I don’t have time to expand on this right now, but I assume the point is obvious to intelligent readers (as opposed to Obama koolaid drinkers).
Why is it that the president would talk to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions, but he thinks that, in the middle of arguably the biggest domestic crisis of his presidency, it’s a waste of his time to have a conversation with the head of British Petroleum?
” if I had to choose some one from Reverend Wright’s Church or Some one from an Evangelical christian Church, it would be a toss up”
If you can’t figure out why that’s a moronic statement you shouldn’t vote.
Bill, how should our government use its power to impose in this situation?
“I would still vote for him over anyone who had Palin as the VP candidate.”
Palin would have been a better President.
Best thread evar!!!
Great question, by the way, Rand.
I sort of look at the situation like a fire that starts in an Apartment complex. Everyone doesn’t site around and argue over who should put the fire out. The complex owners don’t contend that the renters put the fire out while the fire dept sits by and says, “Ohhh you guys are gonna pay for this fire but first we gotta find out who started it.” The whole while the complex burns to the ground and spreads to nearby businesses and homes while they litigate, argue, and finger point.
No, the owners try to build a complex that employs a number of fire mitigation measures. The renters try and follow best practices that don’t lead to a fire hazard situation. The fire dept arrives when the inevitable accident does happen and selfishly puts their lives and resources on the line to end the catastrophe as quickly as possible. Once it is all said and done, then you try and determine root cause and the party responsible for the incident.
Obama is willing to eagerly extend an open hand to Iran but quickly reaches for the jack boot to put on the throat of BP. I absolutely think the only thing that can explain their throat stomping and subsequent feet dragging is that they intentionally want to make this situation as bad as possible to pump up their green jobs and technologies initiative.
Of related interest:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/Once-a-government-pet-BP-now-a-capitalist-tool-95942659.html
I knew it! BP is run by James Taggarts and Oreen Boyles!
if we wanted to keep using gas powered cars, plastics, etc without drilling for oil, couldn’t we use a variety of alternatives, including thermal depolymerization? Couldn’t the price eventually come down enough to make it reasonable?
Yes, Bob. (Are you the original Bob? Why the 1?) And for my nickel the best candidate is engineered photosynthesizing unicellular pond scum. Why screw around with the Carboniferous Period middle man? Let alone putting up giant windmill or puttering around with heavy metals (nasty) to stash in batteries your electricity from silicon panels.
Take a page from Nature. If the best way to use the Sun’s energy were with semiconducting silicon, I don’t doubt we’d have evolved solar cells on our backs. But instead you’ll notice almost every single living thing on the planet uses combustion as its power source and hydrocarbons as its energy storage medium. Why mess with success? This is the power cycle every other living thing uses — we should do the same.
Our only real problem is that the hydrocarbons naturally produced aren’t quite what we want. But this is where genetic engineering saves the day: if we can program E. coli to make human insulin, we can surely program some alga to synthesize fuel, and that is what we should and I think will do.
It will be a nice closed cycle, with perfectly innocuous circulating components — CO2, water , oxygen — and easy to adjust. Too much CO2 from combustion? Crank up the production side and take more out. And we’ve already got the entire system of distribution of liquid fuel set up. Genius! If we all used solar panels and plug-in hybrids and someone invented the scheme today, he’d be hailed as a hero.
What you must not overlook, however, is that research into the biotech necessary to design organisms is expensive, and can only be undertaken by a wealthy society — one which is already using the cheapest possible energy source, which is oil and gas drilled out of the ground. If one were to foolishly prematurely shut off that cheap energy source, and force society to go to a far more expensive power source, the result would be to greatly impoverish society, top to bottom. And there would no longer be available the financial and human capital to pursue the ultimate solution.
Neanderthals did not discover germs and invent hygiene, not because they were stupid or lacked motivation, but because they lacked leisure time away from the pursuit of the crude necessities of life, food and shelter. Society innovates in direct proportion to its wealth and leisure. If you want the best environmental and social solution faster — burn the cheap oil now to fuel its discovery.
bob: how should our government use its power to impose in this situation?
Not like this:
Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.
It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.
The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.
Even if BP wanted the help; they can’t authorize the Dutch Government to perform operations inside US territorial waters. BP would need US acceptance. However, whether BP agreed or not, the US could allow the Netherlands to do exactly what they were offering. None of that is a “statist” issue. That’s simply a federal government performing its diplomatic role.
Bennet is an example of the old definition of insanity. He would vote for Obama again because, even after the last 17 months, Obama as President is better than Palin as Vice President. Yeah… right.
Bob,
BP can’t go to private or government property without permission. The government is the conduit to speed access for clean up crews, for example. The claims process will be a mess. I’m sure there will be mediation and an increase in mediators to speed the settlements along. But the crux of the matter is this problem didn’t come from a lack of regulation, it came from incompetence among the bureaucrats hired to enforce the current regulations and be ready for disasters like this. We had regulations but lax enforcement. We had clean up plans but no equipment. More regulations would not have helped this situation on iota. Governments generally don’t have the expertise just the logistics.
One thing about liberals is you can be sure of their ingratitude after you’ve helped them reach some goal.
Yet, those beaten wives still go back for more, even prison in their undying loyalty. I don’t get it either.
Others are picking up the meme.
Gunga wrote:
Everybody worships something …. (for most Ayn Rand libertarians it’s typically their own ridiculously overblown egos).
Can’t speak to what “Ayn Rand libertarians” worship — doubt Gunga can either — but what Rand herself worshipped was man’s capacity for greatness — for heroic achievements via his faculty of reason. That’s why she was among those invited to witness the launch of Apollo 11 and why she praised the whole mission as a magnificent triumph of man’s rational faculty.
Go to the following link for an article by Rand on the launch and on the mission.
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=objectivism_apollo11
I’m non-religious, Gunga, and neither me nor my morals blow in the wind.
I take it you worship Yahweh, that Big Overblown Ego in the Sky.
Palin is an interesting litmus test. A lot of people are put off by her accent as much as anything else. When you ask them to get specific about why they think she is dumb etc. they cite some of the setup got you interviews (you can see Russia from Alaska) while ignoring unset up faux pas on the President’s part (I have visited 57 states etc). The easiest explanation is that she didn’t go to the right schools, and doesn’t speak with one of the acceptable accents. I am not so much pro-Palin, as anti-anti Palin.
Michael,
That Ayn Rand rand piece kicks !
Paul
Now now. If there is a God, and He did create the entire universe, He does have some justification for having a big ego. Now His followers have less justification for having big egos (in fact, the religion I was brought up under says we have no justification for having big egos). I mean, just because you follow the most popular guy in school doesn’t really make you special, does it? It just makes you a follower.
“I am not so much pro-Palin, as anti-anti Palin.”
At the risk of bring bringing this thread even further off topic, I believe the above statement explains much of the Palin phenomenon. Since many of the people attacking her choose to do so on such obvious class grounds (she is not “one of us”), the attacks also look like they are aimed at middle class people in general. The media types seem to be saying that such people really have no place in the public debate. That such things like public policy should be left to “experts” such as themselves. That kind of arrogance tends to tick people off.
Chris, umm.. I think people attack her on the stupid things that she says. And people who defend her do so because of an unfounded assumption that she just must be saying sensible things and the “liberal-biased media” are only selectively quoting her. See Paul’s comment above for example: hey Paul, the issue is not whether or not she thinks creationism should be taught in schools, the issue is that she has explicitly stated that the separation of church and state is unnecessary and should be eliminated. Which is why I find the comments that she’s a defender of the Constitution so baffling.. she’s an open advocate of changing the Constitution.
…the issue is that she has explicitly stated that the separation of church and state is unnecessary and should be eliminated.
I don’t believe that she has done so (you are far too trusting of the media), but even if she had, I would still prefer that to a Marxist or (in Biden’s case) an idiot, who have no concept of our national interests.
I wonder if Master Waddington even knows what “separation of church and state” even means or does he just chant that phrase over and over like a soothing mantra. (I’ll give him a hint: one thing is doesn’t mean is “not ever talking about religion in public.” It’s not Fight Club.)
I think that he’s Christophobic.
Trent,
My post was about why people defend her, not why people attack her. I was referring to the type of attack, not it’s motivation. Yes, I am sure those who attack her believe they are doing the republic a high service by keeping such a mad woman from attaining anything that even looks like influence. I’m sure that those of us not smart enough to see the danger appreciate you looking out for our best interest. I’m also sure though that such attacks would be a bit more effective without the vindictive class based stench they tend to carry (see Sullivan, Andrew).
A lot of people are put off by her accent as much as anything else.
This is something I noted in myself, the first time was when I read the Charles Gibson interview transcript. Whenever I read the text of anything she’s said it’s like a different person. She has a natural intelligence that to me is astounding. When you read the Gibson interview, not only do you realize Charlie didn’t know what he was talking about, but Sarah gave two very accurate answers to the question. I had to look up international law on the subject to find out Sarah was right in both cases. She’s almost the mirror of Biden. He sound right and is wrong, she sounds wrong and is right.
It’s a weird phenomena that I’ve checked a number of her speeches on. I can understand someone’s dislike of her, but assuming she lacks intelligence is a huge mistake. I find myself disagreeing with her mostly on the fringe of economic issues. I’d like her to study some of Thomas Sowell’s writings.
I should mention that I have no idea what you guys are talking about when you say her “accent”.. you all sound like yanks to me.
“Chris, umm.. I think people attack her on the stupid things that she says.”
Could you name a few? It’s hard to imagine Palin’s ever said things as stupid as any of the average Obama pronunciamento, and yet people voted for him.
I don’t get the accent thing either and I am a Yank. She just sounds like everyone I’ve ever heard talk who comes from the Midwest or West part of the US. In other words, she doesn’t sound like the people who live in the liberal media hotbed of the Northeast and it’s capitol, New York City. Which of course to them means she sounds like an inbred hick. All I can say is, thank God she doesn’t have the dreadful Noo Yawk/Noo Joisey accent — grinding, scourging, droning, with all the music to the ear of an iron rasp being dragged on concrete. I had to hear a lot of that in Miami due to all the transplanted Northerners that had moved there after being driven out from New York and environs. Then I moved, first to Orlando, and now Virginia, and my ears at last can relax.
“All I can say is, thank God she doesn’t have the dreadful Noo Yawk/Noo Joisey accent — grinding, scourging, droning, with all the music to the ear of an iron rasp being dragged on concrete.”
Oh yeah? I have a “Noo Yawk” accent. I got your accent right here, lady.
(Was that Giuliani’s problem, I onder. I don’t recall he had much of an accent, but we came from a similar background–we even went to the same Brooklyn high school, a few years apart–so I may be so used to it I didn’t notice.)
“Oh yeah? I have a “Noo Yawk” accent. I got your accent right here,”
Mine is a very fine and sophisticated Massachusetts accent. I got it by spending the first 40 years of my life there. The NuYoork accent isn’t much admired by elites either, the prefer the homogenized one they teach in communications classes at all “real” universities.
Accent my ass. Half the reason Sarah Palin freaks out the Modern Left is because she’s a good-looking woman with a gaggle of kids and a stud husband. They suspect she has a great sex life and that makes them insanely jealous.
That could be it Carl. All I know is I have to read the transcript.
Now they want to discredit her by claiming she had a boob job. Don’t they know, she might have been broke, but she’s never been flat busted?
It’s really funny when the people complaining about her accent sound just like her.
Re the “Noo Yawk” accent — I’m thinking of the way Fran Drescher speaks, at least when she’s playing that nanny character. Giuliani wasn’t so bad. Drescher combined her accent with that horrible (“HHHHHHAAAAAAAribble!”) voice and that laugh, the one that killed nearby vegetation. Like I said, I grew up in Miami and I had to hear too much of that sort of voice. Also don’t the people in that Jersey Shore show all talk that way? I’ve never seen it, only heard stories from the survivors– I mean viewers.