RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard

RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 3:15:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife The federal government did not cause this spill. The responsible parties are BP and the other companies involved. So it is beyond me how you do not see the hypocrisy in Jindal decrying government intervention when it is politically expedient then complaining about the lack of government intervention when that becomes politically expedient. Part of the problem is, you keep insisting on misusing the term "intervention." The federal government has both the lawful authority and responsibility to oversee the cleanup of oil spills in coastal waters. It doesn't matter who caused it, or who's responsible for cleaning it up - the federal government has oversight responsibility to manage and coordinate the respones. Exercising that responsibility is no more an example of "intervention" than painting stripes on an Interstate highway is federal intervention. It's just their role - it's what they do. If you can find one single instance in which Jindal said he is totally opposed to any role whatsoever for the federal government - or even a quote where he says he is opposed to federal involvement in oil spills - then you'll at least have the beginning of an argument. As it is, you've got nothing at all. If you want to accuse the man of being a hypocrite, you need to find something he said that contradicts what he's doing. And you haven't been able to do that yet.

rulemylife -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 4:25:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda If you can find one single instance in which Jindal said he is totally opposed to any role whatsoever for the federal government - or even a quote where he says he is opposed to federal involvement in oil spills - then you'll at least have the beginning of an argument. As it is, you've got nothing at all. If you want to accuse the man of being a hypocrite, you need to find something he said that contradicts what he's doing. And you haven't been able to do that yet. I though I already did, but let's try again. Are we reading the same thing? Transcript of Gov. Jindal's GOP response to Obama speech - CNN.com In the end, it comes down to an honest and fundamental disagreement about the proper role of government. We oppose the National Democratic view that says the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 4:27:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda If you can find one single instance in which Jindal said he is totally opposed to any role whatsoever for the federal government - or even a quote where he says he is opposed to federal involvement in oil spills - then you'll at least have the beginning of an argument. As it is, you've got nothing at all. If you want to accuse the man of being a hypocrite, you need to find something he said that contradicts what he's doing. And you haven't been able to do that yet. I though I already did, but let's try again. Are we reading the same thing? Transcript of Gov. Jindal's GOP response to Obama speech - CNN.com In the end, it comes down to an honest and fundamental disagreement about the proper role of government. We oppose the National Democratic view that says the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government. Yup, both reading the same thing. You just dont have the ability to separate the plain English of what Jindal said and what you want to attribute to him and he never said.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 4:38:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda If you can find one single instance in which Jindal said he is totally opposed to any role whatsoever for the federal government - or even a quote where he says he is opposed to federal involvement in oil spills - then you'll at least have the beginning of an argument. As it is, you've got nothing at all. If you want to accuse the man of being a hypocrite, you need to find something he said that contradicts what he's doing. And you haven't been able to do that yet. I though I already did, but let's try again. Are we reading the same thing? Transcript of Gov. Jindal's GOP response to Obama speech - CNN.com In the end, it comes down to an honest and fundamental disagreement about the proper role of government. We oppose the National Democratic view that says the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government. We're reading the same thing, but it clearly doesn't mean the same thing to both of us. No matter how many times I look at that, I fail to find the part that can reasonably be construed as "the federal government has no legitimate responsibility to do anything at all." He said that he doesn't think people should be overly dependent on government, not that government should go out of business altogether. I'm no fan of the man, but he did not say what you seem to think he said.

domiguy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 4:40:18 PM)
http://emergency.louisiana.gov/Releases/06212010-injunction.html A Forward Leaning Response The release of oil into the Gulf of Mexico is not just about our coast. It is fundamentally about our way of life in Louisiana. Our shrimpers, our fishermen, the coasts that make Louisiana Sportsmen's Paradise - this all makes up Louisiana and this is our way of life. We have to do absolutely everything we can to protect our land, our businesses and our communities. -------- PRESS RELEASE Office of Governor Jindal Files Brief in Support of Suit Calling for Injunction on Moratorium of Deepwater Drilling BATON ROUGE (June 21, 2010) - The Office of Governor Jindal filed an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana in support of the removal of the president’s moratorium on deepwater drilling. The brief argues that states are entitled to participate in the policy and decision-making process by the federal government on issues relating to the exploration and development of Outer Continental Shelf minerals and requires the Secretary of Interior to cooperate with affected states. The brief states, “Inasmuch as the State of Louisiana was completely ignored by defendants in the establishment of this moratorium for alleged safety reasons, the question arises whether that failure renders Defendants’ action invalid.” The brief also argues that the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMESA) ensures revenues from the Outer Continental Shelf are to be shared with states for specific purposes including mitigating damages to fish, wildlife or natural resources and conservation projects. According the brief, the moratorium does not address the obligations of the federal government to the states via GOMESA. The brief argues that the impact of moratorium runs counter to the federal government’s obligations and will negatively impact Louisiana’s economy. To view the brief, click here. ----------- Apparently as long as the next oil spill is on the outer continental shelf Gov Jindal is not overly concerned.

rulemylife -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 5:30:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Transcript of Gov. Jindal's GOP response to Obama speech - CNN.com In the end, it comes down to an honest and fundamental disagreement about the proper role of government. We oppose the National Democratic view that says the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government. Yup, both reading the same thing. You just dont have the ability to separate the plain English of what Jindal said and what you want to attribute to him and he never said. Well, having been raised with English as my primary language I like to think I understand it pretty well. So Willbeur help me and point out what I am attributing to him that he never said. I mean the quote seems pretty straightforward. He doesn't believe in dependence on government. That is until his state is in trouble and he needs to depend on the federal government. Which I'm told does not make him hypocritical in any possible way.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/21/2010 5:38:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Transcript of Gov. Jindal's GOP response to Obama speech - CNN.com In the end, it comes down to an honest and fundamental disagreement about the proper role of government. We oppose the National Democratic view that says the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government. Yup, both reading the same thing. You just dont have the ability to separate the plain English of what Jindal said and what you want to attribute to him and he never said. Well, having been raised with English as my primary language I like to think I understand it pretty well. So Willbeur help me and point out what I am attributing to him that he never said. I mean the quote seems pretty straightforward. He doesn't believe in dependence on government. That is until his state is in trouble and he needs to depend on the federal government. Which I'm told does not make him hypocritical in any possible way. Siggh. Not believing in INCREASING DEPENDENCE ON GOVERNMENT doesnt mean that you dont believe that GOVERNMENT HAS A PROPER ROLE. He couldnt say it more plainly. Your teachers failed miserably.

LadyEllen -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 4:25:52 AM)
Does it not follow though, that if increasing dependence on government is not the way to strengthen the country then the country should be strengthened by decreasing dependence on government? In this it seems the hypocrisy lays in apparently standing for the strengthening of the country after this fashion, but then by his own words elsewhere conceding that such a path should be to his detriment in this instance and so insisting on government intervention. And is this not the issue at the heart of this argument? That each one of us believes in government intervention and it having the resources, drawn from the taxpayer and delivered through the apparatus of government, to support us when we need it, but that whilst some recognise the need to provide for such eventualities, others do not and instead appear to believe that such interventions can be created from thin air at need and otherwise should not be their problem to provide for at all. E

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 8:40:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Does it not follow though, that if increasing dependence on government is not the way to strengthen the country then the country should be strengthened by decreasing dependence on government? No, not at all! I have raccoons in my backyard. They raise a family each year in a hollow tree about 50 meters from my patio. In any given year, I have anywhere from 6 to 8 raccoons rampaging about my yard and patio, looking for mischief to get involved in, and I enjoy watching their adventures. That's just about the right size population for my yard. I don't want any more than that, because if there were a larger tribe they'd start to become a problem, but that doesn't mean I'm a hypocrite for enjoying the ones I do have and not wanting to give them up. Sometimes the porridge is ju-u-u-ust right. I see nothing hypocritical in Jindal's statement and actions. Until someone produces a quote where he says he doesn't believe the federal government should have any powers or responsibilities, or doesn't believe they should have any involvement in oil spills - or something of that nature - I don't see the inherent contradiction.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 8:58:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Does it not follow though, that if increasing dependence on government is not the way to strengthen the country then the country should be strengthened by decreasing dependence on government? Yes. What is missing from the rants in this thread is that there is a difference between "dependence on government" and government performing its proper role. Obviously different people will have different definitions of "proper role". However, all Jindal has ever said wrt the spill is that the government has assumed the role of regulator of the oil industry and protector of natural resources/coastline etc. For him to expect them to meet the responsibilities they have taken on, while disagreeing about what the Feds role SHOULD BE isnt the least bit hypocritical. (And I don't think he even disagrees with their role in the gas industry. BTW this is in stark contrast to Katrina, where the Feds role is NOT as a first responder, yet the criticism of the Bush Administrations response was primarily over responsibilities that the first responders actually had.

Moonhead -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 10:46:55 AM)
I dunno about that. Maybe this is a eurotrash liberal perspective, but if the eeeevil Fed Gov is running a publically funded body like FEMA, maybe it should be some fucking use when it's needed instead of providing a sinecure for some incompetent mate of the twat in the white house?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 11:13:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I dunno about that. Maybe this is a eurotrash liberal perspective, but if the eeeevil Fed Gov is running a publically funded body like FEMA, maybe it should be some fucking use when it's needed instead of providing a sinecure for some incompetent mate of the twat in the white house? Eurotrash liberal? No. Uninformed or misguided, apparently. In crisis management different units/organizations are assigned roles and responsibilities. Criticizing the crew that repairs water damage for failing to strengthen the levees makes no sense. That is what you are doing when you blame FEMA for failing in roles that it was never intended to serve.

Moonhead -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 11:26:04 AM)
When did I mention leevees? Evacuating New Orleans was their job, and they did a shitawful job of it. But of course, I get my information from the liberal biased press, not some blog run by people who think the civil rights movement in the '60s was the moment your country went down the shitter, so what do I know?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 12:08:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead When did I mention leevees? Evacuating New Orleans was their job, and they did a shitawful job of it. I was using an analogy. And you are 100% wrong. By law FEMA has no role unless and until a Governor requests that a State of Emergency be declared. That did not happen until 3 days after landfall, long after evacuation should have been completed.

Moonhead -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 1:26:02 PM)
What, so everybody was out of New Orleans immediately the Governor declared an emergency? Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 3:13:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead What, so everybody was out of New Orleans immediately the Governor declared an emergency? Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. Uh, no. They SHOULD have been out, but local government failed in that effort. State of emergency was requested in a letter 8/28...well after landfall.

Moonhead -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 3:43:57 PM)
All the Governor's fault then, and nothing to do with the idiot who was running FEMA being unable to find his arse with both hands and a diagram. How strange.

LadyEllen -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 4:08:07 PM)
Oh, are we talking levees and Katrina? Now, who can tell me who cut Federal funding to levee maintenance and construction?............. come on now..... I'll have to hurry you...... E

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 4:14:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Oh, are we talking levees and Katrina? Now, who can tell me who cut Federal funding to levee maintenance and construction?............. come on now..... I'll have to hurry you...... E Why is it a Federal responsibility in the first place?

LadyEllen -> RE: Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard (6/22/2010 4:20:36 PM)
Its your country m'dear, you tell me. Might be worth bonus points too. E

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625