-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Drudge already has this up, but it’s worth a comment. U.S. Rep. Charles Melancon of southeastern Louisiana shows, in very human terms, what the BP oil spill means. Watch this whole video, and watch what starts to happen with about 35 seconds left. This is real human emotion, utterly unfeigned. Unfortunately, Melancon does not get to finish his speech. He started to explain that these aren’t just Louisiana’s wetlands, but the nation’s wetlands. He is right. Look up the stats for yourself. They are staggering. These are the nesting grounds for a huge portion of all the nation’s waterfowl, the spawning grounds for a near-ocean-full of fish, the migratory habitat for an even larger proportion of our waterfowl. And the list goes on. This is a tragedy of almost unimaginable proportions. Those of us who have long supported offshore drilling need to recognize that we had become too complacent. The phenomenal safety record of such drilling, up until now, had led us to underestimate the potential harm. On the other hand, the growing story of horrible human error, bad luck, regulatory letdown (not that more regs were needed, but the regs in place needed to be actually enforced rather than officially waived), makes this an event so rare as to be almost certain to never be repeated. And the lackadaisical response — indeed, the actual interference with STATE response — by this administration is surely never to be repeated by any other administration if ANYthing even approaching this happens again. James Carville was right to blast President Obama. And Rep. Melancon is right to get choked up. My hat is off to him and my heart goes out to him — and to all the people of my home state, who have suffered so much in these past five years.
View all comments (101) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/05/28/what-the-oil-spill-means
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
- Hannah and Her Friends
- The Great Train Robbery
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Beth| 5.28.10 @ 12:41PM
While I’m not crazy about Charlie Melancon, Quin, seeing and hearing his deep distress was truly heartbreaking. Bobby Jindal’s controlled rage is something to behold, as well. Interesting, however, that Jimmy Carville’s absolute fury was suddenly tempered twenty-four hours after his initial outburst. In light of that outburst, the only thing Obama should and could have done was to cede management of the disaster to Bobby.
Ginger| 5.28.10 @ 12:45PM
This whole thing is such a catastrophe there are no words to express my outrage at the Obama administration do-nothing attitude & stupid, "we've been on it since day one", nonsense. Where's the proof of this? The pass the buck attitude & blame game gets nothing done. It's like Obama wants this to happen. If his name was Bush he'd have been literally crucified by now. The families of those killed in this tragedy have been totally ignored by this administration. The whole thing is shameful & frankly,bordering on insanity!
JJC| 5.28.10 @ 1:18PM
I do not blame Obama for this anymore than I blamed Bush for Katrina.
I do stand astonished at his lack of leadersip:
RULE #1:
Never leave the bridge during a storm.
That means no golf outings, no vacations, no fundraisers while people's lives and homeland is being destroyed.
It is had to believe how clueless and callous Obama's reaction has been up to now.
There is something wrong with this guy. I mean psychologically or emotionally off balance.
Tom| 5.30.10 @ 5:43PM
He hates white people, JJC. Simple as that.
If this WERE actually like Katrina, where the lives of blacks were at stake, you can bet your bottom dollar Obama would have been on the scene the next day, reassuring those people that the state is there to help bail them out.
When it's a disaster threatening hard-working white Americans? Yeah, forget it.
Jeremiah| 5.30.10 @ 9:25PM
CONSERVATIVE white people, Tom; I don't think Obama would have been so slow to respond if this eco-disaster had occurred in the coastal waters of the north east.
victor| 5.31.10 @ 7:25PM
Conservative, White Republican People.
What was that state that just got flooded out and no news coverage as there was for New Orleans?
See, I knew you forgot.
Just as Obama cannot remember.
Obama looks at America through race colored glasses. And then acts appropriately.
Jeremiah| 5.31.10 @ 8:40PM
God bless the good folks of Nashville, Tennessee (and surrounding environs)--and I never heard them whine or cry.
Margie| 5.28.10 @ 1:44PM
Isn't it true that if it weren't for the Liberals, we'd have been drilling on the land instead and thus able to avoid this type of disaster?
I asked my husband this question and he seems to think that. Because of the lawsuits against the oil co's. and their leases, there's no drilling, due to endless requests for "environmental impact statements", which tie up the leases for years until time runs out and they expire. So, if it is true, we have yet another preventable disaster that should have never happened, but thanks to the insanity of the Leftist mind.
May God save us from the Left.
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 1:52PM
Margie! So good to see you're back! You've been missed. :)
Margie| 5.28.10 @ 2:00PM
SoCon,
Thanks! I missed being here with you all. Visiting with my Mother in law who's in the hospital these days. She's a Nazi concentration camp survivor and the loveliest soul I've ever known. It amazes me how sometimes those that have suffered the most, love the most.
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 2:21PM
God love your mother in law, she must be an amazing woman. I bet she could write a book about her life.
I know you've been a good daughter in law.
Deborah D | 5.28.10 @ 3:02PM
Bless you, Margie, and your ailing Mother-in-law.
Regarding your post -- I believe you are exactly right about environmentalist culpability here. Krauthammer even mentions it today in a column here: http://www.ocregister.com/opin.....-deep.html
So, you and your husband are in good company. Welcome back, and best wishes to your family.
Margie| 5.29.10 @ 11:32AM
Deb D.,
Thanks for the kind words. I think that there are a lot of conservatives out there who are great thinkers and who could be great writers if they wished to, like Krauthammer. I know my husband could do it, and so could the super cool Gryzmlk. (Hey, Grz!) Well, I guess they do that here, anyway.
I was having a conversation with my sis in kaw last eve who doesn't quite know what she believes politically, but is outraged at the current situation because of Obama, but tends toward the tin foil hat brigade as far as her opinion of the oil companies, but that's only because she doesn't know enough about it. I'm working on her though.
Sis in Law~ "Big Oil IS greedy!"
Me~ "Big Oil makes the world go round!"
SoCon| 5.29.10 @ 12:30PM
I have no illusions about Big business, Margie. BP has a long track record of shoddy upkeep and poor quality control regarding its equipment.
I don't trust them, either. 11 men died for nothing, and their sudden deaths left their young families reeling with shock and grief.
This whole sorry, heartbreaking tragedy is unacceptable. It didn't have to happen.
Margie| 5.29.10 @ 12:55PM
Well SoCon, I am not saying anyone's an angel here. What I am saying is that liberals lie about oil and call it evil. They want us to use "alternative sources" for our energy. So people who don't know any better jump on that bandwagon. They equate the oil industry as evil, along with other large businesses, just because they're "big". That's what I'm saying is wrong. That idea. God gave us the oil in the earth that He gave us for a reason!
As for BP and this particular tragedy, and what you said about their shoddy record, I honestly am not aware. There's a lot of things I'm not aware of, but I do know that the demonization of "Big Oil" is a fraud.
SoCon| 5.29.10 @ 2:39PM
Liberals lie about a lot of things, don't they? BP is probably full of liberals. lol
I know what you're saying about the liberal demonization of business, though--I agree it's disgusting.
Sarah Palin said that BP was difficult to deal with when she Governor of Alaska; I guess she had to get tough with them. As a result, BP had to clean up their act--at least in Alaska.
I just hate to see God's beautiful creation despoiled; we're supposed to be good stewards of the earth. I feel like we've disappointed Him--again.
Nick| 5.28.10 @ 6:59PM
Margie,
Tell Victor that his courageous mother is in my prayers.
God Bless!
Margie| 5.29.10 @ 11:41AM
Nick,
Vic says thank you very much.
I wish we could post pictures here. I'd love to share her with you all!
The other day we came across some love letters written in Russian to her from her husband, who was a p.o.w. of the Germans and escaped, as I've written before. She told us she wants the letters buried with her. And that hers were buried with him.
I share this just because it is so beautiful. I know it is very personal, but it's just so overwhelmingly beautiful.
Thanks again. God bless.
SoCon| 5.29.10 @ 12:15PM
Share away, Margie. We need all the beauty we can get these days.
I hope your Mother in law is feeling better.
DanMingo| 5.30.10 @ 11:23AM
Isn't it true that if it weren't for the Liberals, we'd have been drilling on the land instead and thus able to avoid this type of disaster?
No, it is not true.
And isn't it unfortunate that more 'environmental impact statements' were not required for BP before they got to despoil the entire Gulf of Mexico?
And is it not conservatives who favor the kind of lax regulation that leads to such environmental disasters?
Your post is pure speculation which allows you to blame Obama/Liberals for all the bad things that happen.
Yes, those insane leftists would have us avoid the kind of disasters that your type seem to invite.
Those environmentalist whackos want us to find a solution to our energy problems that does not involve the destruction of life.
Crazy bastards!
ZerObama| 5.30.10 @ 12:11PM
Those crazy environmentalist whacko bastards probably blew the damn rig up in the first place.
The rig exploded on April 21--ONE DAY before Earth Day: Coincidence? You be the judge.
It's backfiring on the whackos, though; the millions of gallons of oil gushing into the water are not only destroying the Gulf, they're destroying Oilbama's presidency.
Margie| 5.30.10 @ 11:23PM
Excellent points. Here's another example of the insanity of the Left. Because of the inability due to their "love" for wildlife, the citizens aren't allowed to kill the overpopulation of deer. We just got back from western PA and saw almost 20 dead dear on the sides of the highway. I am NOT exaggerating. How many of those strikes caused fatal accidents to the human beings driving in those cars? But noooo, it's more important to "care" for the animals.
WHY is it that we are so damn stupid as to allow these power mongering fools to be voted repeatedly into office?! It outrages and saddens me to no end.
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 1:50PM
I'm so sorry about this, Quin. My heart goes out to the families of the 11 men who died in the blast, the folks who make their living on the waters of the Gulf and the wildlife suffering in the oily muck. What a nightmare.
I'm furious with Obama and BP.
It shouldn't have taken nearly 6 WEEKS to (even partially) stop the gusher. There were emergency response plans put in place after the Exxon Valdez oil spill; why weren't they followed?
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 3:46PM
Obama's administration gave BP 5 1/2 weeks to try and save the ruptured well while over 140 MILLION gallons of oil gushed into the Gulf.
It wasn't until fury erupted on the Left that BP was forced to give up on the well and try to cap it by using the "Top Kill" method.
Why didn't the government force BP to bring super-tankers to the Gulf to suck up the spilled oil? This recovery method was extremely successful when it was used during an oil spill in the middle east.
Why did it take 5 1/2 weeks before BP tried the Top Kill measure? Was it because BP was trying to save money?
These questions must be answered, and both Obama's administration and BP have to be held accountable.
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 6:30PM
If Obama had sent in the feds right away you guys would be bawling that he was a Stalinist nationalizing the oil industry!
You said it was a Stalinist "take over" when he approved of a LOAN for GM for crying out loud!
You need to get your ducks in a row. You're all OVER the place!
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 7:41PM
The Corruptocrat Party's motto: "Spill, Baby, Spill!" You incompetent Liberal saps are incapable of governing.
Margie| 5.29.10 @ 11:44AM
Zing!! Cut him to the core, with the sword of Truth.
Oldefarte| 5.28.10 @ 2:59PM
Quin, Sadly, you have now apparently come out of your political closet in showing your support for DEMOCRAT CHARLES MELANCON over that 'WHORE MONGER' David Vitter. The same Melancon who filed a bogus FEDERAL legislation over the Chinese drywall home distruction/homeowners' insurance issue now facing many Louisiana homeowners, even though insurance is a STATE REGULATED issue. Is that what you refer to as POLITICAL PRINCIPLE? All this no doubt because Vitter defeated previously your favored David Treen in Republican races. Shame, shame, shame!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 5.28.10 @ 3:04PM
PS, the bogus FEDERAL legislation concerning insurance was filed to garner political support for his failing senatorial campaign against that 'whore mongering' Vitter; but it apparently has not worked [since I think Vitter is some 20 points ahead of Melancon, according to the last poll I saw]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quin| 5.28.10 @ 5:30PM
C'mon, Oldefarte, you are one of my favorite readers/commenters, but surely you know that not everything is about political races. I didn't post this Melancon thing to help him against Vitter; I did it because it captures the emotion we are feeling about the oil spill. Gimme a break.
Meanwhile, I don't hold anything against Vitter for beating Dave Treen; I blame him for HOW he beat Dave Treen, with one of the nastiest, most dishonest, underhanded campaigns I have seen one Republican run against another. I have described the campaign here previously, so there's no need to repeat the unvarnished facts.
Yes, IMHO, David "DC Madam" Vitter is a louse, for many many reasons. That has nothing to do with whether I approve of Melancon; I frankly don't know much about him. And it certainly has nothing to do with the point of my blog entry. Even politicians more liberal than us can have real human emotions about people who are hurting. The people of LA are hurting, and the administration is not responding adequately. That is a good point, and a conservative point. Why carp, just because I happened to use Melancon's grief as a way to illustrate it?
Oldefarte| 5.29.10 @ 12:44PM
Quin, What I said about Melancon is TRUE, and you of all people KNOW IT [or should]. I have skin in the game, since my child is now directly facing this CHINESE DRYWALL issue [and I hear the same CRAP about Melancon and Vitter directly from some acquaintenances in the NO area]. Also, my child and friends were wiped out in Katrina and will be affected by this oil spill mess, so I have an REAL EMOTIONAL stake in this situation [in addition to living on Alabama's coast]. I really don't think that you could possibly truely believe the crocodile tears shown in Melancon's STUNT [you are too smart/intelligent to fall for his politisized BS]. Vitter maybe a louse and a excrement-head, but he has done more politically/legislatively than some Clintonisk-type Louisiana coonass [aka Edwin Edwards-ish] could ever do. Please don't insult the little bit of intelligence that I might have left by promoting some BS artist like Melancon, just because you may have issues with Vitter's lack of marality or his political ruthlessness. You know better than anyone that we are in the fight of our lives currently to save this country from eventual destruction, and to be out beating the drums for worthless nobodies like Cau and Melancon [because they may be considered good-ole-boy-local COONASS-types is extremely harmful to our cause]. Louisiana already has enough political problems coming from reps like Landrieu and her LOUISIANA PURCHASE concerning WELFARECARE----they don't anymore from the likes of some grandstanders using political stunts to attempt increasing their poll numbers. Take care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 5.29.10 @ 1:43PM
PS, Quin, Also, WHY was Melancon boo-whooing in front of a camera, INSTEAD OF [as a Democrat US Representative] using his partisaned/Democrat/political clout/influence with THE CHOSEN ONE to demand that he [and his administration] get their collective incompetent asses down to Louisiana and do any/all things necessary to rectify this disaster. But, hey, I guess that spending the taxpayers' money to fly to California to promote Barbara Boxer's losing political campaign [so that she can repay the debt in '''''Lewinski'''' fashion] is more important than a bunch of NON-CHOCOLATE COONASSES drowning in oil in Louisiana, right??????????
Quin| 5.31.10 @ 10:26AM
I repeat, my post had NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING to do with promoting Melancon or busting Vitter or choosing between them; it was ALL about the oil spill. I also repeat: NOT everything is about current political races. SO please take a chill pill.
Jeremiah| 5.31.10 @ 1:11PM
Just don't get Oldefarter started on the Catholic Church!
Deborah D | 5.28.10 @ 3:10PM
Quin, I'm just sick about the Louisiana coast. It seems the feds can only do one thing at a time -- worry about BP stopping the spill, instead of doing something about the cleanup.
The feds can't stop the spill, but they can gear up for the cleanup. I watched a video a couple of weeks back on using hay to soak up the oil before it reaches beaches/wetlands. It seemed simple and worth trying. Haven't heard anyone mentioning it since. I think I'd surround the wetlands with hay. Watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5SxX2EntEo
Ana| 5.31.10 @ 4:40AM
Former Shell Oil President said that there was a major spill in the Arabian Gulf, far larger than what is happening right now, where a fleet of super tankers surrounded the spill and sucked up the oil. Check out the interview here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#37344849
Jeremiah| 5.31.10 @ 5:07AM
I read that BP (Barack's Problem) hesitated to employ their supertankers for this purpose because of the expense involved. Not sure if this is true--but why haven't they? It's been 6 weeks!
JP| 5.28.10 @ 3:40PM
There's plenty of oil both on land and in more shallow waters. The deep sea wells also tap into large reserves of natural gas. This has always been the danger. And the government knows as well as anyone that once a deep sea well blows it is nearly impossible to contain it within a decent amount of time. Heck there are wells out there twice as deep as the one that blew up. If one of those goes... what then?
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 3:48PM
Environmentalists have forced oil companies to drill in deep water, thus increasing the risk.
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 6:13PM
That is just BS.
I've heard oil spill Rush Limbaugh blubbering this line all week. It's BS when he says it, and it's BS when you repeat it. And neither of you know what the hell you're talking about.
Nick| 5.28.10 @ 6:51PM
It is tree-hugging, bleeding heart liberals who are responsible for oil companies taking the risk to drill in deep water.
Big Oil would much rather drill where it is cheaper, and thus, more profitable.
Everyone knows this. Except mental midgets, of course.
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 7:46PM
Instead of whining and moaning about my post why not try to refute it, dummocrat?
It's common sense, Einstein; the depth of the well has been an impediment to BP's repair efforts.
Typical Lib--all emotion and no logic.
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 8:41PM
The only entity that is responsible for the oil spill is BP and companies -- like Halliburton -- with whom BP worked.
The government could have done a better job regulating, and perhaps it is even true that there are safer places to drill, but ACCOUNTABILITY demands that the people who stood to BENEFIT from the rig's success -- BP and friends -- receive the blame for its failure.
Because what I've just said appeals to the rules of logic, I realize that it will have absolutely no effect on you. But the truth is the truth, and peremptorily I speak it.
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 8:47PM
CRIME is the responsibility of criminals. Police do a better or worse job of detecting crime and arresting criminals; prosecutors do a better or worse job of convicting and incarcerating them; but crime remains the responsibility of those who commit crime.
Government can prevent car accidents by studying roads and accidents, assigning proper speed limits, and trying to enforce them. But reckless drivers who cause accidents are responsible for those accidents.
These are imperfect analogies, but the point remains: BP drilled; BP spilled.
Nick| 5.28.10 @ 9:04PM
What happened to Halliburton, Nate?
Have you already absolved them of responsibility?
Can you bleeding hearts ever make an argument without envoking Halliburton?
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 10:11PM
Obama fiddled, Obama diddled--NerObama.
Government could have prevented this devastating oil spill by making sure BP had the proper permits before they drilled and sending inspectors to the well platform for routine inspections--NEITHER of which the government did.
The government also was derelict in their duty by doing NOTHING for 5 1/2 weeks to protect the Gulf Coast from oil washing ashore. Nothing.
Of course BP is culpable--but so is your beloved government behemoth.
Sorry, this terrible ecological tragedy happened on Obama's watch--and he will be blamed for it.
Margie| 5.29.10 @ 12:41PM
Rush is right. Now, in the past, and in the future.
Look at that! What a record!
Liberals on the other hand have a record of being~ liars, obfuscators, and well... always wrong. That's why there's more of us than of them. When the opaque vail of treachery is brushed aside by the conservative citizenry and the truth of the matter, whichever matter, is revealed~~ an individual who is honest and who has been a liberal, will be converted to conservatism. THAT is the hopeful thing, and what we can count on. It is a real surety and like a trusty soldier that you can depend on. The Truth is our friend and fails us not, past present, and for all of eternity.
Read it and weep, liberals!!
Oldefarte| 5.30.10 @ 9:35AM
Nate, You wouldn't know an oil well/rig from a TOILET BOWL, and never will!!!!!!
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 6:11PM
"Regulatory meltdown"????
I thought you guys don't LIKE regulations!!! I thought regulations were something only found in SOVIET RUSSIA and in DACHAU!!!
Will you people please make up your goddamn minds!!
By the way. Glenn Beck. Class act that was, attacking 13 year old Malia Obama. But I guess non-real Americans like the Obamas don't have the right to expect the same kind of treatment as real Americans like the Palins.
Nick| 5.28.10 @ 6:54PM
You want the O'Bama daughters treated like the Palin daughters, Nate?
Why are you this cold-hearted?
Curly Smith| 5.28.10 @ 6:56PM
We're not anarchists. There is nothing wrong with reasonable regulation that meets a specific need. We don't, however, support needless regulation or regulation that's intended to achieve the opposite of it's stated goals. And neither should you.
Two easy examples... ObamaCare isn't about improving the quality of health care or reducing the costs of health care - it's a massive power grab that nationalizes 1/6th of the economy. The Clear Air Act is now more of a detriment to clear air than a benefit. Industrial plants can't make major, substantive upgrades that would both improve efficiency and reduce emissions because the scope of the work would mean reapplying for permits. The goal of the Clear Air Act is to close industrial facilities. OK, since it's a holiday weekend, a bonus... Cap and Trade will do nothing but increase energy costs, which will increase production costs for manufacturers and home electric bills, with the end result of more unemployment and a lower standard of living.
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 8:35PM
Curly --
1. "We're not anarchists." I'm sure this is true, Curly. To the extent that there are conservatives who are thoughtful, as you seem to be, there are conservatives who are not anarchists.
However, conservatives are extremely hostile to government involvement BEFORE crisis erupts. If Obama had audited that oil rig a month before the disaster and shut it down for its many, many violations, the American Spectators of the world would be burning him in effigy.
If anything, people in Obama's administration seem too business friendly, when it comes to Wall St. and -- obviously -- the oil industry.
But let's face it: BP and Halliburton are not natural friends of the political left. And they ARE responsible for this oil spill. The government -- whether they screwed up the regulations or not -- is NOT responsible. On their honor, these companies assured the government that they could prevent a disastrous spill. Clearly they overstated their control of a catastrophic spill out of greed. The government should have "trusted but verified." Instead, they only trusted. Let's hope they don't make the same awful mistake again.
2. I enthusiastically agree that some regulations are bad, some inefficient, some wasteful, some disruptive, and some need alteration. Government should listen to experts, to businessmen, and anyone with an interest in whatever sector of the economy that's being regulated. In other words, like everything, it's really complicated. Conservatives want to pretend that everything is simple: if the government gets out of the way, everything will be fine. Government is not the solution to our problems; government IS the problem.
But that is just simply NOT true. LOOK at Wall St. LOOK at the Gulf. LOOK at this chain of mining disasters. A more active government during the past decade -- during the past THREE decades -- might very well have averted these things.
The fact that SOME regulations are inefficient or stupid does not mean REGULATION is bad, stupid, or inefficient. But that's exactly what most conservatives insist is the case these days. My hope is that thoughtful conservatives like yourself will remind your fellow conservatives that you are NOT anarchists and that you -- like the rest of us -- believe in wise, effective governance.
Nick| 5.28.10 @ 9:00PM
The only one being simplistic here, is you Nate.
Conservatives believe in the Constitution. The Constitution sets up the relationship between the Federal government and the several States.
We believe most "regulations" should be made at the local and state level. Like it was in Colonial times.
The Framers didn't like being told what to do by the king, and parliament, who didn't know what life was like in the colonies.
The Framers also understood that it was part of fallen human nature for people to aquire more and more power over other people.
That human vice must always be fought against, because it will never go away.
We must be ever vigilant.
Liberals want more and more bigger government. Because they want more and more power over others. And they want it concentrated in one place, not 50, or several thousand.
So, your premise is false, Nate.
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 10:04PM
What do you think of the federal regulations put on slave trading and breeding in Colonial times?
(By the way. We ceased to be a "colony" in 1776.)
Now. The framers. What did they say about regulating oil rigs that drill a mile below the surface of the ocean?
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 10:18PM
What did the Framers say about the government providing healthcare insurance for every American citizen? Please cite the source so I can check it out.
What idiot would trust the government with the life and death issues of personal health care when it can't even plug a damn hole?
Nick| 5.29.10 @ 12:13AM
There were no "federal regulations" concerning slaves in Colonial times, brainiac. The Colonials were British subjects. So, they followed the regulations of the Crown.
The Framers had nothing to say about such things, drilling for oil hadn't been invented yet.
But, again, it comes down to jurisdiction. States have certain jurisdictions in the gulf, and so does the federal government. I'm no expert, so I don't know who the competent authority is in this situation, if there is one.
Do you know who the "controling legal authority" is in this case, Nate?
Nick| 5.29.10 @ 12:33AM
Oops! That should be: "CONTROLLING legal authority"
SoCon| 5.29.10 @ 12:22PM
Didn't AlGore say something like that when he was caught taking money under the table from some monks?
The guy's such a skunk and skunks never change their stripes; right, nick?
SoCon| 5.29.10 @ 12:22PM
---Nick---
Nate| 5.28.10 @ 11:21PM
A bigger government does not necessarily mean a government with more power over individuals.
After the civil war, the federal government got "bigger" vis a vis the state government and as a result millions of blacks were accorded (legally speaking) the rights of citizens.
When "big" government pays for me to have an attorney if I am arrested and cannot afford to pay for one, the government's power over me decreases.
The metaphors "big" government and "small" government seem to obscure as much as they clarify.
There are just some things the government needs to do because markets cannot or will not do them.
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 11:46PM
I've read stupid posts of yours before, but this one takes the cake. Bigger government ALWAYS means more control over and less accountability to individuals.
Health care is a commodity and is not something the government needs to do; if anything, massive bureaucracies impede doctor/patient relationships.
Truly free markets are superior--by far.
Nick| 5.29.10 @ 12:30AM
"There are just some things the government needs to do because markets cannot or will not do them."
Yes, there are.
And they are listed in the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, in Article 1, Sections 8, 9, and 10.
Being provided an attorney is not a POWER of big government. It is an enumerated right of the individual, that the federal government has no power to take away or restrict.
You really need to go, and study constitutional law and principles, before you spout off on such subjects, Nate.
Nate| 5.29.10 @ 9:38PM
It is NOT in the Constitution that the government needs to provide a lawyer. That was an interpretation of the Constitution from an activist 20th century court, and it is a perfect example of big government.
The government does many things the founders could never have dreamed of. The founders lived in a small agrarian nation of third world status. The Constitution's immense power is that it can evolve and grow. It is -- like all great works of the intellectual spirit -- a LIVING DOCUMENT, as the founders intended.
Nobama| 5.30.10 @ 1:12AM
More like MARX intended. There's no such thing as a "Living Document" it's just more Liberal BS you Progressive crackheads made up.
Why don't you just get your scrawny ass over to Cuba or Venezuela--there's no 2nd Amendment there to get in your way.
Oldefarte| 5.30.10 @ 9:46AM
Yea, too bad that 3000 deseased persons are not''''''LIVING''''' post 9/11/01, similar to your misused, misappropriated document formerly know as our written, declared, manupilated CONSTITUTION!!!!!
Nick| 5.30.10 @ 12:33PM
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to [...] have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
- The Sixth Article of Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
The only thing "LIVING" about the Constitution was the animal hide it is written on. The only way it can legally "evolve", is through the amendment process.
Again, go and study and learn something about the supreme law of the land, if you are going to comment on it, Nate.
Nate| 5.31.10 @ 3:18PM
Nate --
You're absolutely WRONG, time and again, and it goes to show the similarity between the shallow literalisms of so-called "fundamentalist" Christians, who seem to know less about the Bible than the average person, and those of people who prattle on about reading the Constitution's "original" intent.
The framers did NOT mean for the state to PROVIDE legal counsel; they meant only that the state could not DENY a person a counsel. Those two things are VERY different.
But the framers also DELIBERATELY wrote in flexible, spacious language that could be interpreted differently as society EVOLVED. (Yes, evolved, that is, changed.)
What does "due process" mean? What does "cruel and unusual" mean?
The answer is that society decides the meanings of the these things as it changes. The founders COULD have written that the government will not "torture," but they clearly had a broader, more expansive but still flexible idea in mind when they forbad "cruel and unusual punishments."
In other words, it was their INTENT that their original intent NOT be determinative in all cases, but that it be only one in any number of horizons within which the text would be read.
They -- perhaps foolishly -- believed that the nation would produced LEARNED MEN who would read their document as THEY READ the Great Books -- precisely as LIVING BOOKS, books that change as men read them with new eyes.
By arguing simply for original intent, I'm saying, you betray the ACTUAL intent of the founders.
REMEMBER NOVEMBER!!| 5.31.10 @ 7:27PM
Give it up, troll--Americans have already rejected your Progressive-Marxist world-view. It's NEVER EVER worked where it's been tried; latest example is hapless, violence-torn Greece.
We'll see you on November 2. Save the date, because we have.
Nate| 5.31.10 @ 10:32PM
You, are a jackass.
REMEMBER NOVEMBER!!| 5.31.10 @ 11:31PM
You, save the date. We, have. Moron,.
Nick| 6.4.10 @ 9:42PM
You wouldn't know what the Framers intended if they rose from the dead and smacked the snot out of you, Nate.
You are a constitutional illiterate.
Curly Smith| 5.29.10 @ 10:01AM
Nate,
First, BP and BP alone is responsible for the disaster. Even if Halliburton, TransOcean or Cameron had done something wrong then they did so with the OK of the operator. If you're the operator then you're responsible for everything that happens, whether by your action or your inaction. If this report http://online.wsj.com/article/.....80190.html is correct then the problem started with a poor casing design that left no flexibility and forced the drillers to fight the well and the mud system the entire time. Then they compounded their errors.
Had the proper authorities, and that would not be Obama, shut the rig down for egregious safety violations then nobody would have said a word. The various agencies have that statutory duty and responsibility. If the violations were as serious as you claim then the agencies violated their responsibilities. It would not be a case of "trust but verify", it would be a case of the agencies abrogating their statutory duties. However, those violations were likely not serious, and they just point to one big problem with too much regulation -- they take focus away from the serious stuff.
The mining disaster may fall into the same category of over-regulation. The biggest problem that an operator has with dangerous activities is worker complacency. The dangerous work becomes normal and routine. If you stress 100 safety matters and treat them as "life or death" then the workers who understand the risks will say "hey, those are all trivial nit-picking stuff" and will overlook the 2-3 items that are, in fact, "life or death". Most of the violations reported in the mine disaster fall into the category of "routine housekeeping". It all falls into the old adage "If everything is important, then nothing is important".
I found your aversion to greed interesting because the system you advocate embraces the wrong sort of greed. In my world greed is good. It causes you to work late, to spend time in your workshop or lab developing the next great wonder of the world. It causes you to devote all of your spare time to making an AIDS vaccine because there's a windfall at the end. Your world, however, causes the wrong sort of greed... how can I take money from other people. The financial disaster flowed directly from the sub-prime lending regulations which told banks to lend money to people who couldn't repay the loans. The Wall Street firms then discovered that they could sell the sub-prime loans, that were guaranteed via regulation by Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, and make enormous sums of money. They were using regulations to print money.
If you want to stop that sort of greed then you need to get the government out of the way and let the free market work. If I'm selling a $1 widget for $1000 then there are two possible outcomes: I'll have to reduce my price as competitors enter the market or I'll run to my congress critter and get regulations to prevent any competition. All companies trying to enter an existing market are free market advocates, all companies in that existing market are big government advocates because they intend to use the power of the government to stifle any competition. If you're really "for the little guy" then you should favor free and open competition and you should eschew all of the government mandated quasi-monopolies (and real monopolies for that matter). And, just so you know, you're never going to get efficient and economical alternative energy sources if you subsidize stuff that doesn't work. Why invest the time and money to invent products that work when you can make vast sums from products that don't work? And what cities are going to spend $100 million on the products that work when they've already spent $100 million on stuff that doesn't and has a 25-50 operational life?
We need to regulate the important things and let the free market punish shoddy business practices. In my world the Wall Street firms, GM, and Chrysler would have been shuttered. Those companies are run by clowns. Sadly though, we just shipped them a new supply of canvas.
Nate| 5.29.10 @ 10:26AM
Greed (avarice) is a vice.
The desire to achieve great things with one's talents (find an AIDS vaccine, develop a better widget) is good if it is truly a desire to achieve great things with one's talents.
Pride, envy, avarice are the curses of modern man. I don't see anything good about them.
But I think I know what you're saying and I think you make good points.
I do think conservatives are very, very quick to pounce on any attempt to AVERT disaster as governmental overreach; it is then exasperating when they seem to suggest government be all powerful when a disaster actually happens.
As for you remarks about BP's sole responsibility, I think you're probably right. They were the main contractor.
One problem is that when regulation succeeds, there's no news story. No news stories cover airplanes that land safely, water that is consumed safely, oil rigs that do not explode, children that are not forced to work in factories.
The attention is only drawn to disasters, which conservatives then use as evidence for their "government IS the problem" thesis. I think that makes these debates much harder to engage in productively.
Your last paragraph I agree with, only we should remember that our competitors overseas -- Europe and Asia -- do NOT let their big manufacturing industries simply vanish. I worry what will become of this country without a manufacturing base, but I sympathize with your sense of justice.
SoCon| 5.29.10 @ 12:19PM
What is it about, "Thou shall NOT steal" that you don't understand, Nate? Do not take what you have not earned.
Theft is certainly wrong.
Curly Smith| 5.29.10 @ 12:59PM
"As for you remarks about BP's sole responsibility, I think you're probably right. They were the main contractor."
You're close but not quite there... BP was the operator. They were in charge. They had control over everything that happened. They would only be a contractor if somebody else, let's say the MMS, were actually running the show. A contractor has limited liability, the operator owns all of the woe that ensues. BP has sole responsibility.
I'm sorry but regulations do not prevent disasters. What prevents disasters is compliance with regulations and company policies. We've had regulations against murder for millennia, yet people still murder each other. Do we need another law? There are two ways to secure compliance, (1) teach the people why compliance is important, that their lives are stake (which leads to the need for limited regulation because there can only be so many #1 priorities), (2) make the consequences for non-compliance severe (which again points to the need for limited regulation because jaywalking shouldn't be a capital offense). The first method is best because it yields voluntary compliance. The second is worse because those forced to comply are always looking for ways to not comply.
Detroit is a good example of what's wrong with over-regulation, it's now a virtual ghost town.
It's an example of what happens when large companies buy politicians. Large companies love regulations because they keep the small fish, who can't afford regulatory compliance, away. And when they've totally destroyed the industry the large companies have the resources to relocate to a more rewarding environment (and then start the anti-competitive practices anew). Government's role should be to foster competition, not to limit it to one or two players in each sector.
Deborah D | 5.31.10 @ 7:29AM
Curly -- Such an excellent dissertation on the free market, government regulation, business and government (sleeping together) and specifically on the financial disaster. Nate should be grateful to get a master's class in a few posts by you. I know I am!!
Nate| 5.31.10 @ 8:55AM
Curly --
I think I can assure you that Boston and Manhatten are more highly "regulated" cities than Detroit or any number of cities that have come upon hard times. Boston and Manhatten are doing pretty well despite it all.
I'm not an expert on Detroit; it seems to have many, many problems and I can't imagine that "regulation" is really the main one.
"Regulation" is very often a boon to business. This disaster in the Gulf is ruining livelihoods left and right; it will cost the economy hundreds of billions of dollars; it will mire ecosystems beyond the Gulf that are -- if we must look at it this way -- economically valuable.
A little socialism might have gone along way. Norway treats its deep water oil rigs like they're NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. Norway has its boot on the neck of its oil companies. These rigs are EXTREMELY regulated and costly to run, they're not as profitable, and you know what? They're not spilling oil all over the Gulf of Mexico right now.
Jeremiah| 5.31.10 @ 1:14PM
We can all see what socialism has done for the Greeks! You idiot liberals never learn.
Oldefarte| 5.30.10 @ 9:42AM
Nate, That's just more ignorant clap-trap/BS coming forth from your pie-hole. Maybe BP could use your words to fill up/stop that oil leak, instead of blowing rubber balls at same. What's next, Nate, I FEEL YOUR PAIN?????????
SoCon| 5.28.10 @ 7:56PM
Sure, slimeball-- at least Beck didn't joke about Malia being raped during a baseball game at Yankee Stadium.
Har har har! What a kneeslapper!!
That's just one of you Liberal pervert's disgusting jokes about Palin's beautiful daughters.
You bore, loser. Go away. I'm sure you can find another pristine eco-system to destroy; it's what you democrat "Spill Baby Spill" incompetents do best.
Oldefarte| 5.30.10 @ 9:38AM
Nate, You're a MORON for believing that political BS that THE CHOSEN ONE proclaimed about his daughter asking him when the oil spill would be fixed. That's equal to that Louisiana rep BOO-HOO'ING in front of a camera over same. Get your head out of your GLUTAMUS MAXIMUS!!!!!!!
ZerObama| 5.30.10 @ 12:04PM
It's a pretty tight fit, Oldefarte--I don't see it happening.
Ken (Old Texican)| 5.28.10 @ 6:59PM
OUCH, Nate.
You hurt my feelings.
You should get a bonus check for that.
Dear President Obama
Please send Nate another check. Double his 17 cents. Send him a check for $.34
Oh? The postage is more than that?
Oh...I forgot.
Will you let him lick your................. "shoes", instead?
He will be ever so grateful.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Plug It| 5.29.10 @ 2:10AM
What amazes me, is that BP can set-up this amazing technical accomplishment of beaming live video feeds of the leaking oil plumes to us all over the world:
http://tinyurl.com/BP-Live-Oil-Leak-Feed
And do not get me wrong, that is good to have insight what is going on down there; but yet still not able to use all of the technology available today to plug the leaks. It is sort of ironic.
BP is to blame, but at this stage it is time for the government to also be held responsible.
Jeremiah| 5.31.10 @ 1:19PM
I do blame Obama for his lack of leadership--looks like the Obumster voted "present" one too many times.
BP = Barack's Problem
John Nail | 5.31.10 @ 5:03AM
"Environmentalists have forced oil companies to drill in deep water, thus increasing the risk."
I agree with this opinion.
Tish | 5.31.10 @ 9:14AM
We would all be better off if the EPA went out of business. Having had a couple of run-ins with their officious bureaucrats myself, I have never found a situation in which they helped more than they hindered.