

68 Does anyone know if it's worth it or have a favorite aged, sipping tequila they recommend? 
Posted by: Y-not

I'm definitely not a tequila fan nor even hard liquor fan but Hacienda De Chihuahua is the smoothest tequila I've ever had.

I haven't seen it in many stores so it may be a bit hard to come by but it's well worth it.

69 By the way, since I apparently am required to say this, what Barton said was 100% right, and we absolutely must stand behind this stalwart, and it's pure communism if we don't.

Oh noes!  Ace is being oppressed!  Despite not having made any appearance in the previous conversation, he's somehow being put down by the Man-or something. 

Again, there were like two people on that thread arguing for the entirety of Barton's position, and their argument was that the word "apologize" or at least its target was being misconstrued not that DrewM.'s "interpretation" should be 100% supported.  Nearly everyone else was making the correct point that Obama's thuggish shakedown was the problem we should be focusing on rather than whining about how uncomfortable one congressman's comments make the moderate fringe of the party feel (because remember Joe Wilson 'hurt' us so much),

But because we don't march in lockstep behind a poster-who isn't even ace-ace insists that we are tyrannically imposing our collective will on him.

70 Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Suffering leads to chafing. Chafing leads to rashes. Rashes lead to discomfort. Discomfort leads to irritability. Irritability leads to indigestion. Indigestion leads to poor appetite. Poor appetite leads to bad eating habits. Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet. ...you know, I'm not sure where I'm going with this.

71 24:  Kinda got that impression myself.   Drew - try the next post before Limbaugh's show comes on then giddy when he signs on - might work out better.

More Zombie Flatt & Scruggs.  Less Outrage.

On conspiracy, I've heard at least 3 variations on the "Obama's declaring marital law before November" plot.  Sadly a couple of my dot-connecting black-helicopter-watching acquaintances have been saying this in public to the great amusement of Gaslamp Quarter Lefties here in San Diego. 

Any idea who got that one started ?

72 Jah, das gut, Ace. Shutz dem up. We will pay yous big moneys jah, when you are bathing in a hottub full of cash-monies on your yacht in Bermuda you will not care about having to lie to deese tiny insignificant peoples.

73 Is this the right place to mention how the popcorn that sticks between your teeth is the conspiracy of the American Society of Dentists?

74 I think Drew is a traitor, largely due to his involvement in the Montauk Project.

75 How the heck did a majority of posters disagreeing with Drew's take on the Barton statement turn into conspiracy theories and passive-aggressive butthurt?

Some damned odd stuff going on around here.

76

Posted by: joncelli at June 17, 2010 05:02 PM (RD7QR)

 

Thanks!

77 I hate it when the parents are mad at us....

78 >>>Drew was pretty damn ugly to people who made great points. I didn't really read the thread so sure, maybe he was. But in that case we have a blog which thinks one way and a readership that thinks completely the other so it's like... well, everyone's trolling each other. So, like, pointless.

79 David Axelrod pays me $125 per week to shill for Obama.

80 #82 Trolls trolling trolls...This blog has reached awesome critical mass!!!!

81
Who is defending BP? No one.

Some people are defending due process. And me, like a dummy, am defending the word apology, or...I dunno, something.

Shit got out of hand when Drew started to insult people who disagreed with him.

82

 

.   .   .   .   ^fnord.

83 In honor of Etheridge's apology and refusal to use his bad day as a crutch:

I refuse to mention that in the previous thread literally everyone agreed that the shakedown was a problem so there wouldn't have been alot to discuss on that score and it was the purity police who decided that anyone who disagreed with Barton or Rush was a card-carrying ACORN member who was okey-dokey with BO going all Chavez on BP.

But I refuse to use that as a crutch.

84 I gotta tell you that right now, at this moment, I don't care.
I should care. This is a valuable site.
Right now I don't care. I don't care.

WE'VE GOT TO CARE!

85 >>>This post is part of a conspiracy to blow up the site.


I gotta tell you that right now, at this moment, I don't care.

I should care. This is a valuable site.

Right now I don't care. I don't care.

Posted by: ace at June 17, 2010 04:58 PM (66DVY)

I dislike the descent into name calling myself and, as an attorney, I don't fight unless somebody is paying me (family excepted).  But on the other hand, whatever the vitriol may reveal about the readership, it also reveals that they are passionate and not afraid to dissent.  You find that at Little Green Footballs or Daily Kos. 

86

Ace, perpetual outrage is wearing, you are right there. I have had to give up watching any news program in the same room with my wife, because she is fed up with my rants, screams and cursing.

The problem I have with the spill is that I simply still do not know all the facts about what actually happened. And if I did, I still might not be able to ascertain who really was at fault.

But I know a shakedown when I see one. Barton may have said the right thing the wrong way. But just how politically correct does someone have to be before it stops being smart politics and becomes giving up on your principles? The actions taken by Obiwon just may be a step down a very slippery slope.

On the other hand, I read somewhere that BP is sucked up tighter than a cheap sweater with cap and tax.

I'm not angry right now. Just very sick of seeing the way my country is going.

87 He apologized? Idiot!!! He recanted? Genius!! Meanwhile, 8 times as much money as is going into the BP escrow fund was "lost" as a rounding error in the health care bill. The difference, of course, is that BP has to pay with real money while Congress gets to pay with money their kids haven't earned yet.

88 Judging by the GREY background on the comment boards...I'd say we're being monitored for our superior intellect and skepticism.  I fully expect to have a probe in my ass and orifices somewhere between here and Zeta Reticuli by next Thursday. 

89 Wow, Giuliani is fired up on MSNBC!

Real Clear Politics: Giuliani: If This Was Bush, He Would Have Been Impeached By Now

90 It was us.

91
But in that case we have a blog which thinks one way and a readership that thinks completely the other...

No, it's not like that, at all. The first thing we (i.e., you & Drew) need to do is to stop exaggerating and stop jumping to conclusions. For instance, it doesn't help when you accuse people of being on-board with BP.

92 I hate it when the parents are mad at us....

Posted by: Alex at June 17, 2010 05:05 PM (3TjEK)

When they divorce, it's your fault, you know.  Learn to love aerosols.

93 For what it's worth, I think all sides, when they aren't arguing strawmen, have a good point in this argument. That's why the passions are so high, I think, both sides, substantively, have a pretty good point. I also think that's why most of our aggressions gets taken out on each other. Unlike when we argue trolls, we are actually discussion things with intelligent counter-parts, so it gets the dander up. You always hurt the ones you love, you know. It's too bad it comes out like that but that's just the way life is. See? I'm a uniter, not a divider. Just like Captain Kick Ass.

94 Everyone pull your pants down and start wanking. Everything is okay while your wanking. But I don't have to wank. Nikki Haley. Me. Bah, you know the rest.

95 I didn't know you weren't allowed to settle out of court anymore.

Posted by: ace at June 17, 2010 04:52 PM

"Do dis..or ima break your kneecaps" doesn't seem to me to be the normal part of a negotiating process

96 Yeah..but Drew thinks it's wrong to mention that
Posted by: beedubya at June 17, 2010 04:56 PM (AnTyA)

What I actually think is wrong is ignoring what I actually wrote and inserting some other version of what people think I wrote.

I don't mind people beating me up and having to defend my posts, I just prefer the critiques/attacks actually be based on the post.

97

Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Suffering leads to chafing. Chafing leads to rashes. Rashes lead to discomfort. Discomfort leads to irritability. Irritability leads to indigestion. Indigestion leads to poor appetite. Poor appetite leads to bad eating habits. Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet.

...you know, I'm not sure where I'm going with this.

Swollen feet means not being able to run from what scared you which leads to acceptance which leads to apathy which leads to ennui which leads to death.

Therefor,

Fear is the mind killer, the little death that brings total obliteration. You must face your fear, you must permit it to pass over you and through you, and when it is gone past you must turn your inner eye to see it's path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only you will remain.

And only then, may you control the spice.

Which is leaking into the gulf and causing fear.

The kind of fear people had when giant perhistoric earth-worms came up from the ground to devour them in the movie Tremors.

The movie Tremors, which.... starred Kevin Bacon.

98

Is this a bad time to bring up the topic of whether Rush Limbaugh calling for Obama to fail was valid or not?

*ducks*

99 So, like, pointless.

If we always agreed, that, in fact, would be pointless. We are in fact [Checks URL] at AoSHQ; The home of the annual "I hope he fails" friendly pistol duel to the death. The refuge of hand spitting throat slitting bacon eating hobo beating action, I vote we don't take name calling and disagreement personally.

100 My take on this is that if you're looking for a conservative hero in this mess, you're looking in vain. It's one of the perils of living in a mercantilist state-run economy. BP was obviously negligent, and thoroughly deserves the pronging they're getting (and then some); but Obama's famous antipathy to the British is coming out in his rhetoric against BP, and further alienating our most valuable ally. Remember: this isn't just about BP. It's about our relationship to Britain. There were many ways to punish BP for their fuckery that didn't include pissing off our most valuable ally. Obama's dislike of the British is causing both them and us lasting harm -- harm that won't be magically healed when a Republican president takes office.

101

When they divorce, it's your fault, you know.  Learn to love aerosols.

30 years of therapy undone by a single comment.  Thanks a bunch. 

102 Oh, I need some Excedrin for this one.

103
That's why the passions are so high, I think, both sides, substantively, have a pretty good point.

You are useless!

hahah, just kidding.

^{no, but seriously, pick a side Johnny McFencesitter or gtfo}

104 So, I guess this is not a good time to talk long bows?

105

Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. ... Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet.

Dude, I have gout. You know what inflames the hell out of gout? Shrimp! Seriously, I can barely walk the day after having shrimp.

I won't say there's a conspiracy in play here, but ...

... no. I've probably said too much already.

106 Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Suffering leads to chafing. Chafing leads to rashes. Rashes lead to discomfort. Discomfort leads to irritability. Irritability leads to indigestion. Indigestion leads to poor appetite. Poor appetite leads to bad eating habits. Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet.

...you know, I'm not sure where I'm going with this.

Posted by: Monty at June 17, 2010 05:04 PM

Going toward your next financial round-up?

107 Henry II specifically ordered the execution of Thomas Becket. He did it on the request of space aliens who implanted a small nuclear device in his neck. For reals.

108 If this had been a CITGO rig, we'd have put 20 billion dollars in escrow for Venezuela, lest Hugo go hungry.

109 That's why the passions are so high, I think, both sides, substantively, have a pretty good point.

Dude this is a circular firing squad. Is that where you really want to stand? In the middle?

110 42 >>>This post is part of a conspiracy to blow up the site.

I gotta tell you that right now, at this moment, I don't care.

I should care. This is a valuable site.

Right now I don't care. I don't care.

Posted by: ace at June 17, 2010 04:58 PM (66DVY)

Well, actually, Ace, I've been having a hard time caring, too. But mostly, what I've been having a hard time caring about is what's going to happen when people who care about the rule of law decide there is no rule of law in this country anymore, and get violent. Revolutionarily violent.

You see, apparently some commenters here - and a lot of Republicans in the House - are so busy trying to win the next election that they are overlooking the way the Obama administration is gutting sodomizing THE RULE OF LAW. GM and Chrysler bondholders might not be so worried about if Rep. Barton phrased his statement as inelegantly as he could have. The same goes for BP shareholders (from what I heard on TV today, one in 6 investors in the UK and one in 7 investors in the USA).

I can't blame you for your ennui. It happens to everybody at some point. But please don't overlook the big picture here: Barton drew attention to a problem even bigger than the BP spill - the transition from a constitutional republic to a thugocracy.

Maybe its time for another guns, ammo and survival food bacon thread. I know they always lift my spirits (among other things).

111 And yes, I didn't care much for that "little people" comment that Hayward lofted like a broccoli-fart into the air. He just confirmed the old American suspicion that upperclass Brits still think of us as grubby colonial yokels.

112

What if we're not angry, just quietly noting that rule of law means little to this administration, and it's probably good to point that out when evidence presents itself?

That said, BP is in bed with Obama over C&T, so I'm hardly about to shed a tear for them.

113 I did not read or watch what Barton said.  I have watched the Congressional Show Trial of Tony Hayward and it is quite frankly sickening.  This is Soviet Style public hanging  by ignorant preening congress critters who have bankrupted a once great country and destroyed the best health care system in the world.

 Obviously BP was focused on profits over safety, that is the DNA of corporations it is the job of federal regulators to counter that DNA, they did NOT that is at Obama's door and these worthless self-righteous Democrats trying to deflect blame from themselves.  I hate these public scourgings, they are all for Congress to act like they actually care about anything but naked power.  I hope the day comes they have to sit in a seat and defend their actions.

114

I think the problem here is that some of us are, ideologically, conservative.  Being conservative means, among other things, not being reactionary.  Being conservative means you study something from all perspectives and try to assess all possible ramifications before implementing political policies.  And the U.S. government grabbing a handful of a private corporation's cash to dole out as it sees fit is, in the end, a political policy.  It's akin to grabbing the taxpayer's hard earned wages to dole out as the government sees fit.  We've seen what happens when that is done.  It is not a pretty sight.  And the "small people" generally take it on the chin in favor of government chronies.  As a conservative, I've watched this administration govern based on little more than reaction to immediate crises.  That is worst possible way to formulate public policy.  I am very hesitant to say "Well, OK!" to another government slush fund without knowing all the details.  And, of course, we won't know the details until it's just too late.

115 #113 and #120: Hey I'm keeping my dog out of this fight. Just practicing running for office!

116 122 I don't think Hayward made that remark. The guy who did was Scandinavian. (Unless they both said it.)

117 publicly defending BP is a really fucking stupid political move?

Amazing. It's politically safe to defend the right to piss in a cup and put a crucifix in it, but NOT to defend the right to due process.

118

Who is defending BP? No one.

Some people are defending due process. And me, like a dummy, am defending the word apology, or...I dunno, something.

Barton apologized for the way BP is being treated.  How is that anything other than defending BP?

It doesn't matter if Obama is anally raping BP with a broken bottle.  Going on record defending BP is just plain stupid from a political standpoint.  With all the fuckups on the part of the Obama administration, you really think this is the angle to take? 

119 110 Monty - agreed - Brit pensioners shouldn't be bankrupted in a lynch-mob rush - we need to leave some meat on BP's bones even if it means some don't get a dollar-for-dollar payout, and Teh One would love nothing more than to matador the angry public up someone else's rosebud on this.

120 Gulf oil is PEEEPLE!!!

okay I just wanted to get that out there

121

122 And yes, I didn't care much for that "little people" comment that Hayward lofted like a broccoli-fart into the air. He just confirmed the old American suspicion that upperclass Brits still think of us as grubby colonial yokels.

He's not British is he?

122 Posted by: a sign post up ahead at June 17, 2010 05:03 PM (uFokq)

I just did a quick scan of my comments on that thread. Where did I call you or anyone stupid or get really out of line?

I did mockingly question if English is your first language because you were putting words in my mouth.

Is that what you are referring to?

I'd love for you to tell me what comments were so out of line. I'd be happy to apologize if I did.

123 I know this post has a baiting title, but obviously, you don't want to hear from Drew or I. Opinions are what they are and they are clung to with a vigor I wasn't expecting, but... That's fine. But in that case there's just no point arguing. Here's what I think: I think many people believe the GOP itself, the "Establishment Party Apparatus," have actually been keeping down a series of ideas and attitudes and impulses. And if the Establishment stopped preventing people from pushing these ideas to market, they would catch on in the market. So there is a lot of anger at RINOs/establishment types like me, because, this theory goes, it is not the PUBLIC which has rejected these ideas, but only the establishment, which has blockaded the ideas from the public. And, if you believe that, then fine: It's time to push aside the fuddy-duddy worryworts like me and boldy go to market with a very uncompromising (and uncompromised) strong-form Paulian/Hayekian platform. And see how the public likes these ideas. Now, personally, I already know he answer, and I know you're wrong about this. (I know you think the same thing, only in reverse.) So I know this is going to be a disaster. But I can't prove that, not unless/until you get the chance to try. I really did not want to try now because I thought it was so, so important to defeat the Democrats and prepare for 2012 and evicting Obama from office. But I do sense that is, for many, a secondary concern, or at least one only equal to the historic opportunity to push strong-form laissez-faire libertarian/social conservatism out to market and see how it flies. So... Okay. We have different missions. I think this is going to be a disaster. That is why the GOP has slammed Barton so hard. Because he spoke a calamity. But you think he has Righteousness on his side. There is no compromise on this. You want your Righteousness, straight up no chaser, and it is of no avail to I plead with you to consider the fact that not one in four American voters is a hard-core Paulite/Hayakian. You are determined to take this path. Take it. I guess I will be around in four years' time to ask how the project went. I mean, I'll be here too. I'm not quitting the blog. But I am not part of this movement. I'm just not. I have been trying to fudge and compromise (and I suppose you have to) but at the end of the day-- I'm not one of you. We do have, as I feared, now two parties here. There is a split. That might mean that I'm not a Republican anymore (or at least for now, as we attempt this doomed project), and just a Republican-leaning independent. And that's fine, too -- a party gets to define itself. I shouldn't sulk because I'm being outvoted. But you really, really, REALLY need to consider this: You keep saying you have no fear that you'll lose people with this strong-form of the ideology. Well, guess what? As of today, I am really wondering where I am politically. So you CAN lose people by insisting on the full loaf.

124 ace, we have a chair with your name on it.  Anger is just a part of it, man.  You gotta learn to just go with it.  Very similar to when the grand mals hit.  Ride it out like a wave.

125

You know where the oil mess is? The Gulf of Mexico!

Does anyone really think this would have happened in (say) the Gulf of Wyoming or the Gulf of Kansas?

Hmmm?

126 74 Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Suffering leads to chafing. Chafing leads to rashes. Rashes lead to discomfort. Discomfort leads to irritability. Irritability leads to indigestion. Indigestion leads to poor appetite. Poor appetite leads to bad eating habits. Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet.

...you know, I'm not sure where I'm going with this.




I thought you were doing a riff on The Road Warrior at first.

127

Some damned odd stuff going on around here.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at June 17, 2010 05:05 PM (ZESU0)

Don't look at me. I just wanna be able to get married. Maybe I'll post on that.

128 Well that's interesting Ace.....I'm thinking they are going to restructure BP, the American company is going to go bankrupt and tony is going to fire himself.

129 Monty, that was my objection in the Thread That Should Not Be.  There are international implications for BP's financial commitment, and if the appearance is that this was a political act as opposed to a legal action, then it will tarnish our relationship further.  As noted, wait until the Brit papers get a hold of Barton's quote. 

130 "So you CAN lose people by insisting on the full loaf. " If only we lived in a world where all of humanity wasn't bound by a dichotomy made up on the spot some Thursday afternoon at Ace. Alas, we must play the hand we are dealt. Now I have to go re-read the post to decide which whole loaf I am going to demand.

131 "Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet, toes, ankles, knees, fingers, hands and elbows and blinding, incapacitating pain."

FIFY - And the treatment leads to persistent projectile diarrhea that will blow thru a screen door at 20 paces and not leave a speck...

132 The oil is emanating from underneath the Denver International Airport.

133 Gabriel, don't get married.  Just find a woman man you hate and give him your house. 

134  Obviously BP was focused on profits over safety, that is the DNA of corporations it is the job of federal regulators to counter that DNA,
Posted by: Jehu

Warmed over socialist tripe. They got stuck with this mess by trying to ingratiate themselves with the Carbon trading schemes and green engergy bullshit.

They've spent millions on that trying to be the good proggy company only to have it rear back and snap their neck. Millions of dollars that they could have spent properly securing rigs and emergency measures, were tossed at lefty asshole bullshit motherfuckers and 'sustainable bullshit.'

Profit?  Try this ass, they were play by your fucking rules so you own it.

135 BP should have to pay - out the ass.  That's a no-brainer, and therefore a specialty of mine.
However, my primary concern remains - why the FUCK are they spending so much time grilling Tony Hayward (who isn't going to give up any information of value, anyway), worrying about filing charges and who's going to pay for what (or else!)...how about they get the damn leak stopped first, and then the lawyers and politicians can have at it?  I don't care who apologizes to who, who takes it back, how many different ways you can ask a CEO the same damn question before you get the hint that he's not gonna answer - STOP THE LEAK.  Period. 

136 Albert Haynesworth sucks fat cock.

137

Ace does this anytime he or anyone posting articles gets yelled at for missing a point.

So he's defending Drew's cockeyed point about being more concerned with word choice and ignoring completely the fact that the Administration extorted 20 billion from BP in violation of the Constitution and the principles of the Founders. See, word choice is more important to talk about and Ace'll make sure you agree with his writers or you get more of this stuff.  This stuff = passive agressive to the max.

So, Ace gets all hyperbolic and basically accuses anyone who disagrees of saying something quite ridiculous."what Barton said was 100% right, and we absolutely must stand behind this stalwart, and it's pure communism if we don't." After a while, he tends to lump everyone who disagrees into one basket and declares that he's tired of the ad hominem attacks that 3 people have uttered but lumps them with the rest of the dissenters. So suddenly you go from disagreeing to being accused of wild attacks and utterly ridiculous assertions.

It'll get filled up and he'll declare that someone has spoiled it all for him and he'll accuse someone like myself, left-handedly, of being an instigator or being unreasonable and justifying his putting of hyperbolic statements in the mouths of people who disagree with him.

Standard procedure, really.  He's basically call anyone concerned about something like the rule of law over Drew's take on word choice something like a Birther or a Bircher, and then he'll get mean.

When he's caught on it, like I caught him back when Palin resigned and he accused me of some conflated thing someone else did, he'll never come back and post an acknowledgment or apology.

 

138 Of course 9/11 was an inside job.

The attack was ordered by Al Gore and Bill Clinton as a retaliation for the Republicans "stealing" the election in 2000 and was meant to embarrass the then-new administration.  The entire operation was bankrolled by George Soros, and the black-ops operation itself was run by Valerie Plame.

The demolitions were secretly laid by SEIU members masquerading as building inspectors, with disguised Greenpeace activists doing the grunt work.  Meanwhile, the planes were flown by remote control using Hollywood special effects experts (who were in turn recruited by Barbara Streisand, Charlie Sheen, and Rosie O'Donnell).  The WTC was chosen as the primary target because it was a symbol of the capitalistic system destroying our environment, because it was deemed a blow against the corporate pirates who are preventing the US from becoming the worker's paradise the DNC central committee wanted, and because Hillary thought it ruined Manhattan's skyline.  The Pentagon was added later to the list of targets because Bill Ayers kept insisting.

Hey, makes about as much sense as the conspiracy theories the Truthers do believe in.

139

Amazing. It's politically safe to defend the right to piss in a cup and put a crucifix in it, but NOT to defend the right to due process.

Funny, that's exactly the reasoning the "human rights activists" used to bemaon the treatment of terrorists overseas.

Is there a specific law being broken?  If so, let BP's lawyers raise that arguement.  Publicly defending an entity that is almost universally despised out of a misguided attempt to score political points?  How tone deaf does one have to be to agree with that tactic?

The vast majority of voters are looking to see heads roll, with that of BP at the top of the list. 

140 #138 HA! That's why we need in this thread! And btw, pretty historic that we have ace and two co-bloggers in the comments at the same time. We should fight more often.

141 75 On conspiracy, I've heard at least 3 variations on the "Obama's declaring marital law before November"
_______________

Obama's getting involved in the Prop. 8 fight now?

(yeah, i know, just couldn't help myself)

142

Don't look at me. I just wanna be able to get married. Maybe I'll post on that.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at June 17, 2010 05:24 PM (0JsTF)

Jeez, Gabe - why would you want to go and ruin a perfectly good friendship like that?

143 But we are getting away from the fact that Obama just extorted 20 billion that'll go who knows where. Can we talk just about how heinous that is? Or am I suggesting a purity test or something? Honestly, this is pretty f'n scary.

144 Some funny stuff #5. Weee Doggies, that was good!!

145 I do not understand how people could insist that it's time to defend BP's corporate rights when they haven't yet really been able to convnice the public of the much easier case they should get a business tax cut. It's this insistence on leading with the weakest punches in the repetoir, as if basic strategy is "faggy" or something. But fine. Lead with Rand Paul's thing on the civil rights act and this BP thing. Because not a thing I can say can disabuse you of the belief that these are some wildly popular ideas, if only someone would speak up for them. You have a right to your experiment. I think it's a really bad time for that, but experiment away. I think I just might stop posting about anything that that might divide the hard-core from moderates.

146 122 And yes, I didn't care much for that "little people" comment that Hayward lofted like a broccoli-fart into the air. He just confirmed the old American suspicion that upperclass Brits still think of us as grubby colonial yokels.

It was the German guy that said that not Hayward.  Also are we to become hyper-sensitive and insulted by anything?  It was said the way we talk about the little-people, all in the context of "regular folks,"  Are we now liberals?  All filled with hatred for CEO's and the rich, or for some guy that does not know the nuances of American Idioms. 

Start pretending that all these Exec are also human beings, not automatic rapers of the planet.  Two things happened here IMO.  A big, big corp that had a profits over other concerns culture, it bit them in the ass, huge.  We also had a incestuous regulatory system that probably has existed all the way back. Everyone stinks in this one.  I have no desire to see old ladys in Brittan shivering this winter because Americans are going to drain every drop of blood for this mistake, something really unseemly in our behavior right now.  Hold BP accountable, of course, but our own government is far more responsible for the original spill, and for the response.  In the congressional Kangaroo Inquest today one idiot Dem mentions how BP had the worst safety record by far of all the oil companies, yet these same morons licensed them to deep-water drill?

147 I think it's time for a movie review, Ace.

148 Beck "the criminally negligent media is showing you birds with oil all over them they don't have time to show you pictures of billionaires with grease all over their palms"

149 So, are we being prepped for a "Why I Left The Right" post?

150 Frak.  There were like 10 comments when I wrote that comment in the 70s.  I thought this was another 'ace needs to pick a fight thread' rather than the 'ace calls a truce through sarcasm.'

Standing down now.

151 Alex, that's a good point; who's going to be minding the store - all $20 billion of it?  We already have some pretty solid evidence that the clowns in charge aren't very good with other people's money. 

152

FDR was totally behind the Pearl Harbor bombing. Seriously!  HE WAS EVEN THERE FOR THE LAUNCHING OF THE FIRST ATTACK SQUADRONS!!!!!!1111!111!  The Japs even had a handicapped spot painted for FDR's wheelchair on the deck of the flagship carrier, the Akagi, so he could be on deck to watch the first wave take off. 

True story!!!

 

153

I broke the dam Deepwater Horizon.

Actually, I had Hagbard do it with that nifty Sub of his.

154 I think I just might stop posting about anything that that might divide the hard-core from moderates.

Maybe a good idea, at least until after November.

And jack up the perverse profanity and anatomically impossible deviant sex act count back up.  It's been slacking lately.

155 Whoa, ace, narrow that stance, a bit, would ya?

156

...of Course, Hagbard had no idea I was behind it. 

We couldn't have that, now could we?

He thinks he was working for the Sikh whose strings were being pulled by the Mossad.

 

 

157

Monty, that was my objection in the Thread That Should Not Be.  There are international implications for BP's financial commitment, and if the appearance is that this was a political act as opposed to a legal action, then it will tarnish our relationship further.  As noted, wait until the Brit papers get a hold of Barton's quote. 

The Brits don't vote in US elections.  Americans do- and 90% of Americans aren't going to have a problem with harsh measures against BP, regardless of how fair and proper they might be.

Let BP defend itself.  If the Brits have a problem, they can address it themselves.  Taking BP's side in this- even if they're being treated unfairly- is political suicide and Barton was an idiot for doing so. 

158 Don't look at me. I just wanna be able to get married.

You can. The government just doesn't pat you on the head and say "That's my boy!" if you do it. Don't be such a pussy.

159 "So he's defending Drew's cockeyed point about being more concerned with word choice and ignoring completely the fact that the Administration extorted 20 billion from BP in violation of the Constitution and the principles of the Founders." See, it's not. See, if you hit me with your car, it is not extortion for me to demand a cash payment in lieu of my filing suit. In fact, if you look up "extortion," you will find that that is one of the SPECIFIC exceptions. It's a specific exception because -- OF COURSE YOU CAN DO THAT! Are you making a threat? Yes! But it's a threat you are legally entitled to make. Threatening suit is (look it up) specifically not extortion, by law. Look, BP did this voluntarily, dig? The government didn't make them. It didn't seize assets. The government told them the country was pissed off and the government would seek all legal remedies if it didn't do this, and, frankly, it was going to have to do this, anyway, because I'm pretty sure the cap doesn't apply to punitive damages, and of course BP would get wacked with those. I know you think it's important. I can't prove to you it's not. I lack proof. Nor can I prove to you that the public thinks you sound naively corporate-loving when you burst out with these (to their minds) strange views of corporate rights. But okay-- I can't prove it. You will just have to test your theories. I think you're going to wind up regretting the fact that you treated "politics" and "strategy" as dirty words, but fine: I can't prove it, so you will have to learn as most things are learned. Unfortunately, as they say, experience is a harsh teacher. If you're willing to sacrifice 2010 and 2012 for these principles, fine. Fine. It's your party.

160 #163 It feels like it but I sincerely hope not.

161
If I'm understanding Ace he thinks we'd rather stick our fingers in our ears instead of sometimes hearing the ugly truth about our people?

Let me ask you this: Now that it has been settled and the obligatory apology has been issued, what's the point?

What was the whole point of it? We're right back to being the Asshole Party, which is where we started the day. So why was it necessary for us to join the Democrats and beat the shit out of Barton?

We gained nothing from it and now we're even more diminished as a party. For what, journalistic integrity? The truth?

We could have ignored the whole thing, sat on the sidelines, and ended up a little ahead of the game at the end of the day. But instead we played right into the Democrats' hands and that's what most of us are sick of and we take it out in the comments.

162

No, not really.

Another straw man burns.

Thank you for that very thoughful and convincing argument.

163 Just wait-everyone in the SEIU is going to be driving a new Caddy next year, paid for by the taxpayers and BP. There's a conspiracy theory you can really sink your teeth into.

164 "Dude, I have gout. You know what inflames the hell out of gout? Shrimp! Seriously, I can barely walk the day after having shrimp." - Firehorse

See your Doc about getting on Allopurinol.  I've been on one 300mg tab a day for a few years now, and after I built up to a therapeutic level in my system, I haven't had an attack since.  And I eat and drink everything I want, including shrimp.

It's also on the $4 'script list at Wally World pharmacy.

165

So, are we being prepped for a "Why I Left The Right" post?

Have you ever seen Ace and Charles Johnson in the same place at the same time?

166 Thank you, Forger. I certainly will.

167 FEMA and UNATCO are conspiring to give the population the Gray Death, even though they have the Ambrosia cure, they're refusing to mass manufacture it so they can whittle the human population down to a more controllable size.

168 The whole world is conspiring against me. That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.

169 You guys are stating the wrong crime. This isn't extortion, it's money laundering.

170 Does every unpopular move have to be "suicide"? Every ill-timed remark "idiocy"? People here have vocabularies, they should use them. I know we're somehow supposed to be in a race to break into competing snark-camps the second a new post pops up, but it's getting kinda tiresome, no?

171 Looks cautiously behind  him .
Rubs forefinger on side of nose .

Says in a conspiratorial whisper , "It's the Masons".

172

I think a lot of this bluster we see from people within the Republican party is just that: crazy shit you say around your friends that you wouldn't repeat to the general public.

Its funny, despite the chasm most people imagine the D's and R's have between them, I could see Joe Lieberman making the same type of statement ace just made about the fringe left repulsing him more and more.

And folks, drew is right; the last thing we need is a bunch of idealogues who are picking their hills to die upon. If you're determined to burst naked from the room and run screaming into the light for the world to see, at least try to wait until our party can fix the fucking country first, mmmmkay?

173 You know the funny part? BP is probably fine with paying the $20B. Well, relatively fine.

It's an obscene amount of money in the real world but not in theirs. Would they rather not pay it? Of course. But they are a business and they know this is a cost of doing business for them.

They want to continue to exist and if this helps make that happen, then they will write the checks.

174 134 Ace:

Basically that was my point in the prior thread.  Giving everyone who dissents the Mike Savage treatment isn't going to win elections and when the give-me-my-damned-country-back screamers manage to drive off everyone who disagrees with some scintilla of their agenda, they'll be crying in their beer come November.

Your past posts regarding "buying-in" covered that ground nicely. 

Our county is being run by a Marxist Manchurian Candidate and two corrupt grinning stooges because "my way or the highway" doesn't work in a democracy.  I'll be here with you to say we told you so when they're trying to drown their sorrows with an all-empty glass .

I see the usual suspects from the prior thread are weighing in on your apostasy.  Don't let their flak change your approach and certainly don't worry about divisive posts.

175 Seriously, Ace. You're being a bit of a baby. No one is defending BP's idiocy. We're just calling out Obama on his thuggery. They're not one in the same. The idea that they are is Democrat strategy and shouldn't be ours.

176 My beef is with due process. BP should pay for damages to the extent they are responsible; so should Hallibuton and the platform company, as appropriate.

Right now the following needs to be done:
1. plug the damn hole - BP
2. protect the coastline - Fed, State and Local govn'ts
3. clean up the mess - BP, Fed, State and Local govnt's
4. Investigate and assign blame through the court system - Plaintiffs and Defendents and the Courts.
5. Review findings, craft law - Legislative Branch

177

Ace, so what is your position on Barton? I wanna know if it is like mine (Apology = too much, 'shakedown' = correct)

PS I didn't post on other thread so dont be mad at me

178 Extortion or not I'm not real comfortable with the entire idea of a president calling a CEO in and telling them what they are going to do. Little to latin american for my tastes. 20 billion on demand, folks. Let's keep our eyes on the prize. Extortion or not this isn't the kind of precedent we want to set.

179

 I think Barton suffered from foot in mouth disease just a bit, but he was right to say it.

And what Monty said @110 and some others have said about rule of law and a thugocracy, and cap and trade and...

 

and it's a flipping damn conspiracy that I ALWAYS miss out on the exciting stuff around here (and it's patently unfair as well)...I blame Boosh (and possibly Ace)

180

Back to the conspiracy theories ...

Anyone ever notice that there were three consecutive Super Bowls that featured exactly three teams? Those teams were Washington, Buffalo and Dallas.

Anyone know what distinguishes those three cities from every other city in America?

Coincidence?

181 You guys are stating the wrong crime. This isn't extortion, it's money laundering.

Posted by: Randy at June 17, 2010 05:41 PM (zQKSr)

Don't forget "collusion".

182

Wow..the boss and several cob loggers are here....

...is this an intervention?

183 Okay. We have different missions.

In my account, we have been on a fairly steady (with the exception of 8 years in 80) leftward slide for a long time. At this point I feel the US is this close [Measures distance with micrometer] to conversion to euro-socialism. Stopping that trend and in fact reversing it is my mission.

What's yours?

184 I blame everything on Satanism and Radon.

185

"You have a right to your experiment. I think it's a really bad time for that, but experiment away. "

The stakes are a lot higher now, but the odds are more in our favor than they tend to be, and they are trending the other way. So what I think you'd call 'purists' are trying to hit onw out of the park and turn the game around when they see a nice, easy pitch coming, rather than merely close the gap with a sacrifice fly.

That and there realy aren't two camps, but a spectrum, with al of us sharing your concerns but drawing the ine in different laces. So make the case for your line, Ace, which you do with your wit and style, and lose the passive-aggressive whining.

186

If you're willing to sacrifice 2010 and 2012 for these principles, fine.

Thus, you're willing to sacrifice the rule of law for 2010 and 2012. right?

Put me some know-ment-ness unto my head noggin.

 

187 This whole situation is screwed up four ways to Sunday.

Firstly, Barton is right--this is a shakedown.  But secondly, I believe it's a perfectly legal shakedown.  Thirdly, I believe it's a very bad idea, because it's going to open the door to all sorts of fraud, just like we saw after Katrina and the 9/11 fund.  Fourth, even though Barton was right, and even though it's a very bad idea, he was still stuck on stupid when he apologized to the CEO of the company who's screwed up safety procedures led to the worst environmental catastrophe in the Gulf since Ixtoc blew out and spilled (by some estimates) 200 million gallons of crude.

188

Have you ever seen Ace and Charles Johnson in the same place at the same time?

*gasp* I just realized I have never seen Ace...dun...dun...dun

 

189 181 - Firehorse, No prob.  I know how bad that shit hurts, so I try to help others with it when I can.  I got it in my left knee once and it swelled up to about soccerball size and I could feel the blood going thru it with every heartbeat, and it HURT!!

 Allopurinol has worked for me for about a decade now. 

190

I would like to make an argument or at least ask the question if there is precedent for the executive branch being involved in this and not the judiciary, but i don't want to offend the management with my cant, rhetoric, pretense, humbug, balderdash..thesaurus.

 

But BP pure evil. Government good.  Escrow Account with no limits or rules good. Judicial system to settle greivances bad.

Who cares if there is law or regulations on how to deal with this events like this. The mob wants heads and by golly everyone needs to join the mob regardless of where it leads us and what precedents it sets, because really isn't what Barton said just as bad if not worse than the leak itself? I think we should focus more on what a republican representative said at an inquisition hearing than the leak, cause of the leak, the governments ineptitude, Obama's terrible speech or anything else. Really.

 

 

191

_{It's an obscene amount of money in the real world but not in theirs.}

It isn't now that I've had the Fed Print Money almost as fast as I can spend it!!!

 

192 174: Ace

Disclaimer - I'm not positive that the Feds have the same standards, so anyone feel free to correct my shit if I'm off base.

For BP to get hit for punitive damages, the plaintiffs would need to show more than gross negligence but rather malice or reckless indifference amounting to malice, and likely have a higher burden of proof (malice here in CA is a "clear and convincing" standard rather than "preponderance of the evidence" - call it 75% proof compared to 51%) - not a gimme although given the public attitude re: BP, that hurdle might be easier to clear.

From what I've seen so far negligence would be provable but malice might not.

193 >>>I think most Americans are on board, and I think you already knew that or you wouldn't have conflated this John Adams ideal with Paulians. I don't know what you mean by "on board." If you mean with your ideology, no, I don't think that. I think the watered-down version which the establishment sells by rubbing down the hard edges gets 53% at its BEST, but you keep telling me if we are purer on everything we'll get more than that. And I say to you the liberal Democrats made that same case to themselves, and now they face disaster. (Disaster which, I am sad to say, will be blunted by my former co-partisans making the exact same mistakes.) >>>I do think there is a problem with the 'establishment' thwarting a lot of great people and ideas. I think you actually agree with this. Only in a few cases, and in others, I figure it's a wash. But I think the guys who poll and focus-group every day know something that you don't. There is a reason -- I don't understand how you don't get this -- but there is a reason that a Republican presidential candidate hems and haws about abortion, and wishes to talk about it as little as possible, and why we (and you) claim media bias when the media focuses on this topic and keeps asking our guy questions about it. And that reason is -- abortion is not really a big vote loser, because the country is so divided on it, but it also is not a vote-getter, and if someone's going to be convinced, they'll be convinced by soft-pedaling a pro-life stance. I'm choosing this because you all know Republican presidential candidates do this -- get very quiet and vague about abortion. I know it angers you -- but I would invite you to ponder the reasons they are doing something that angers you. They are doing it because if they put pro-life front and center and talk uncompromising about it, they lose. Period. 55% will go along with a soft-pro-life position, but 55% will vote against a strong pro-life position. And if I'm wrong -- if 55% would vote for it -- how come we don't exploit that advantage? Again, I use abortion as just as an example. on many issues, the public is with us, 55%, on the soft-pedaled version of many issues. But basically stepping up to defend BP's right of corporate integrity is the hard-core position, the same as announcing "I want to make it murder to abort a fetus throughout the country." But you just keep insisting that's the way to win votes. Again, I can't convince you, you can't convince me. One of us is right and one of us wrong. But there is no sense continuing to argue about the same damn thing. You (or many, if not you) think the path to electoral success lie through stridency and strong-form ideology, even the controversial, public-no-like parts. I can't convince you otherwise and frankly I'm just tired of being the 'pussy" who's always yelling to NOT light a book of matches in a room full of gasoline and being told, "Yeah, that's the RINO yammering again." Fine, try it. You win. I offer counsel; you have soundly rejected it. There is no point to my (or Drew, or anybody) offering the same counsel, day-in, day-out. The "center-right" position barely gets 55% in a GREAT republican year but you are convinced the hard-right version will get the same numbers (or more). Fine. Try it. I give up. I cannot convince you not to sacrifice 2010 and 2012 for your quixotic need for a strong-form Paulite government.

194 146

Warmed over socialist tripe. They got stuck with this mess by trying to ingratiate themselves with the Carbon trading schemes and green engergy bullshit.

They've spent millions on that trying to be the good proggy company only to have it rear back and snap their neck. Millions of dollars that they could have spent properly securing rigs and emergency measures, were tossed at lefty asshole bullshit motherfuckers and 'sustainable bullshit.'

Profit?  Try this ass, they were play by your fucking rules so you own it.


Really?  So corporations do not exist to make profits?  They can slather on all the political correctness society is demanding, but a corporation exists to make profits.  I make no moral judgments about that FACT!  Most of my life I worked for corporations I WANT them to make profits to stay in business.  If BP was kissing politically correct ass, what does that have to do with the observation we have, or were supposed to have a system of regulated capitalism, or are you so wedded to an ideology you want to go back to the early day of Ford Motor Co, et al that had workers gunned down in the streets?

Everyone get some perspective about this, including you.  The problem exposed by this is not fundamentally about BP, other than corporations that are LICENSED to do risky things ought to actually be inspected and checked once in a while, or is that too communistic for you?  Personally I don't want to fly on an airline that is not under the FAA.

195 It's ALL Data Points, Ace!

196

Ace, so what is your position on Barton? I wanna know if it is like mine (Apology = too much, 'shakedown' = correct)

PS I didn't post on other thread so dont be mad at me

I read the other thread. It is always one or two people that get into flame like arguments with the bloggers, then the bloggers decide its time to be condescending to the rest of us.  It's actually one of my favorite parts political discourse.  Its like kicking the dog when you're mad at someone else.

 

197 I'm not a fan of BP. Never have been. They fucked up bigtime. But they had a shitload of help from the environmentalists and this administration. Why the fuck were they drilling in a mile of water? I hear they were forced to drill in deep water. They obviously had no real plan in place to deal with Murphy. They advertise constantly about their fucking "green technologies" which is mostly bullshit. They are probably controlled and run by left wingers. This administration screwed the pooch every bit as much as BP. And I hate this administration far more than BP. The administration is using this to push their socialist agenda. They are already doing it. They may have deliberately made the spill worse to help them push their agenda. Why else refuse foreign skimmers? The gulf will recover, but my concern is whether America will recover from this administration. They are using BP as a stalking horse. Make no mistake about that, and I will not participate.

198

Ace;

See, I think that the Administration is guilty of a crime committed in front of the news cameras. The administration has no power to impose a penalty, but since they have before directly threatened the lives and safety of members of other businesses (remember? Pitchforks, etc) then when they say they are merely threatening legal action, they are also doing something more. That something more is the clear threat of abuse of power which has been witnessed and publicized before.

So I see this as clearly as a violation of the Constituion, a high crime or misdemeanor.

Can you see the reasoning here?

I think that the fact the rule of law is being trampled is much more worthy of discussion than anticipated spin.

Drew did have a point as to the message enforcement by the party higher ups, but I believe you are wrong to equate concern for the rule of law to be somehow unrealistic, weird, and crazy as demanding that we eliminate the Air Force because it wasn't described by name in the Constitution.  Now that's Paulian weird, but I don't think a basic a full concern for the rule of law is anything to be flip about.

Do you see why someone can be passionate about the Constitution and the Founding concepts and principles of our Country and yet not be "paulian"?

 

199 society-- Yeah, if you're a lawyer, you know the public, like, doesn't really care very much about those finely-drawn differences in culpable mental state? They reason backwards. Do we think BP should pay punitive damages? We do? Okay, what mental state do we have to find for that? Gross negligence bordering on malice? Okay, done and done. Further, big companies ROUTINELY settle out of court, even if blameless, because they know juries think like that. I defended a McDonald's against a rape tort. Yeah, rape. A worker there had been followed into the parking lot after hours and raped. They could only find joint and several liability if they found MacDonald's was willfully negligent. Of course they claimed that. It was ridiculous, but they wanted to pay the victim out of MacDonald's pockets, so they did. They didn't care that it was absurd that MacDonald's could be "willuflly negligent" just for having parking-lot lights 30 watts less powerful than the ones the plaintiff's lawyers insisted were needed.

200 I tell you the type of candidates we NEED are like the governor of N.J.  If you cannot get that type then you cannot go to far out of the mainstream, however right inside of the Mainstream gives you a Dole or McCain.  They lose you elections just as much as the slightly nutty types. 

201 I read down to #74 and suddenly couldn't breath.  And I'm seeing gray spots.

202

Ace, the likelyhood that Republicans will put up a hard-core, dyed in the wool conservative for President are slim and none (slim having left the room), and you know it. I'm pretty hard-core conservative, but I will vote for any and every Republican i can find on a ballot in November. Although, frankly, I might have a hard time with Rand Paul, and i am really glad I don't live in either Rand's district, or his father's here in Texas. And I agree we have to keep our eye on the prize.

Come on, though, didn't just a little glimmer of agreement enter your mind when you heard about Barton? Just a tiny little bit?

203 By the way, since I apparently am required to say this, what Barton said was 100% right, and we absolutely must stand behind this stalwart, and it's pure communism if we don't. - Ace

Now, you're beginning to understand Texas. Bless your heart.

btw- That's the number two reason why I left h/a

204

Thread for Ranting and Conspiracy Theories

Friends. Friends.

205

Further, big companies ROUTINELY settle out of court, even if blameless, because they know juries think like that.

Aren't settlements clearly defined?

The plantiff gets a certain amount of money?

Has there ever been a settlement that was open ended?

Put 20 billion in an escrow account and we ask for more when we want it.

206

I defended a McDonald's

O.M.G.!! A member of the defense bar. I had no idea.

207 215 Ace - I covered my base on that one with my public attitude reference.  You're correct in seeing LA v. BP as fertile ground for a results-based judgment. 

The case you describe is what drives me nuts about tort law even though it's what I do from the plaintiffs' side.  The downside to reactive tort liability vs. pro-active regulation is the uncertainty for the business and the results-oriented, disregard the law verdicts.  It's something I have to pick and choose through on a case-by-case, "am I morally comfortable asserting this claim" basis.

208

Let me see if I understand you, Ace. Under your guidance, a Republican campaign for 2010 and 2012 should never speak about the rule of law and how it has been abused. If you were elected President, you would have no reason to worry if a flunky abused a publically derided person or organization by threatening extra-judicial punishment even before they had been charged with a crime.

You sound like you'd be okay with that happening, as long as it only happened to BP, the ACLU, and oh, say, the company that makes those goddamned noisemakers in the news.

It seems that you'd be unwilling to mention the rule of law if it did not apply to those the public dislikes.  How far is that position from one where there is no rule of law?

How am I overstating your position? I have to be overstating it somewhere, but I can't see where I'm making the over-reach.

See, Ace, you seem to be saying that the rule of law is secondary if the only people without the protection of the law are disliked.

That can't be. You're not that simple.

209 Nil Butron is a Pud.

210

Let me see if I understand you, Ace. [Strawman couched as paraphrase.]

Oh, yeah, that'll help.

211

We could have ignored the whole thing, sat on the sidelines, and ended up a little ahead of the game at the end of the day. But instead we played right into the Democrats' hands and that's what most of us are sick of and we take it out in the comments.

You're suggesting that we all play the "hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil" game when a Republican does something incredibly stupid and damaging to our side?

Shit like this should be addressed and denounced.  Yet, unbelieveably, we have people who, by agreeing with Barton's idiotic public statement, are defending BP.

You don't pick fights that can only have the outcome of benefitting your opponent.

 

212 >>>But I do not think the people defending Barton are 'paulians' or even extremists at all. I do. I think they're so determined to "get Obama' On every damn thing that they will take any position so long as it is opposite Obama -- even if that leaves them in a very precarious, indefensible opinion. And I think you're insane if you don't think that Republicans, historically, FACTUALLY, the more business-friendly, corporate-friendly party, don't sound like Plutocratic jerkoffs suddenly leaping up to scream about how shabbily poor BP is being treated. Are you nuts? Do you not know we have the reputation of being too comfy with monied interests? And we're supposed to start getting angry because Obama urged BP to set up an escrow fund for the payment of real claims that WILL be filed by THOUSANDS OF FISHERMEN? We're fucking siding with BP over the FISHERMEN?! What? Look: If principle really, REALLY not only demands you enter this fight on BP's side, but do so loudly, rather than, as I would suggest is far more prudent, *quietly*, in a reluctantly-I-am-compelled-to-say manner, then go ahead. I will say this: I have heard you (and all other conservatives, including me) be *quieter* about more important things. So if you're telling me principles demand you be out-and-proud on BP's side, I just don't believe you.; I think it is because *Obama* is specifically involved here, and you are allowing him to CHOOSE YOUR POSITION, because you must be 180 degrees opposite him. And he's leaving you with an awful position, and you're falling for it hook, line, and sinker. Barton could have quietly said "I'm very uncomfortable with the federal government being so cozy with BP and working out deals in backrooms," rather than seeming like Superman coming to the rescue of Lois Lane as she's getting mugged.

213

Weinshaupt is a pawn.

I was using him.  In order to run Bearer Bonds, bought with Heroin Funds from the Taliban,  to the Gulf Region.  Normally, I'd steer clear of the German Freak, but I needed a cloaking mission. The Illuminati fell for it, hook line and sinker.

Now that the Bonds have been exchanged for some epic Peruvian Blue: Which I will then trade to an un-named US Official for a Copy of President Obama's Thrid Grade Science Project and a chunk of Kennedy's Left Cerebral Cortex. 

I'll make a mighty profit off of that in North Korea. 

That and some assorted Small Arms to be traded to the FARC for the release of a few Hostages that I am eager to be reunited with.  Then it's off to Amsterdam!

I'm running dry and this sub gets all claustrophobic when I'm not high.

It's all very simple really.  

The Oil Spill was a necessary diversion to get the Sikh off our tail. 

214
Gabe, you're not helping.

We're trying to mend fences and come to an understanding. You're being a little prick.

I know you're a little fed up with some of the response you've been getting lately, too, but now's not the time.

215

Gabe,

It wasn't and isnt' a strawman. I explicitly say, "Where's my overreach?" and I clearly say my conclusion has to be wrong based on Ace character.

He is saying that if the subject of a horrible, unconstitutional wrong is merely a hated entity, one must never talk about it in a negative way because it weakens the Party.  That the public won't value the rule of law over their media-pumped hatred.

I can't agree, and I don't think what I understand and am paraphrasing is at all correct. I must be mistaking something, I have to be misunderstanding his position. 

 

216 Hmmmm.

I believe that the Victoria's Secret supermodels are all actually fembots designed to lull us men into complacency.  Then they'll emerge from their underground factories and totally fuck us to death.

Can't wait.

217 Hey, Inspector-- Liberals believed, in all sincerity, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's rights had been violated by being waterboarded 187 times. Did President Obama come rushing to KSM's defense? No. He spoke quietly about this. Surely you concede that some "victims" are so repulsive that it's unwise to be seen as too close to them or too sympathetic to their "plight," don't you?

218

_{Posted by: ace at June 17, 2010 06:11 PM (66DVY)}

Ace -

Do you think that these funds have any chance of being distributed impartially?  I have a sneaky suspicion that we will see this disbursment mirror that of the Stimulus. 

 

219 What I don't want to see is the Bills winning the Super Bowl. As long as I'm alive that doesn't happen.

220

Under your guidance, a Republican campaign for 2010 and 2012 should never speak about the rule of law and how it has been abused.

Inspector, that doesn't bear any resemblance to what Ace has argued. Particularly the part "should never speak about the rule of law and how it has been abused."

 

221 >>>>See, Ace, you seem to be saying that the rule of law is secondary if the only people without the protection of the law are disliked. Yeah, that's right, I"m saying it has some fucking give in it, because KSM was probably tortured or something like that and supposedly that's against the law and you know what? The Rule of Law can take a fifteen minute break on this and go have a cigarette while we finish waterboarding him. And that fact of the matter is: There is a lot to get angry about, a lot of the "rule of law" being broken, and yet you choose to get animated over THIS instance. Not other instances. Republicans seem incapable, it seems, of getting angry over the fact that we permitted deep drilling without a relief well (secondary well in case the first leaked), which other countries do, but which we did not. No anger or passion there! But here, on this, comes the PASSION. ANd what do you think that makes people think? How do you think that looks? A bad thing happened here, with lax standards and no required relief well (guess what-- money changed hands; rule of law implicated). and a bad thing happned, maybe, over here (Obama is threatening a major multinational corporation to pay some money they have to pay anyway). And WHICH of these two do you CHOOSE to focus your PASSION on? You think people are stupid? You think they aren't making some evaluations based on your CHOICES as to what to get all fired-up about?

222 74 Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Suffering leads to chafing. Chafing leads to rashes. Rashes lead to discomfort. Discomfort leads to irritability. Irritability leads to indigestion. Indigestion leads to poor appetite. Poor appetite leads to bad eating habits. Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet.

...you know, I'm not sure where I'm going with this.

Posted by: Monty at June 17, 2010 05:04 PM (4Pleu)

And swollen feet leads to the dark side. 

223


Men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government.

224

Ace,

 

the barton statement aside

Has there ever been a settlement like this?

Some questions i have that a lawyer may be able to answer..

- it is open ended, there is not set amount. 20 billion to start

- are there any rules for how the 20 billion is spent?

-What is the filing process, who decides if a grievance is legitimate? someone from the executive or judicial branch

 

225

>> We're trying to mend fences and come to an understanding. You're being a little prick.

Put down the nail gun.

 

226 You know what? I already dreaded this whole thing, earlier. I was doing some chores and Limbaugh was on ranting and raving like an imbecile and I knew, I knew, Great, there's the storyline, wonderful, now 50% of the party is going to be fucking committed to a ridiculous position. I already knew, awful day.

227

Have you ever seen Ace and Charles Johnson in the same place at the same time?

*gasp* I just realized I have never seen Ace...dun...dun...dun

The 2008 CPAC Blogger of the Year:

http://bit.ly/d1FfuX

228 Barton could have criticized Obama (pbuh) without sounding like a shill for BP.  Regardless of whether anyone might think that what he said was reasonable, it was politically stupid, and for that he was smacked down. I happen to agree with him, but we all need to be smarter than that if our goal is to eviscerate the leviathan that Obama is busily building.

229 Dare I bring up the epistemological closure issue?

Because a lot of conservatives live in red states, have right wing friends and neighbors, listen to Rush and other conservative talk shows, watch Fox and read this blog among others, and I think this gives them an exaggerated sense of the popularity of hard core conservatism.

But if you live like I do in a blue state with purple neighbors, you realize pretty quickly that some parts of the conservative agenda are a really tough sell to the not already convinced. So you try and sell them on your strongest, most appealing issues and hope that they'll eventually be open to the more ideological purist arguments.

Because let's face it - the average swing voter or 'moderate' is an apolitical dope. And god bless'em - we're lucky to live in a country where people don't have to worry about politics as they go about their daily live. So they is good folks, but they're still dopes when it comes to political issues.

Sure they may have conservative instincts on a lot of issues, but they also want more regulation, cheap gas, safe stuff for kids, fat cats to pay their share, the caribou and fish to be protected, lower taxes, help for the poor, and a whole panoply of mutually contradictory goals. So getting them to sign on to the 200 proof full-tilt boogy conservative agenda is just not going to happen. Even with zombie Reagan.

230

No one is defending BP's idiocy. We're just calling out Obama on his thuggery.

They're not one in the same. The idea that they are is Democrat strategy and shouldn't be ours.

You know who would view "calling out Obama" on this as defending BP?  They're a member of that select voting demographic called "almost everybody".

The Democrat strategy is to portray Republicans as beholden to Big Oil and corporate special interests.  Barton couldn't have done more to advance that strategy if he tenderly kissed the BP CEO on the mouth.

231

ps - congress can lift the damages cap in a heartbeat without violating the Constitution.  Krauthammer was dead wrong that it's a bill of attainder.  Nor is it an ex post facto problem, as long as it's simply removing a civil damages cap.  There is no vested right in a defense, especially a damages cap, under federal law.  Landgraf allowed for a measure of vested rights in the law, but not to that extent.

So this is neither a settlement, nor is it legitimate for teh president to shakedown a corporation. 

But for once, I gotta side with ace on a "purity" issue.  This is not the hill to die on.

I'm more pissed about the Chrysler bondholders' treatment in banko.

This at least is "voluntary" by BP and doesn't contravene established law.  It's just BO being a tyrant in a gray area.

232

Have you ever seen Ace and Charles Johnson in the same place at the same time?

*gasp* I just realized I have never seen Ace...dun...dun...dun

The 2008 CPAC Blogger of the Year:

http://bit.ly/d1FfuX

dear lord Kevin Smith has really let himself go.

233 Ben, I don't know, and garrett, I don't know -- Look, this is an escrow account, which I believe is an account put into the control of a third party who distributes money based upon certain easily-verifiable conditions being met. Like -- your escrow for a home sale. Money moves when you take title and keys, right? Ergo, if it's a normal sort of escrow, I'd imagine -- imagine -- that money would be paid out according to some evaluation of a claim, maybe judicial (a court judgment), maybe some quasi-judicial function. I worked at a company and we settled a huge class-action lawsuit for fraudulent sales practice so what we did, what we agreed to do, was put a lot of money in a fund, and then, quasi-judicially, we evaluated claims people sent in, and paid out 60% of them straight-up, denied another 20% of crap claims, and the other 20% went to an arbitration panel where our lawyer and plaintiff's lawyer argued about it and then the abitration panel ruled. Is this what's going on? I don't know, but this mechanism is actually pretty common.

234 #245, now that is a comment I can agree with.

235 Ace, I'd like to recommend a book to you: "Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe Is Hijacking America," by John Avlon. tiny.cc/mhcq8 Avlon makes a very good case for moderation, and he takes on the extremists of both right and left (though I admit he goes harder on the right - but this is because, as he says, they are "louder" at the moment). Though Avlon probably leans left, he really does try hard to be fair, and his analysis is well worth reading. I think you would agree with much of it, and would enjoy the read.

236 Remember: this isn't just about BP. It's about our relationship to Britain. There were many ways to punish BP for their fuckery that didn't include pissing off our most valuable ally. Obama's dislike of the British is causing both them and us lasting harm -- harm that won't be magically healed when a Republican president takes office.

Posted by: Monty at June 17, 2010 05:14 PM (4Pleu)

Go read the British news online comments section if you want to see how pissed they are at America/Obama.  I guess Wonder Boy isn't looking to good to them anymore.

#97 - Loved Guiliani's comments on this whole mess and how he responded to the question of "What would you have done"......but then he has been and is a leader.

237 Well, he says, "I don't care" 3 times, so, that means it's important to him, right?

I looked into the mirror and did this.  Apathy appeared.

238 If you're fed up Ace sell the damn blog (good luck) and do something else.

239

Ace at 250

Was there a cap of payouts in that instance?

and who represents a fisherman at an arbitration panel, or is it the scenario where one law firm represents a large percentage of the fisherman?

 

 

240 This whole thread is a trap. The Bilderbergers want you to out yourself, so they can find how much you know, then check you in to a private psychiatric hospital 'for your own good', BUT NOT ME, MAN! I'm not divulging anything, if I did actually have anything to divulge.

241 Ace  , keep on keepin' on .
Don't change anything . This is the most freewheeling site on the conservative side . I know you get tired of herding these cats but if they were honest , most would realize , we got nowhere else to go .
Jeff is cool when he's not being a prima donna .
 Tim Blair got moderated into pablum .
Allah is boring and Iowahawk doesn't have comments .
We got nowhere else to go .

242

So, Ace,

Are you saying, "Sure, BP was done wrong, technically. Let's not forget, people, that politics involves the public and right now the public, urged by luddite/socialist media drones, hate BP unreservedly. Let the public have their lynching.  Deal with outlawing other lynchings once we have power." ?

I understand that.

I don't think that sort of position precludes a deep and valid concern for the rule of law and the contitutional limits to power of the various branches of goverment.  I disagree with being okay or even complacent about it.

I ask a question,

In your opinion, do you think that the public will always overlook abuses of power if the media supports the same tyranny? If so, do you believe there is a way to alter this?

 

 

243 I'm pretty astounded anyone thinks this is a good political move. I'm not arguing about the legality of it, although if BP thought this was a better, cheaper, less painful route than going to court it appears perfectly legal, but the raw politics of it. BP is quite possibly the most hated company in the world today. Their CEO and Chairman come across as pretentious douche bags of a level only pretentious British douche bags can reach. There are millions of real people who are going to lose big if not everything due to what is becoming clear was BP's recklessness. And somehow it's a winning strategy to defend them, under any circumstances? The logic of that escapes me. For the record, the guy chosen to administer the escrow account is Ken Feinberg, the guy who paid out the 9/11 claims and is pretty well regarded by all as a fair minded guy.

244 Avlon makes a very good case for moderation, and he takes on the extremists of both right and left Posted by: sauropod

I don't think this is a matter of moderating any side. The problem Ace and Drew are running into is trying to debate tactics and that ends up being interpreted as a debate on principle.

Look at the original thread; some commenters were replying that we must "defend the Rule of Law," and "we have to stop Obama."

Ace and Drew weren't arguing with that arm-flexing, Principled Stands™. The whole point was one of tactics; don't apologize to the most hated company who has admitted culpability for putting a lot of people in a bad situation.

We've run into this loony circle more than once and it just fucking tiring.

245 Here's a question. I'd appreciate a snark-free answer: Why is it we have to be earnest, boring, and only concerned with making one point at a time?

The Democrats have always pushed on a hundred fronts at once, with great success. We have been distracted, confused, and ultimately have been just plain worn out by a barrage of complaints, insults, lawsuits and legislative initiatives. Why can't we do the same?

I understand the idea that the press covers for the left, but the Code Pink whackos are hardly a secret. The anti-war left aren't a secret either. The rise of talk radio, the internet, and Glenn Beck's TV show have all spread information to scads of people. Information the left didn't want to see disseminated and information we did.

Ace: How many people do you really think will vote against a GOP politician in their 2010 house election because of Rep. Barton's comments today? Do you and the other Cob Loggers really believe that a monolithic image management that would have made the Communist bloc jealous is the only way to win elections?

I'm asking because I am beginning to think that if we overwhelm the media with a barrage of comments, lawsuits, complaints, videos, etc., we can have the same result on them as they have had on us. They can only cover so many stories at a time before their reader's eyes glaze over. The others will be spread by our media, and spun by us, may attract more votes than they cost us.

Am I insane? Naive? I know I'm not on drugs ... so why can't we steal this strategy as well as Alinsky's Rules for Radicals?

246

Remember: this isn't just about BP. It's about our relationship to Britain. There were many ways to punish BP for their fuckery that didn't include pissing off our most valuable ally. Obama's dislike of the British is causing both them and us lasting harm -- harm that won't be magically healed when a Republican president takes office.

Unfortunatley for them they don't really have any options. England can't really stand alone anymore. They need an ally and they have two options. Mainland Europe and the USA.

I know they have been flirting with europe, but they see what is happening in the EU and they probably don't want to get into bed with them just yet.

I think there will be a lot of animosity towards america from the little people in England, but our governments will remain close.

The issue the UK government will have with the Obama Admin is the pensioners. Someone will have to make up for all the lost income from the BP dividend, and it will likely be the UK govenment. I assume it will cost them a few billion as well. A few billion they don't have in these lean times of budget cuts.

247 >>>>Was there a cap of payouts in that instance? Payouts per person or payouts overall? Payouts per person, yes, you were limited to getting all of the money you'd paid refunded AND getting to keep the thing you bought. Overall? no idea... I wasn't up that high. The fund/escrow had a defined amount of money into it, by settlement, but whether or not it could be expanded I don't know. Like, if a judge ruled that it was grossly insufficient and tore up the settlement or something. >>>and who represents a fisherman at an arbitration panel, or is it the scenario where one law firm represents a large percentage of the fisherman? Look, honestly, i don't know if this is what they're doing, or if they've worked out the details. In the case I worked, there were class-action litigants, and yeah, they got paid off as per the original settlement. What then happened is that my company had to pay additional money which would be dispersed to third parties acting as advocates for the class action plaintiffs. I.e., we paid a sum of money to pay the costs of the continuing conflict resolution; we didn't just pay cash awards, we had to pay the salaries and costs of the process for it.

248 Tarball montage on the news now.

I don't question that BP fucked up, but I honestly don't think they offered up 20 really, really large out of the goodness of their hearts.  Were they threatened?  Fuck yes, they were threatened.  They were up against the President of the United States, and a particular President who has shown utter contempt for the law in the past.  Ask Chrysler bondholders, or GM shareholders.

Now, whether what Barton said was politically wise is a very different question. What I guess I found so disturbing is how infantile it is.  Can we at least STOP THE FUCKING GUSHER before we start hanging people?  Can we do anything, any-fucking-thing without putting politics first?  This politicization and personalisation of absolutely everything is Alinsky in action.  The peasants are aroused in righteous anger, the pitchforks are out, the torches are lit, and we still don't know how much oil is in the water.  "Never let a crisis go to waste".

That's not a conspiracy, it's a fact of politics in Third-World America, now.

249

Ace and Drew weren't arguing with that arm-flexing, Principled Stands™. The whole point was one of tactics; don't apologize to the most hated company who has admitted culpability for putting a lot of people in a bad situation.

You mean like this?

 

I would like to apoligize to the Germans for burning down Dresden in 1944. There was no acceptable reason to break the international rule of law. None whatsoever.  I prostrate myself infront of thee.

250

Ace-

My fear is this becomes an Autocratic Disbursment Fund for Obama's Progressive Agenda.

I see this harming any Non-Union Fishing Fleet/Buisness in the Gulf.  I also see it harming the Domestic Oil Industry by fiat. 

The problem, in a nutshell, is that I don't trust our government headed by its' current Helmsmen, to be the Arbitor of anything.

 

251 CONSPIRACY THEORY Deepwater Horizon oil spill actually the result of covert action of North Korean submarine. Mission undertaken at the behest of their ChiCom masters to test ability to bring US to it's knees through rapid and widespread destruction of Gulf oil assets in the event of confrontation with US. Dicuss among the group.

252 The Blind Side was pretty damn good. Not a rant or conspiracy theory though.

253

Frankly, I think that all of us are just SCARED right now - we don't have a leader running this country, and all of us just love America and what she stands for so much, we can't stand the thought of losing her.

We've all been watching what has been happening over the past 18-30 (if you count the campaign) months, feeling absolutely powerless to do anything about it, and we know that we still have another 2 1/2 years left in this nightmare.

We don't know what is going to happen, and we don't see things getting better, and our emotions are tapped out.  We're at our wit's end, and we take it out on each other.

Ace, I know that you are tired of all of this.  Drew, you too.  You are both very precious to those of us who aren't as eloquent as you both are.  We need you in this fight, and on our side, but we also need you to be rested and sane. 

If you need a break, please take it - the last thing we want to have happen to either of you is for you to get so burned out that you aren't around to help us take this country back from the inmates who are currently running the asylum.  Take some time for yourselves, and then come back rested and refreshed.

We're all tired, and I think that we all think that we can't take breaks from time to time.  However, if we don't, we will all burn out at the same time, and the fight can't be won if everyone has spent all of their energy at the most crucial time of the battle.

You are both loved and cherished very much.  I will leave you with one of my favorite Scriptures, which has gotten me through more than one rough patch:

"For I know the plans I have for you, sayeth the Lord.  Plans to prosper you and not to harm you; plans to give you a hope and a future" - Jeremiah 39:11

God's grace is ALWAYS shining on this land we love - He will not let Her fail....

254 Conspiracy theories matter. The whole "Bush lied kids died" thing, which went on for years and was the undercurrent for most news coverage between 2003 and 2008, was a conspiracy theory. It was a conspiracy theory shared by a majority of demonrats and independents and even some conservatives that Bush knew Iraq had no WMD all along but invaded anyway to avenge the threat to his daddy's life. This belief persists still, despite congresscritters and even the French and Russians saying the same thing about Iraq's WMD. To believe this conspiracy you would have to believe that Bush had better information than everyone else on the planet other than Sadam himself.

255 ace,

If I may be so bold, allow me to point out the fact that a bunch of jerkoffs arguing on a blog are not going to have much of an impact either way, so the 55% of this and 55% that argument about soft peddling a tough issue doesn't really apply.

Drew posted his opinion on Barton said.  A lot of people disagreed with him.  So what?  You know who will be talking about Barton a week from now (assuming he does not do something else)?  NOBODY. 

It is not like Asshole Inspector is the final approving authority for the GOP Fall 2010 Platform.

I don't grok this "Pontius Pilate washing his hands and letting the fanatics try it their way" routine you are selling.  I really don't. 

256 Did the space aliens put you up to running this thread, Ace? Did they? Did THEY?! Did they offer you nicotine patches!!!

257

Look, honestly, i don't know if this is what they're doing, or if they've worked out the details.

that is part of my concern.  not that you don't know, but that no one in the media or anywhere else seems to be asking.

I understand BP screwed up. I work in heavy industry. They should pay and will pay, my biggest concern, aside from the freaking spill and the terrible toll it is taking, is that BP is going to hand over billions and it isn't going to get to the people who deserve it.

I will be interested to see what the rules are relating to this escrow fund.

 

258

I would like to apologize to the Germans for burning down Dresden in 1944. There was no acceptable reason to break the international rule of law. None whatsoever.  I prostrate myself in front of thee.

Posted by: Winston Churchill

Aside from reaching Godwin, um, sure. But, no. BP is not Nazi Germany by any stretch. Are they culpable for the spill?  Sure as hell looks like it.

And if the final reports all point to liable, then apologizing to BP is a bad tactical move come November.

259 sock off

260 >>>Are you saying, "Sure, BP was done wrong, technically. Let's not forget, people, that politics involves the public and right now the public, urged by luddite/socialist media drones, hate BP unreservedly. Let the public have their lynching. Deal with outlawing other lynchings once we have power." ? No, I don't know that BP was "done wrong." Honestly, i doubt they were done wrong. But I don't even really give a shit enough to think very hard about it. Is it possible they were done wrong? You know what? A rapist might get beaten up by the fucking cops and you know who's going to make a fuss about it? Not this guy. He can pay his own fucking lawyer to bring that to people's attention. And that's what it looks like you're doing to me. Rather than let poor-little-BP fight its own fights (and note: You're making an allegation of wrongdoing that the suppposed victim isn't making!), you're jumping to defend the rapist. Was something wrong done here? How about we wait for BP to make that claim? This is EXACTLY similar to my true opinion on whether KSM was "tortured" illegally: 1) I don't know; it's a gray area. 2) I don't give enough of a fuck about him to bother taking it out of the gray area; I'm not doing research and advocacy on his behalf. Because, in final analysis, even if I became convinced it fit the technical definition of "torture," I don't care. I'm good with it either way. But here's Joe Barton coming to BP's defense, *unbidden.* And then a bunch of people, many of whom frankly don't seem to have considered the whole issue of demanding-cash-payment-in-lieu-of-suit at all, come along insisting that they KNOW with 100% certitude that this was all very wrong, and furthermore, they are so outraged about what's being done to BP they have decided that principle demands they take a wildly unpopular decision. To be honest, Inspector Asshole, I think NEITHER of us has really done our homework as to whether this is unprecendented and illegal. I think NEITHER of us knows enough to know. But you are acting as if you are sure that you are completely, 100% certain. You know, this just happened like Monday? I don't think we've really seen the definitive legal/constitutional treatise on this yet. You fail to consider the possibility that BP was ALREADY planning to do something like this and decided to do Obama the FAVOR of letting it appear that Obama demanded it and they complied. Which I think is actually about 25% likely.

261

Krauthammer agrees with Drew.  That should end it.

262 Originally posted at HotAir:

The degree and consequences of BPÂ’s actions will, in large part, depend on how well they were following the rules, and not making them up as they go along. There are procedures in place for making this evaluation, and I donÂ’t believe that creating an atmosphere of lawlessness and announcing unprecedented transfers of billions of dollars to unaccountable slush funds is helpful.

For a government to make up rules as it goes along to handle claims against a company based on its making up rules as it went along is a recipe for chaos, not resolution. It leads to posturing, rather than cooperation.

**********************

From Ace:
I worked at a company and we settled a huge class-action lawsuit for fraudulent sales practice so what we did, what we agreed to do, was put a lot of money in a fund, and then, quasi-judicially, we evaluated claims people sent in, and paid out 60% of them straight-up, denied another 20% of crap claims, and the other 20% went to an arbitration panel where our lawyer and plaintiff's lawyer argued about it and then the abitration panel ruled.

Is this what's going on? I don't know, but this mechanism is actually pretty common.

**********************
I think a good deal of the grief involves Captain Kickass meeting with BP for 20 minutes and coming out with a sensible sort of solution along the one you mention. It didn't happen. Instead, we got something that looks like a posture, smells like a posture, has a whopping big price tag on it, and appears to be getting handed off to a crony -- when neither of the parties is particularly credible.

263

I for one am highly offended that BP has agreed to settle for damages.  Just who does Obama think he is?  Doesn't he know it was an accident?  Sure, it was a pretty bad one that will affect many people.  But what about the shareholders?  Aren't they people too?

Obama shouldn't be so tough on BP.  Threatening legal action unless they set aside money for damages?  That's just unheard of, no to mention not very nice.

Sure, millions may have suffered economically, and the cleanup will be expensive.  But we should all be more compassionate to the real victim in all this- the poor, defenseless BP corporation.

264 I was talking about Barton, btw.

265

Okay, read Ace's 238, and I was utterly wrong when I thought his position doesn't preclude a respect for the rule of law.

He thinks it is fucking optional bullshit for "hard core" conservatives in that post.

Ace, you're way wrong if that's how you evaluate the rule of law, because without it - we'd be a third world, "moderate" nation like Vietnam. Or Mexico.

You know, where people can bust in your doors for having a blog that takes exception to the President's politics and beat your family to death in front of you, as what happened to a friend of mine in Vietnam when her dad mouthed off in front of the VC.

Sounds fucking delightful. Who fucking needs the rule of law? It's just hard core Paulians who give a shit about it. That attitude is not reasonable.

Oh, and Ace, equating KSM with a citizen is improper and you know it. He is a non-uniformed combatant and according to the Constitution and to the Laws and Customs of Warfare, we can if we want feed him piece by piece to a herd of rabid pink pigs. He has no rights, the Constitution guarantees those of citizens and resident aliens. It is silent as it should be where it concerns foreigners committing acts of war against our country. They, being non-uniformed, may be hanged without trial. Waterboarding him was in no way, shape, or form a violation of the rule of law. you fucking hippy. (joke)

266

_{Which I think is actually about 25% likely.}

...with a chance of Tar Balls!

267 I agree with Posted by: Guy who loses elections.

268 >>>Drew posted his opinion on Barton said. A lot of people disagreed with him. So what? You know who will be talking about Barton a week from now (assuming he does not do something else)? NOBODY. Eh. Sharron Angle, Rand Paul. We are all stand-ins for everyone else. That is to say, I'm not just venting annoyance with Inspector Asshole, but with the broader movement insisting on this stuff. It has consequences. I think some people kind of like the minority and subconsciously want to remain in the minority, where they are free to agitate for whatever position strikes their fancy without having to worry that their representatives actually have any power.

269 The LONGBOWS apologized to BP...

270 What has Gov. Perry done for the past two years about AWOL Afghan military officials who deserted Lackland AFB?

And why would people here to learn to speak English be also given security clearance badges to access secure military installations?!

The 17 Afghan officers and enlisted men have gone AWOL from the Lackland AFB Defense Language Institute. They possess security badges that give them access to secure U.S. defense installations, according to the lookout bulletin, "Afghan Military Deserters in CONUS [Continental U.S.]," issued by Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Dallas, and obtained by FoxNews.com. "I can confirm that 17 have gone missing from the Defense Language Institute," said Gary Emery, Chief of Public Affairs, 37th Training Wing, at Lackland AFB. "They disappeared over the course of the last two years, and none in the last three months."

271 >>>He is a non-uniformed combatant and according to the Constitution and to the Laws and Customs of Warfare, we can if we want feed him piece by piece to a herd of rabid pink pigs. Wrong; there is a law against 'Torturing" someone, even a non-American.

272 A lot of people here have an unflinching support for the "rule of law", and I respect that, but I don't understand exactly what laws have been broken. Someone clue me in. As far as I can tell BP has agreed to voluntarily set up a fund to compensate victims of this disaster. I'm pretty sure that's not a crime, by anyone.

273

_{Wrong; there is a law against 'Torturing" someone}

It's true. 

Tickle Torture will get you thrown out of Congress. Even if it's not in the shower.

274 Inspector Asshole, As I said earlier: You continue to be all OUTRAGED about this GROSS VIOLATION and have shit to say about the fact that BP was allowed -- by our laws -- to drill without a relief well, because they considered it "unnecessary" and "too expensive" and were able to donate enough to politicians to have that position vindicated. I read something into your choice of outrages. Anyone with a brain would read something into it. So, spare me the rule of law horseshit. You only seem worried about some infractions of the rule of law.

275 For a government to make up rules as it goes along to handle claims against a company based on its making up rules as it went along is a recipe for chaos, not resolution. It leads to posturing, rather than cooperation.

I agree with this. It's why I think Barton was right and this is a shakedown, and I believe it's a very bad idea.  But I still think Barton had a colossal mind fart when he apologized, in committee, to the CEO of the very company who created this mess.  Calling it a shakedown is a statement of fact.  Apologizing for it to BP was a first class fuck up.  Had he just called it a shakedown and moved onto making sure that the cleanup and aftermath are properly, none of this shitstorm would have happened.

276 I just find it absurd that so many people are insisting that BP's rights have been violated when BP itself hasn't objected. How about we wait for the victim to fill out a complaint, at least?

277 Sacred honor compels me to question the patriotism of those who criticize Joe Barton for...

He did what? Oh, never mind. Barton is a pussy RINO traitor. Blood libel against the white man may be involved.

278 a few billion? Make that the sum total, $20billion.

The issue the UK government will have with the Obama Admin is the pensioners. Someone will have to make up for all the lost income from the BP dividend, and it will likely be the UK govenment. I assume it will cost them a few billion as well. A few billion they don't have in these lean times of budget cuts.--Posted by: Ben at June 17, 2010 06:35 PM (DKV43)

279 Eh. Sharron Angle, Rand Paul.

We are all stand-ins for everyone else.

That is to say, I'm not just venting annoyance with Inspector Asshole, but with the broader movement insisting on this stuff.

It has consequences.

That is a point worth considering.  In fact, it is a very good point.  Maybe it would be a lede for, I don't know, a new thread?  Now that you have been moved off your earlier "What? Well fuck you wingnuts, have it your way" initial posted reaction. 

280 Ace:
Please, step back and take a deep breath.  Please don't let a one-day story do so much damage to your psyche.  Your blog has become a refuge for me and a lot of other wayward conservatives who did not feel comfortable in the ideological straitjacket Redstate-type blog or the insane lunatic Freeper-type blog.  I think I speak for quite a few others when I say thank you very much for the awesome service you provide for the greater conservative diaspora.  I'll be hitting your tip jar in a moment.

Specifically with regard to the Barton story, I think you and Drew are absolutely right when it comes to electoral politics and strategy.  Nobody is going to win any election posing as BP's defender even if it is couched in terms of ideological principle.  And I would be very very disappointed if, somehow, THIS 'shakedown' issue was the one which dominated the 2010/2012 elections, because if that were the case Republicans would surely lose in a landslide.  I have no doubt Democrats are going to be attempting that and Barton with his ill-chosen words has handed Democrats some prime campaign ad material.  So based on that reasoning alone, we should do as much to condemn Barton as we can.

But, on the other side, if we pretended we didn't have to worry about elections or campaigns or public images, and we only discussed the relevant principles as an intellectual exercise, then I find the entire "shakedown" to be troubling from a rule-of-law perspective.  That is all I was trying to argue in the previous thread anyway.

So, if I were to wear a political advisor's hat, then yes I would agree with you and say "don't even appear to be defending BP, you'll only lose at the ballot box".  But if I were to wear a professor's hat, then I would be very disturbed by the apparent lawlessness of what just transpired.

But, Ace, don't lose your cool over it.  Please.

281 Rule of law ?
We like to think of them more as guidelines .

282

"There are vampires that walk backwards? Or do they exist in a parallel parking universe?"

No, they give blood.

283 I just find it absurd that so many people are insisting that BP's rights have been violated when BP itself hasn't objected. How about we wait for the victim to fill out a complaint, at least? --Posted by: ace

"so many people are insisting" that Obama is instituting by precedence a completely unconstitutional practice.

The BP officials aren't paying the $20billion they have agreed to front. They're stealing the money from pensioners who had NOTHING to do with creating this mess.

Of course BP is responsible for the damned mess. And the entire bed partner relationship that Obama and BP CEO/Board reflect in practice is TOO QUEER to ignore.

284 Posted by: Garbonzo the Garrulous at June 17, 2010 05:04 PM

Thank you. 

91 In honor of Etheridge's apology and refusal to use his bad day as a crutch:
I refuse to mention that in the previous thread literally everyone agreed that the shakedown was a problem so there wouldn't have been alot to discuss on that score and it was the purity police who decided that anyone who disagreed with Barton or Rush was a card-carrying ACORN member who was okey-dokey with BO going all Chavez on BP.
But I refuse to use that as a crutch.

This. 

285

See, Ace, you think you're talking to a uniform group of people focussed soley on elections.

That's not what you have, many of us are deathly concerned with actual decay of actual Consitutional concepts. Deathly.

You are wholly focussed on politics and the election cycle and view everything through that election lose/win telescope.

Thus, when the focus is on real principles, you get nervy and hard to converse with - you're more than uncomfortable even contemplating bad sound bites and such.

People like myself see that as a minor irritant - the election is to me, near moot. We may win, but we may at this point never win again, even if we are perfect with our language and approach.

See, I think this is worth getting passionate about. I'm not running for Congress - I'm deciding who I need to talk to and who I need to educate.

I am not going to queer your pet race or initiative. None of us are - but we all should be furious at what kind of Administration we've ended up with .

You focus so much on how the MSM fucks with conservatives that you wince before the punch hits. We're not wincing, we're seeing how utterly un-American the media and the Democrats have gone and are concerned with making sure we don't slip into the same horrible state as they.

So when people like myself get worked up, it isn't fair to smear us as Paulians and declare us poison to various races. It would only be fair if a significan number of us were running for office. And even then, hey, it's just your opinion and similar opinions have been shattered before.

So give us a fucking break, Ace. We're not your goddamned enemies because we care more for the Constitution than for the nitty gritty of MSM mischaracterization of conservatives. Even if they weren't given "ammunition" by this congressman, it would not have changed in any way how conservatives are portrayed by the media. They'll always show their enemies as sub-human, it's what works for them, has since they wrote their Jim Crow laws way back.

286 # 261 "I don't think this is a matter of moderating any side. The problem Ace and Drew are running into is trying to debate tactics and that ends up being interpreted as a debate on principle." Fair enough, but I still think Ace would enjoy the book ("Wingnuts," John Avlon). I did. Avlon's point is not that we shouldn't have principles, but that we are getting carried away with extremist rhetoric that often doesn't make much sense. For the record, BP has the worst record of any oil and gas exploration company, by far. So I think they are open to criticism, and are not victims in any way.

287 Obligatory happy-face pancake link

288 This is like trying to pick a team to root for when North Korea and Iran play each other.

289 Posted by: Tim geithner Chuck Rangel and 20,000,000 pot smokers Paulbots

fify

290 There are some pretty sick and pretty damn exclusive Golf Clubs / Courses in Great Britain...that's all I'm saing.

291 >The BP officials aren't paying the $20billion they have agreed to front. They're stealing the money from pensioners who had NOTHING to do with creating this mess.



They're not only pensioners, they're investors. Drilling for oil is a risky business and they took the risk. Paying damages is a cost of doing business. Maybe they should invest in something else.

292

_{This is like trying to pick a team to root for when North Korea and Iran play each other.}

AQYemen?

293 Obligatory cute kittehs link

294 >>>People like myself see that as a minor irritant - the election is to me, near moot. I have news for you: If we don't win these next two cycles, all your principles will be moot, forever.

295 And no one in moron nation (with one exception) drinks tequila?  Srsly?  No one has a recommendation of an outstanding anejo or super anejo? 

It's a conspiracy! 

296 BP is NOT "stealing money from pensioners".  Please.  It isn't BP's fault that the British government decided to put all of its pension eggs in one basket, i.e., BP stock.

297 I think you all assume that "the small people", "the folks" are just plain stupid.  they aren't.  they don't only get their news from "the media".  What do you think?  They wizened up and they aren't taking what the talking head says in fact they've stopped watching the evening news that you would expect them to watch.  What they see, though, is not only their livelihood and their beautiful states being destroyed before them, they see any and all hope of future oil jobs walking out the door.  Kudlow just said....where was congress and the prez?  Why didn't they invite the 15 other countries who volunteered to help over to help?  Why didn't they vote to suspend the jones act.  Why didn't they push on the prez a little to get him moving a lot faster?   So, per Kudlow, they are just as guilty as BP.   I think a lot of people are thinking this.  You can think "what plays well in peoria" and "what is politically expedient for the republicans" but people "the folks" are thinking "every one of these SOB's in DC representing them belong to the same club, they look the same, they act the same.....heck, they are the same.  No difference between dems and republicans.  So while you all talk about minutia, the people are thinking how can we purge all the dems and republicans from DC.  How  can we get good honest Americans back in those seats and with real enforced term limits.  When the rigs are gone from the gulf coast over to Brasil, how many Americans are going to go to Brasil for a job?   Those jobs will be gone and they aren't coming back.  That should be what they are talking about...but they aren't you know why?  Cause dammit they are all the same....

298 I love how ace is turning into chuckles johnson.

It's how it started over there...granted, over something different, but still.

As for BP...they had the *option* of turning to Barry, flipping the bird and saying, "we'll pay the freaking legal maximum, and that's it.  You want more, take us to court, jackass."  But apparently, they, for whatever reason, didn't do that.

On the other hand, the rule of LAW has to mean something, and apparently ace is missing that point.  The LAW says that BP is liable for a certain amount...not 20 billion dollars, or 5 gazillion, or whatever arbitrary number the jackass in chief decides.

Also, ace is complaining about "you guys are forcing a purity test at a terrible time...now is a bad time to do this!!!!1!!"

Let me ask...When the hell would be a GOOD time to do this.  Right now the electorate is as angry as I've EVER seen it.  In some cases you could almost elect a freakin' plunger over a democrat, and ace wants to put RINO's in?  What kind of acid is he taking?
"

299 278

Krauthammer agrees with Drew.  That should end it.

Posted by: rdbrewer at June 17, 2010 06:47 PM (zRQZ4)

That means little to me. W.F. Buckley was the last word on Conservative issues IMHO. Krauthammer is a piker.

300 292 Posted by: GulfCoastTider at June 17, 2010 06:57 PM (CaPnz)
Sounds about right.

**********************************
293 I just find it absurd that so many people are insisting that BP's rights have been violated when BP itself hasn't objected.

Posted by: ace at June 17, 2010 06:57 PM (66DVY)

"-- when neither of the parties is particularly credible."

Posted by: cthulhu at June 17, 2010 06:47 PM (/0IOT)

With BP's ties to the Obama administration, and a totally opaque deal, how are we to know who the aggrieved party should be? Maybe it's BP shareholders, or US citizens, or Gulf Coast shrimpers.....due process is a good thing whether or not it necessarily leads to a specific party's desired result.

301 I love how ace is turning into chuckles johnson.

That is an unfair slander.

302

Here's a question. I'd appreciate a snark-free answer: Why is it we have to be earnest, boring, and only concerned with making one point at a time?

Because we can't seem to make several points tied together with a common theme. Historically, recently anyway, they've been very good at it. ("Culture of corruption!" or "Eight years of failed policies!") They could tie everything to a common, underlying message. And lately, we've been unable to pull that off.

I think it will be different this time around. "Out of touch" would be a good theme for 2010.

As Obama's re-election campaign will be the headlining act in 2012, "Ineffective" will likely be the tag line.

303 I heard all of this same crap in 2008. "What's the worst that can happen if John McCain and Republicans lose? It will be a good lesson." What shocks me is that now you know "what's the worse that can happen," and in fact going a little crazy with outrage now that you've seen the worse that can happen (so far), but guess what? You're all singing the same retarded song again: "Elections don't matter to me, principles do." Same fucking thing I heard in 2008. It's gotten worse since then, of course, and instead of saying, "Shit, we gotta win don't we? Or we will literally never win ever again," i hear the same old self-righteous lunatic ego-stroking horseshit. "I'm too principled to think about faggy shit like that." Eh, Stupid can't be fixed as Ron White said.

304

  _{Srsly?  No one has a recommendation of an outstanding anejo or super anejo?} 

Step One: Drink Bourbon.

Step Two: Get Angry.

Step Three: ?????

305 316, just for the record, I think you have a very dull mind, and I believe you need "ideas," or what counts for them in your world, to be simple-stupid and droolingly emotional in order to engage with them. So it might be less that I object to your position than it is I object to you as a personal matter.

306 Thank you.  Posted by: Y-not

Ah, you're welcome. I'm just glad you came back to this thread so I didn't have to re-post it in the ONT.

307

This is about RULE OF LAW.

I don't know what rule or law Obama actually broke, but I don't like him so he MUST have broken the law and I must denounce this even if BP who I am in no way at all defending isn't fighting back.  Surely they don't have lawyers who hate Obama as much as I do- if not Barton and I, who will stand up for BP?

Now, I'm not defending the highly unpopular BP, but we really should apologize to BP and stop treating them so harshly  If we don't defend BP expose Obama's violation of some law that may or may not exist, it's like tearing up the Constitution.  Or something.

Besides, I really despise Obama, and he's going against BP, so that makes BP the good guy in all this, right?

308 Gulps. Checks who did post 316...

309 I don't know, everyone rallied around scott what his name in MA...and that really hasn't worked out so well....

Maybe people want to stop and think.  Maybe they no longer want to play the game by the old rules anymore.  Maybe they expecting someone to step up with new rules and new ideas not the same old political basket of crap.

310

I have news for you: If we don't win these next two cycles, all your principles will be moot, forever.

I agree, but I think there's a non-zero, non-insignificant chance that we won't even get a free election in November of this year. That's my worry. Seems not to be so far-fetched, eh, since you have the same worries but with 2 years difference.  

Please tell me I have nothing to fear. Or lie or something. Because right now, I have doubts Obama will obey the Constitution and step down if he's beaten.

311 286 The LONGBOWS apologized to BP...

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at June 17, 2010 06:51 PM (k5CvA

That's next week on Top Shot.

312 This sure beats those toys ...

Star Wars fans rejoice: someone has finally succeeded in creating a working lightsaber. And it can be yours for only US$197.97.Hong Kong company Wicked Lasers has manufactured “the most dangerous laser ever created,” a lightsaber with a blue beam that can burn retinas and set skin on fire.The Spyder III Pro Arctic features a 1 watt laser the company warns is the most powerful portable laser available. The beam is a thousand times more powerful than sunlight on skin and the manufacturer warns it could cause cancer.

313

#326: Gulps. Checks who did post 316...

(Me too. I'm safe. For now.)

314 >>>W.F. Buckley was the last word on Conservative issues IMHO. W.F. Buckley famously said the party had to shun -- not cast out, per se, but pay no mind to -- the conspiracy-theorists and Communist-infiltrators-are-among us known then as the John Birch Society. Agree?

315

The issue the UK government will have with the Obama Admin is the pensioners...

I've been hearing more and more about the plight of the poor pensioners. You know what? Tough. Fucking. Shit.

Those receiving dividend income from BP are (drumroll), OWNERS of BP. They are BP.

And they're on the hook for this as much as Hayward.

316 For the record, BP has the worst record of any oil and gas exploration company, by far. So I think they are open to criticism, and are not victims in any way.

Posted by: sauropod

That's not really the point. Nobody, not even Inspector Asshole, is claiming BP is the white knight here.  I think the people who you seem to think are taking up for BP could frankly not give a shit either way about BP.

Their problem is with how Preznit Easy Bake is dealing with this.  This spill has been ongoing for two freaking months.  The President's ONE decisive response:  Hey, youse guys will pony up $20 Billion.

Do you get that his two months of pulling his pud might just have contributed to this frustration with the action he took when he finally got around to taking action?

I am not sure how reading the latest in a long series of books written by squishes that decry those icky extremists is going to help ace or anybody else.

317 Specifically with regard to the Barton story, I think you and Drew are absolutely right when it comes to electoral politics and strategy.  Nobody is going to win any election posing as BP's defender even if it is couched in terms of ideological principle.

Agreed, even by this puritan.

The overarching meta-narrative, in the archetypal context, of Ace's hermeneutic, is as follows: 

And yes, I did throw up in my mouth when I typed that.  Ace is a guy with grease on his hands and a wrench in his pocket.  His fear is that we're trying to replace the blown engine in question with one that won't fit, just because we think it might work. 

There is a hope that this country can swing as far right in this cycle as it did left last time.  Fact is, ain't gonna happen.  Republicans have a chance of taking the House, and a hope of taking the Senate by the margin of ball-sweat.  This is not a done fucking deal, by any stretch. 

A lot of people want to put a Hemi in this old car.  Ace is looking to the junkyard for a plain old engine that actually fucking runs.  I want a Hemi, too, but we run the risk of over-reaching, big time.  Remember:  President FerShizzle lied through his fucking teeth to get that far left.  We don't have that option, because we don't have Chris Mathews' lips on our ass.

We do need to be practical.

And this is officially the first time I've ever defended Ace, the Manhattanite, in a purity thread. 

The next round of Hobo Snuff Porn will have to be talkies, BlogBoy.

318 >>The BP officials aren't paying the $20billion they have agreed to front. They're stealing the money from pensioners who had NOTHING to do with creating this mess. Really? Is that how corporate dividend payments work? You are just guaranteed them no matter how the corporation performs? I'm learning a ton about the rule of law and corporate governance on this thread. Very edumcational.

319

Don't look at me. I just wanna be able to get married. Maybe I'll post on that.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at June 17, 2010 05:24 PM (0JsTF)

Don't worry, Gabe. Someday you'll find a nice girl who is more than willing to...oh. Yah. Right. Never mind.

320

Step One: Drink Bourbon.

Step Two: Get Angry.

Posted by: garrett

Step Three: ????? Assume all AoSHQ posters argue for suicide and then proceed to lose your shit.

321 327 I don't know, everyone rallied around scott what his name in MA...and that really hasn't worked out so well....

Really?  On a purely practical matter it's worked out pretty well.  Now the D's actually have to sweat to get something through the Senate.  You're right he's not exactly Mr. Purity Republican but hey, I'd much rather have him than Martha "Massachusettes" Coakley.

322 Posted by: Irate and stupid at June 17, 2010 07:14 PM (plsiE)

You are even dumber than the guy who just called ace a Charles Johnson clone.

323

See, Ace, you think you're talking to a uniform group of people focussed soley on elections.

That's not what you have, many of us are deathly concerned with actual decay of actual Consitutional concepts. Deathly.

You are wholly focussed on politics and the election cycle and view everything through that election lose/win telescope.

If you want to understand your readers, Ace, listen to this guy, despite his occupation.  It's like the witty janitor from Dilbert, but with worse spelling.

324

 #316, honest question. Do you think Bartons statement was welcomed by all the people in the gulf states? Do you think the rule of law is the most important issue at that Congressional  hearing? IMO both are important but the bigger picture of Obamas incompetence in handling this crisis, is more important. Barton derailed that message. That is what I am angry about.

325 Ahh fun stuff.  It's amazing to me how someone that doesn't actually get the arguments of people that disagree with him go right for the personal.

I love you too ace.

326 Nice italics you got here.  Shame if something happ... 

Fuck.  Never mind.

327 Inspector Asshole, If you agree why do you yell at people like Drew and I who tell you that it is unwise in the extreme to thwart the anger of a roused public in order to make pretty debatable points of constitutional order? Even if you are sure you are right (though God knows when you've had time to research this issue thoroughly in 48 hours), why is anyone who says "We have one shot here, we had better make it count, and no, we cannot waste shots on targets we're not going to hit anyway, which will just scare off the other game" some kind of RINO pussy sell-out? It's amazing to me -- when the public is on our side, when populism is aligned with us, you praise it, and mock liberals for standing in the path of this potent force. And when populism is aligned against us, you say, "Aw, fuck populist impulses, I have PRINCIPLES." You do exactly what you laugh at liberals for doing. When you are strong, you press your advantage. When you are weak, you make yourself a small target and parry and dodge. I continue be flabbergasted that the most basic rules of conflict are so casually tossed aside as sneaky and effeminate when "principle" is invoked, and quite frankly, when is "principle" NOT invoked anymore? Jesus. It would be one thing if people did not drop "principle" as some kind of all-purpose I Win card at the drop of a hat, and played the principle card sparingly. But no -- every fucking argument is one of SACRED HONOR AND CHERISHED PRINCIPLE and I'm supposed to be impressed with that at this point? Tell me what's NOT principle, and so what it IS permitted to discuss the dirty politics of. Give me that list, so I know what the fuck I can talk about without violating SACRED HONOR AND CHERISHED PRINCIPLE. It will be a very, very short list.

328 Ace, stop saying we're all this and all that, it's kind of insulting. A lot of us agree with most of what you say.

329

_{the guy who just called ace a Charles Johnson clone.}

Ace Grew A Pony Tail!?!?

Ace Has a Calendar!?!?

Ace Has a Fixie!?!?

330

Posted by: Who cares about the rule of law? Not me at June 17, 2010 07:22 PM (zQiqq)

Ace is trying to make a point.  Is he a shrill lil' ewok sometimes?  Yeah.  But he is actually trying to say something. 

And don't play with your balls so much.  Your thin skin might crack and they'll just tumble right the fuck out.

331

Posted by: ace at June 17, 2010 07:17 PM (66DVY)

I agree that the John Birch Society had to be ignored because of their fringe status. However, we obviously were being infiltrated by communists. The bastards are everywhere these days, and in positions of power. Also the leftists had not infiltrated the Republican Party at that time. Nobody had an acronym for Republican in name only.

332 Obligatory happy-face pancake link

Posted by: chemjeff at June 17, 2010 07:04 PM (Gk/wA)

This really needs the Hello Kitty link IYKWIMAIKTYD.

333 Obligatory happy-face pancake link

Posted by: chemjeff at June 17, 2010 07:04 PM (Gk/wA)

Not funny, asshole.

334 Politics is both about the head and the heart. There's a giant game going on where you try to score useless points by playing charades about stuff that everyone is tired of....and then there's a "we gotta do the right thing here, regardless of the game" streak. Both have good points and bad points.

As an example of purposeless passion, I live in a heavily gerrymandered district in Silicon Valley, and I made a donation to the Republican candidate running against the incumbent, even though it's only gone Republican for six years since 1963. Hopeless? Probably. Smart politics? Probably not. Best and highest use of campaign funds? Probably not. Makes me feel better about myself? Yep.

On the flip side, I also contributed to Scott Brown's campaign. Do I know him myself? Nope. Care a whit about Massachusetts? Can't even spell it. Got better positioning out of it -- it's like sacrificing a bishop on a chessboard.

It's easy to lose track of the meaning of things while playing a game. Look at Alinsky -- in the greater scheme of things, he had no ideas or constructive platform....it's the game for the sake of the game. Alinsky's rules are like drawing to an inside straight -- it's about the play and not what's being bet.

But Ace's point that fighting the good fight can end up losing the game is also valid. The way Bush won the electoral but not the popular, or the way Hillary got smoked by Obama in the Democratic convention, are two recent examples. The game's rules decide what role the players must play.

And now, having validated nearly everyone (with a few exceptions), everyone back in the mud pit and get to rasslin'!

335 I can't believe I'm still reading this.

336

 I love how ace is turning into chuckles johnson.That is an unfair slander.

Absolutely.  Ace and the cob loggers have not summarily banned anyone for disagreeing with them.

337 "And this is officially the first time I've ever defended Ace, the Manhattanite, in a purity thread."




I'd like to suggest the term "Red Chowder Republican"  to describe the Hudson River school of Republicanism.

Never be be cross with anyone you prepped with at Choate....

338 Posted by: chemjeff at June 17, 2010 07:20 PM (Gk/wA)

I feel in watching as an independent that the republican party is lost in a total fog.  I feel like they need so kind of direction and fast.  Yes, everyone rallied around Scott in MA  but he wasn't really a know quantity, he was a crap shoot but the only crap shoot you had.  And miracle of miracles he won.  And yes he has proven that he can make things slightly unpleasant for the other side, but really, they are going to get it all through anyway and then you will all be shocked and horrified. 

I don't have answers for you.  You need more Chris Christies and Sarah Palins and when you do have them, you eat them for lunch.  If you are honest you will realize that any normal well educated patriotic person isn't thinking of "public service" anymore.  who really wants to do this?  You put your whole life and your family on the media chopping block and the fact that you inadvertently stole some candy when you were three and in the stroller becomes a huge deal and you are then discredited and gone....because you are a republican or a conservative.  Meanwhile....if you are a dem I bet you could commit murder on national tv and get away with it, saying "well the poor guy was under pressure, you have to understand". 

I think the republicans are in a lot of trouble and I think the worst part is they don't see it.   I understand Ace's need to try and reign everyone in and sort of make things appear as though they are normal.  The conspiracy people sort of represent crazy cousin albert who you pull out on holidays but keep in the attic when company comes.  I don't know what the answer is, but I do know the dems are really beating the republicans and it doesn't seem right and they don't seem to realize it is happening or understand what to do to stop it.

339

Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at June 17, 2010 07:30 PM (cniXs)

Banned.  By using the term "cobloggers" you have revealed yourself as a cornite.  I saw the flag and everything.

340 Actually, Morgenholz, would it actually surprise you that I agree with ace that it's a stupid time to argue what Barton did?  I object mostly to the way that he (ace) is going about it though (which led to my comment about chuckles...which is actually undeserved, and I apologize.  I mean, ace actually is taking the time to read comments).

Look, we have our differences, but calling us all Paulians...well, sorry.  We all know exactly how ace meant that.  I mean, sorry, but insulting me in the hopes that I'll fall in line with his purity test is going to get my hackles up.  That behavior, the insulting because someone disagrees, is something I saw on LGF as it did its slow dive into insanity.  As odd as it sounds, I really like this place.  I mostly lurk, and I enjoy reading most of everyone's posts.  I do not, however, care to be insulted for agreeing that there are basic principles.  Unfortunately, my reaction to such things tends to be, well, less than cordial.

I stand by the last paragraph, and hell, even the 2nd paragraph of my original post, however.  That the rule of law should matter, but if BP agrees to settle, then they agree to settle.

341

_{I can't believe I'm still reading this.}

Here ya' Go! 

Better?

342 You put your whole life and your family on the media chopping block and the fact that you inadvertently stole some candy when you were three and in the stroller becomes a huge deal and you are then discredited and gone....because you are a republican or a conservative.

That's why I murdered those hookers.  I have ambition.

343 my cats are conspiraring to kill me and my family, then use our guns to start an armed takeover of the world

344

Companies paying claims in advance of any final judicial finding is a fairly common occurrence and is usually done to mitigate losses. Even evil insurance companies do this. It's very common with first-party coverages, for example after a hurricane they might send tons of claim people out to give partial payments so people can salvage as much as they can and then they'll settle up on a final payment later. Even in third-party liability insurance an insurer might make a partial payment in order to mitigate the loss if it's pretty clear that their client will be found liable and they'll only be arguing about the amount of damages later (rather than who's at fault).

In this case, I'm pretty darned sure that BP has said they'll pay all valid claims (essentially already admitting fault) and I think they've already started getting some money to people. Setting up an escroe is only to gauranty that a certain minimum will be available to pay. What is unprecedented is for the executive branch to have anything to do with the administration of a fund like that. Didn't the admin announce that Feinberg (the pay czar and guy who handled the 9/11 fund) is going to administer this? He seems like a guy with integrity, but this really should be handled by one of the courts. Say, whatever federal court has jurisdiction down along the gulf coast should have appointed a judicial master to oversee the disbursement.

And Ace, your comparison of the adminstration strong-arming BP to one party in an accident threatening to sue another party is an inapt analogy. The government is supposed to be the arbitrator of these disputes, not one of the participants. Now, if Obama just said something like: "You know you're at fault. Why don't you just set aside a big chunk of money so people will have confidence that they'll get paid." then I wouldn't really have a problem with that. In fact, I expect that judges try to convince obviously liable parties to settle all the time. But the adminstrator of those funds should be from the judicial branch. However, if Biden really did say something to the effect that "if you don't put the money up we'll take it anyway" then that is more than a little disturbing.

345 That's why I murdered those hookers.  I have ambition.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at June 17, 2010 07:35 PM

As long as they're dead girls and not live boys, you're good.

346 Ace should marry Gabe.

347 I hesitate to point out that Bobby Jindal is kind of sort of probably breaking a few laws* right about now, and I am all for it.

*Or maybe just regulations...same dif.

348

I agree that the John Birch Society had to be ignored because of their fringe status. However, we obviously were being infiltrated by communists. Posted by: maddogg

Um, not to put too fine a point on it but, the Birchers? They believed, as a core platform principle mind you, that Pres. Johnson was a Communist.

349

The best way to fight back against Democrats who abuse Constitutional principles is to make it easier for Democrats to win elections.

Does no one else care about the 48th Amendment, which clearly states:

"Neither Congress or the President shall use the threat of legal action to induce a private entity into entering an agreement in which they set aside private funds to reimburse those affected by an oil spill."

350

 _{my cats are conspiraring to kill me and my family, then use our guns to start an armed takeover of the world}

It's not them. 

It's the ToxoPlasmosis.

351

Posted by: Who cares about the rule of law? Not me at June 17, 2010 07:33 PM (zQiqq)

Well, it's all in the family.

I think, in all, this is a great place for this type of stuff to be vented, for the simple reason that IT DOESN"T FUCKING MATTER HERE.  We can bitch and piss and moan at each other, and it effects nothing.  It does, however, allow us to solidify our thoughts, and that is actually useful.

And I have no doubt, whatsoever, that Congressional Aides and White House Staff and other people with both raging hormones and some ability to influence events come to places like this to read these arguments and learn from them.

So maybe it does matter...

352 my cats are conspiraring to kill me and my family, then use our guns to start an armed takeover of the world

Posted by: navycopjoe at June 17, 2010 07:36 PM (gg4j2)

I'm with the cats.  They'll need a shovel man.

353 Posted by: garrett at June 17, 2010 07:34 PM (6nfpx) thank you. Hardcore makes everything better. I'm gonna go windmill the neighbors now.

354 371  if they could figure out how to open a can i would already be dead

355

Um, not to put too fine a point on it but, the Birchers? They believed, as a core platform principle mind you, that Pres. Johnson was a Communist.

I wouldn't know. I've never studied the John Birch Society. But I can certainly say that Johnson leaned socialist, but he was responsible for too many dead communists to identify too closely to them.

356 my cats are conspiraring to kill me and my family, then use our guns to start an armed takeover of the world Posted by: navycopjoe

Tango, tango, tango.

357

Um, not to put too fine a point on it but, the Birchers? They believed, as a core platform principle mind you, that Pres. Johnson was a Communist.

Posted by: Garbonzo the Garrulous

Well, not to put an even finer point on it, how would things have been different if they were right.

Who is this idiot plsiE)?

358

_{if they could figure out how to open a can i would already be dead}

They'll take the toxo back before they work on the cans. 

All part of the plan...excellent.

 

359 74 Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Suffering leads to chafing. Chafing leads to rashes. Rashes lead to discomfort. Discomfort leads to irritability. Irritability leads to indigestion. Indigestion leads to poor appetite. Poor appetite leads to bad eating habits. Bad eating habits lead to gout. Gout leads to swollen feet.

...you know, I'm not sure where I'm going with this.
Posted by: Monty

Let it fester and your dick falls off.

360 No, the Birchers thought Eisenhower was a communist.

361 but he was responsible for too many dead communists to identify too closely to them.

Posted by: maddogg

That particular piece of logic falls apart once you realize just who it was who managed to rack up the highest body count of communists.

362 But I can certainly say that Johnson leaned socialist, but he was responsible for too many dead communists to identify too closely to them. Posted by: maddogg

As you and I'll both agree, Pres. Johnson was not a Communist, then.  Birchers were the extremist nuts Reagan knew they were.

 

363 "EXCLUSIVE: Alert Issued for 17 Afghan Military Members AWOL From U.S. Air Force Base"

364 No, the Birchers thought Eisenhower was a communist. Posted by: chemjeff

Damn, I knew someone would correct me.

365

That particular piece of logic falls apart once you realize just who it was who managed to rack up the highest body count of communists.

Stalin? LBJ went to war (or at least escalated it) to prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia. Stalin just wanted total unquestioned power.

366 ace: "I think some people kind of like the minority and subconsciously want to remain in the minority, where they are free to agitate for whatever position strikes their fancy without having to worry that their representatives actually have any power."

You've gotta be kidding me, Dr. Freud. Maybe some people really believe in what they advocate, contemporaneously popular or, as you charge, not. We all get to fight and die on different hills, but to smear others because there's is further out front (IMO) is beneath you.

367

Stalin? LBJ went to war (or at least escalated it) to prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia. Stalin just wanted total unquestioned power.

Posted by: maddogg

Not just Stalin, communists in general.  Mao killed a shitload.  I am not arguing that Johnson was a communist.  I am just scoring debating points by taking something you said out of context, since that is what we have been doing here all day anyways.

368

I don't know which amazes and simultaneously depresses me more- the fact that Barton was so fucking stupid as to publicly come to the defense of BP (and he did), or that commenters on this blog actually agree with the fact that he said it.

 

369 Ace notices and reacts to every extremist wack-job on the site and completely ignores my sane and rational comments..... .....sort of like how the MSM will go to a Tea Party and do a 10-minute interview of someone who wants to appoint gerbils to the Supreme Court.....

370

382

"Lock Up Your Daughters and Your Goats - But Mostly your Goats"

371

This threads weak.  "Conspiracy Theories"?

ChamTrail, ChemTrail.

372

I don't know which amazes and simultaneously depresses me more- the fact that Barton was so fucking stupid as to publicly come to the defense of BP (and he did), or that commenters on this blog actually agree with the fact that he said it.

When we landed in Normandy and attacked the Germans, we were not defending Stalin.

373 Did someone say gerbils???

374

When we landed in Normandy and attacked the Germans, we were not defending Stalin.

But we apologised to the Germans for the "shakedown" when the surrendered?

375

388 Ace notices and reacts to every extremist wack-job on the site and completely ignores my sane and rational comments.

Someone's over due for some Jello puddin dippin...

376

When we landed in Normandy and attacked the Germans, we were not defending Stalin.

Posted by: maddogg at June 17, 2010 07:56 PM

and thank God we didn't quit when those krauts attacked Pearl Harbor

377

But we apologised to the Germans for the "shakedown" when the surrendered?

Apologising for Chicago thuggery in our government is not defending BP.

378 I'm desperately wondering how come we're not hearing anything about the suffering refugees in District 9 while the Joo media is distracting us with "World Cup" coverage in the same country.

(With apologies to someone I'm shamelessly ripping off from a Twitter post last weekend.)

379 "They disappeared over the course of the last two years, and none in the last three months."

wha?

380

I don't know which amazes and simultaneously depresses me more- the fact that Barton was so fucking stupid as to publicly come to the defense of BP (and he did), or that commenters on this blog actually agree with the fact that he said it.

 

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 17, 2010 07:52 PM (plsiE)

Really? What website were you on today?  Again with this "Anyone who does not agree or care that Barton's statement hurts the GOP politically is either an extremist whacko or a BP shill" bullshit?  Can't we just put that one to bed, already?

381 spank, sorry. I'll use another word. I"ll say "Dr. Spank thinks this."

382 The best part of the quote is that this disaster is tied around Obama's neck, but here comes Joe Barton to remind America, "Hey, remember which party more strongly supports corporations and oil-drilling! Don't forget us!" Obama owns this, but Barton got jealous and decided the GOP should own some of it too. Wonderful!

383 Again with this "Anyone who does not agree or care that Barton's statement hurts the GOP politically is either an extremist whacko or a BP shill" bullshit?  Can't we just put that one to bed, already? Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth

You're overstating Drew and Ace's position. For the last fucking time, they are arguing that the apology, THE fucking apology, is poor tactics.

They never said "Anyone who does not agree or care that Barton's statement hurts the GOP politically".

Sorry, you're just reading too much into their comments for that. How about, you know, we just not infer stuff that ain't necessary?

384
...because KSM was probably tortured or something like that and supposedly that's against the law and you know what? The Rule of Law can take a fifteen minute break on this and go have a cigarette while we finish waterboarding him.

I'm really surprised by this. I wish Ace had let us know earlier that he thought waterboarding was torture and thought George Bush was guilty of a war crime.

385

Apologising for Chicago thuggery in our government is not defending BP.

It most certainly is when the target of the "thuggery" is BP.  At least it'll be viewed that way- and perception is reality when it comes to politics.

386 Garbonzo,

I am not addressing ace's or drew's statements at all.  I am addressing the poster I to whom I replied.

I said everything I needed to say to ace and drew about that to ace and drew upthread.  I thought we'd moved on until Sir Non-Sequitur piped up.

387

You're overstating Drew and Ace's position. For the last fucking time, they are arguing that the apology, THE fucking apology, is poor tactics.

That part is likely true. Look at the shit it stirred up here today.

388 Ace -

I've seen this before, and it saddens me when it occurs.  It seems to be triggered when an important political issue is under discussion and you become convinced that the remarks of a few commenters on your blog will provide "aid and comfort to the enemy" because they make our side (your side) look bad.  I think you have a visceral reaction to the notion that your blog could turn out to be a vehicle used to achieve the opposite of the result that you seek and which you (correctly) consider so important.  I totally get that.  But I think you are not dealing with it in a rational manner, or at a minimum I think you are not making the best of what you see as a bad situation. 

If you look calmly at what each of the posters were saying last night (I know, who has the time?), I think you will see that the overwhelming majority of them were (a) responding to a hell of a lot of facts and statements, (b) rapidly,  (c) with lots of over the top comments in the spirit of this blog, and (d) with no one moderating who could step in and clarify the points of agreement and isolate the few items on which there was actual disagreement.  The result was that a lot of sensible statements were trashed, ignored or distorted by angry counter-commenters, including you and Drew.  That is just a damn shame.  You have a largely intelligent, well-educated, thoughtful readership.  You don't owe them a damn thing, of course, but you would do yourself and the causes you espouse a favor if you could summon the energy to step back, see them in that light, give them (or almost all of them) the benefit of the doubt, and then try to moderate the shouting match by summarizing what you think are the points of agreement and narrow down to the bare minimum those points on which you think there is important disagreement.  And then maybe ask for a "show of hands" of posters who agree with you.  I think if you or Drew had done that, you both would have found that the Ace-o-sphere was in "violent agreement" last night.  And you wouldn't be morose or pissed off at so many of us.  Instead, you might have been in a position to state that posters X, Y and Z were idiots and everyone else seemed to be pretty sane.  And that, I think, would go a long way towards preventing your blog from being used by the opposition to tar your opinions which, I think, is what really has you so upset.

Love you man,
Z

389

jeezus.

i wasn't defending BP, i thought i i saw everyone defending  eachother if gvt comes knocking we want a court between me , you and seiu or something similar.

390 Stupak: "Legitimate" For BP Escrow Account To Fund Health CareWasn't it PJ O'Rourke who said something about giving politicians access to money and power was like giving teenagers access to booze and fast cars?

391

It's deja vu all over again.  As soon as I saw Paul talking about the CRA I saw 3-4 House seats slipping away in November. Barton probably put another 3-4 out of reach.  We don't have enough slack to be able to afford these unforced errors.

If you are worried about the rule of law, the only thing you should be thinking about, every word, every interview, every speech, you have to be thinking about how you are going to get the 20% of the population that votes based on national mood to vote against Dems in Nov.

392

Really? What website were you on today?  Again with this "Anyone who does not agree or care that Barton's statement hurts the GOP politically is either an extremist whacko or a BP shill" bullshit?  Can't we just put that one to bed, already?

No one is calling them an extremist whacko or BP shill.  Just incredibly tone deaf when it comes to politics.

Is Barton a BP shill?  I doubt it.  However, he went out of his way to portray himself as such when he came to the defense of BP.  It was an incredibly stupid attempt to score points against Obama and guaranteed to backfire. 

Tell you what- strike up a conversation with every random person you meet, and tell them you feel sorry for BP after Obama shook them down for $20 billion in reimbursement funds.  Let us know how that turns out.

393

The Left has already dug up that Barton has received a shit-ton of campaign contributions from energy companies.

So now he gets painted as a Big Oil shill.

What's that, you say? Obama got a bunch of money from BP? Oh, well. That narrative is buried under this old one brought new again by Barton - the GOP is in the pocket of the oil fatcats.

Awesome.

Smart fucking thinking, that apology.

 

394 410

WTF are you babbling on about?  That "national mood" you mention took a whole lot to get where it is.  It is not going dissipate just because one guy mentioned CRA and another stepped on his dick while trying to point out this "escrow account" is horseshit.

When you have crawled out from under your desk, can you answer a simple question?

How many house seats do the Dems lose when one of their congressmen says something stupid?  I'd like to be able to keep a running tally.

395 I'm late to the party, but I feel like I have to jump in. 

I can't believe the way some of the commenters have piled on to Drew.  Even if you disagree with every fucking word he said in that post, it doesn't justify the personal attacks in the comments. I read every comment in the Barton thread, and I'm seriously disturbed that you guys thought it was hunky-dory to hurl that sort of shit at someone who provides entertainment and food for thought and well-written posts on a damn near daily basis - for NOTHING in return.  Are you really so damned imbecilic that you can't civilly disagree with him?  And to accuse Drew of responding nastily - he didn't get anywhere close to the level of shit that was being thrown at him.

Are you guys really so fucking oblivious that you don't realize that Drew and Ace and Gabe and all the other bloggers here that you love to abuse mercilessly are giving you something and really not getting anything in return?  If Ace decided to close up the sandbox tomorrow and go home, where are you going to go then?  But you think it's perfectly OK to take the free fucking gift they give you and shit all over it.

396

The Texas Republican received $1.5 million in donations last year from big oil, according to Open Secrets.

Barton's biggest donor is Anadarko Petroleum --at $146,500 -- a company that drills heavily in the deepwater Gulf and has suffered from the drilling moratorium.

Kickass! We're taking it to Obama now!

397 I'm so sorry I missed this thread.

398
wow Alice, you're a wonderful peacemaker

399

How many house seats do the Dems lose when one of their congressmen says something stupid?  I'd like to be able to keep a running tally.

When they do, our side will try to take advantage.  The trick is not to give ammo to the other side when they're pointing an empty gun at you.

400

Tell you what- strike up a conversation with every random person you meet, and tell them you feel sorry for BP after Obama shook them down for $20 billion in reimbursement funds.  Let us know how that turns out.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 17, 2010 08:20 PM (plsiE)

Tell you what - strike up a conversation with every random person you meet on November 1st, and ask them how what Barton said on June 17th affects how they are going to vote.  Let us know if anyone even knows who or what you are talking about.

401

How many house seats do the Dems lose when one of their congressmen says something stupid?  I'd like to be able to keep a running tally.

None, because the media wing of the party buries it.  Seen many hour long specials on Etheridge assaulting those students?

The sad reality is the the slowest 20% of the population decides all elections, and they don't vote based on rational arguments.  They go with the herd.

402

dagny, i wish i had, i believe i was called a paulian for my opinion.

grrr

pretty rude. heh.

403 I'm not here to make peace.  This is not about making peace, this is about some people who need to wake the hell up and realize that shitting where they eat is a bad idea.  Most other blogs would have started dropping the banhammer for the idiocy going on in the Barton thread, but since that's not the way things work here, people think they can take a dump on the fucking coffee table of the house they're a guest in.

404

Tell you what - strike up a conversation with every random person you meet on November 1st, and ask them how what Barton said on June 17th affects how they are going to vote.  Let us know if anyone even knows who or what you are talking about.

If and when the Dems run a campaign ad featuring Barton apologising to BP, think they'll remember then?

405

412, bingo Warden

Barton could have gotten on his soapbox about the legality & mechanics of the $20bn... without ever uttering the words "I apologize."

Instead, libs have the meme they've been waiting 58 days for. Dumb.

406 See, the problem here is that all this sea lawyering and handwringing is not going to make what Barton said matter all that much in November.

All this talk of "tactics" and "optics" and whether or not Barton was right to say what he did or is wrong to say what he did...well, it's all bullshit.  It's June 17th, 60 days into an ongoing clusterfuck he had nothing to do with and at least 60 days from the end of that clusterfuck he had nothing to do with.

407
I'm not here to make peace.

I know, Alice, so shut the fuck up. All you're doing is stirring shit and kissing ass.

408 Ace.
 Sure, you're right that we can't allow the extreme right stifle our message to the majority.  But, remember, we just went through watching the Republican majority so 'moderate' our principals as to not only lose the extreme right, but the moderates, and all three branches of the government as well. 
So you'll have to excuse me if on some level principals remain as important as political spin and posturing.  Sure, we have to win elections, but unless it is with conservatives, we haven't really won anything.  A bunch of big government representatives with an R by their name is no victory. 

More to the subject at hand, the 20 bill slush fund is a pretty transparent attempt by Obama to make any payoffs by BP  appear to have only happened because HE forced them to.  Last thing he wants is for BP to have the chance to make this right on their own.  He must make it appear that only his government power FORCED them to pay up.  From now on, it's not BP paying claims, it's the government. 

409

If and when the Dems run a campaign ad featuring Barton apologising to BP, think they'll remember then?

Posted by: Hollowpoint

That's not a bad point.  I don't think it is going to help them much, but it wouldn't be a bad ad for them to run.

410

425

The first 60 days, this thing belonged 100% to Obama-BP. Not anymore.

411 Warden@415,

Counterpoints:

Assuming you trust the numbers from Soros' Open Secrets or I from Center for Responsive Politics...

According to Center for Responsive Politics, the biggest recipient of campaign money from BP for the last 20 years was... Obama.

BP is the company that was negligent and intimately tied with this administration (and others); Anadarko Petroleum doesn't seem to have such a poor record.

The nation still approves by a strong majority the continuation Gulf drilling.


So, Barton maintains moral authority over Team Obama even when looking at the downside of this political spin.

412 Posted by: Alice H at June 17, 2010 08:28 PM (qJHYy)

Well, it is reassuring to know that somebody is willing to defend the blogger's Sacred Honor.

413

The first 60 days, this thing belonged 100% to Obama-BP. Not anymore.

Posted by: Cuffy Meigs at June 17, 2010 08:39 PM

Really?  You really think Barton gets them off the hook?  I guess we'll have to check on that in a week or so to see if it is playing out that way.

414 but since that's not the way things work here, people think they can take a dump on the fucking coffee table of the house they're a guest in.
Posted by: Alice H

Ace is made of sterner stuff than other candy-ass blogs. He'll live.

415

You really think Barton gets them off the hook?

Of course not. He just put theGOP on the hook as well. Way to go, Barton.

416

This just in, Krauthammer on Barton:

"I think that wins the award for the most politically stupid statement of the year. We can retire it right now, in June."

Video.

417

Gee Alice, I feel so terrible.

*sniff*

 

418 Can Ace or one of the other attorney like people lays some knowledge on me. Isn't BP's "legal" liability is only 85 million, IIRC. So BP setting up this slush fund is in a sense going above and beyond their liability. Yes BP could tell everyone to F off, but it will kill them if they have to go to court and have a jury decide on it.
Here is a lawsuit from my city from a few years ago. http://tinyurl.com/38zpqem
Here is what the jury decided. http://tinyurl.com/3235a6n

Don't ever let these things get to the jury, the jury always sympathizes and is not real interested in the rule of law.

Also, Soylent Green^® is people.

419 I think the conpiracy theory is that BP somehow wanted this to happened...that they "don't care".   Drilling for oil is a complicated business and it's amusing how so many non-technical peeople want to play armchair CEO or engineer when it comes to this oil spill. 

420 All you're doing is stirring shit and kissing ass.

Can't take what you dish out, eh?

421 When did Krauthammer get to be the spokesperson for conservativess?  McCain's only wise move during the campaign was to select Palin over some dull moderate Republican, and K whined about that.   He was still swooning over Obama speeches not too long ago.   It seems to me he thinks that the Republican party can dump the social conservative issues and still win, but that will only put the South and Midwestern states into play for the Democrats. 

422 MORMONS DID 9/11!

423 What we've got heaah...is a faaailyuh...to communeecate.

424 Well. ity's far too late to make a difference here, but it seems to me that in the coming cxampaign against Obama and the Democrats, there will be only a certain amount of oxygen in the room. The public can only hear so many things. Choosing marginal stuff like Barton's stupid commentary leaves less room for more solid (and more generally agreed to) actions that steal our rights and ignore due process.

There is so much to campaign on that pulls your allies in, it doesn't seem worth bringing up stuff that makes your allies reluctant to sign on.

But it's pretty late in this debate so fuck it.

425 I mean, Hell, I came in after the shoe guy.

426 I didn't know Drew's mom was named Alice.

427 The best threads are the ones where the shit's going down.  I read them top to bottom.

428 445 I mean, Hell, I came in after the shoe guy.

Heh, I'm after the guy who posted after the shoe guy, but I read your comment and agree with you, so there's that.

429 For every Barton ad the Dems run, about 20 anti-Dem/Obama ads can be run in kind by the Pubs. If they show some sack.....

430 I find it hard to explain why our politicians seem to be driving our great Country toward destruction and what could thereby open the door to a global dictatorship. I don't think Obama et al have evil intent (Bush, too for that matter. He certainly made a couple major moves that opened the door to Obama as far as possibly taking over entire American industries) I think they really want to "love their neighbor". Unfortunately, that is exactly how the worst of the worst regimes of the 20th century made there subtle inroads. Struggling to explain how such regimes came into power and how America could possibly open the door to such a monstrosity led me to read stuff like this. A major reason I find the need to credit supernatural entities, powers and principalitites with directing this (what looks like, from a broad historic perspective) march toward a one world government is the sheer absurdity of that end being the product of a long term human plan. First of all, implementation of the political, economic and ideological strategies necessary to blind side the world would require a team of Albert Einstein / Stephen Hawking / (insert mega genius here) with unflappable tenacity working in cohesion for a couple of genrations! At any rate, check the links if you are interested.