The American Spectator

Campy| 6.10.10 @ 11:48AM

So if BP goes into bankruptcy, who exactly does the administration think is going to continue working to solve and clean up this mess? Oil sludge doesn't respond to demands, rhetoric and posture.

Tim| 6.10.10 @ 1:57PM

Maybe Obama will put on his super suit and swim down there and weld the pipe shut with his laser vision.

Nate| 6.10.10 @ 12:26PM

This word you guys keep using about Obama -- "thug."

You might want to think about that. It sort of gives the lie to the idea that you just deeply disagree with his politics and policies and suggests something deeper and uglier is at work in your hatred for him.

MacAoidh| 6.10.10 @ 8:02PM

More like we notice that his language and tactics are those of a Chicago street thug, as opposed to someone committed to the rule of law.

There is nothing racist or bigoted about such a recognition. Your comment, on the other hand, suggests an intolerance to opposing views which gives off the odor of fascism - and you might want to think about that.

nate rhymes with hate| 6.10.10 @ 8:41PM

i dont hate him...i hate his useful idiots

like you

Nate| 6.10.10 @ 9:57PM

So .. you're arguing from words that rhyme with my name?

Nate also rhymes with fate, gate, rate, mate, pate, late, bait, sate, ate, wait, Kate, and Kuwait. What's your point.

Campny| 6.10.10 @ 12:40PM

Oh that's rich, Nate: 'Us guys' like Quin are definitely racist.

Snide, transparently veiled, and overused default, Nate. Try coming up with something original next time.

Nate| 6.10.10 @ 3:18PM

If you can't hear the racism in words like "thug" repeatedly used to describe this president, then you're tone deaf.

Now let's separate the issues:

Calling names, as Hillyer does above, is almost always childish and foolish. It's childish and foolish when the left does it, and the same when the right does it. And believe me, I know people on the left do it constantly as well.

There are many different names that could be hurled at Obama, just as there were many that could be hurled at W.

But the frequency of THIS name, the fact it is used so often, by reactionaries makes me wonder if those who sense the strand of white nationalism and xenophobia in such talk are correct.

Quin| 6.10.10 @ 4:05PM

Nate: Get a life. Not only does my own well-documented background refute the charges of sub-strata racism, or whatever you are alleging, but the idea that "thug" is necessarily a word to describe blacks is as ludicrous as is Keith Olbermann's accusation that "arrogant" was also a coded racist word. What IS it with you lefties that you immediately default to the accusation of racism? For the record, "thug" is probably MORE likely to be used to describe white skin-heads, or Italian mobsters, than to describe black people. Frankly, anybody who uses bully-boy tactics is a thug. Thug. Thug. Thug. Thug. Thug.

Curtis Rasmussen| 6.10.10 @ 4:32PM

Look to the racially tinged emails from Nate the marxist moron in other threads on this website. His vile racism precludes him from writing logically on the subject.

Hoppy| 6.10.10 @ 6:39PM

The term "thug" is likely to conjure up a vision of a Mafia street soldier or Nazi SS man for me. It isn't a term I'd use for Obama - he's more like a punk.

Nate| 6.10.10 @ 9:44PM

How many times did you call Clinton a "thug"?

Jeff Perren| 6.11.10 @ 1:27AM

How many times did he act like one? For all his faults, which were many and egregious, he tried to smooth talk us into slavery. Obama does that, but he also prefers more direct means.

Jeff Perren| 6.11.10 @ 1:29AM

P.S. It's not name calling when the name is an accurate description.

Lazy Jak| 6.11.10 @ 12:36PM

Ironically, I think I remember Clinton referring to Obama or his staff by using the word thug during the primaries. Why was it not racial then?

Lazy Jack

Oldefarte| 6.11.10 @ 2:00PM

Yea, him too, although OXFORD'S HILLBILLY BUBBA works better for me!!!!!

Oldefarte| 6.11.10 @ 1:57PM

My dictionary defines 'thug' as a 'harsh criminal'.........THAT pretty much sums up my understanding of Obama and his Chicago GOONS in my opinion. I therefore agree 150% with both Quin's and Jennifer's [especially her LAST SENTENCE] opinions!!!!!!!

Keith I| 6.10.10 @ 6:40PM

After the ObaMauists wiped out the Bond holders at GM and Chrysler in order to give controlling interests in both companies to the UAW I thought that "Thug" was the best description for them.

Now they just look FECKLESS. Racially neutral enough for ya' Nate?

MacAoidh| 6.10.10 @ 8:05PM

Actually, the word "thug" comes from the "thuggee" cult in India - so if there's a connotation to be had about that word it would be that Obama is a brigand from the sub-continent.

But to the ignoramuses of the Left, anything out of one's wheelhouse is clearly evidence of hatred of black people. You're showing yourself to be such an ignoramus. Carry on.

Jules| 6.11.10 @ 11:23AM

Here you go NATE, the definition of the "racist" word "thug" from Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: thug
Pronunciation: \ˈthəg\
Function: noun
Etymology: Hindi & Urdu ṭhag, literally, thief
Date: 1810
: a brutal ruffian or assassin : gangster, tough

Your man Barry is all of those things...and then some. Sooo, SHUT UP!

Jules| 6.11.10 @ 11:25AM

Actually NATE, the one thing in the Webster definition that really doesn't jive with Barry is TOUGH. The man is nothing but a poseur. Oh yeah, and he throws a baseball like a girl...

Oldefarte| 6.11.10 @ 2:03PM

Wait, now, according to his followers, HE BE 'THE MAAN' !!!!!!!!!!

Ken (Old Texican)| 6.10.10 @ 1:53PM

Hey, NATE.

Yes...you are correct. A "Thug" just wants to make a living...even if he has to shoot some folks to do so instead of competing with excellence in a free market.
My ONE word for Obama....is "communist"...without the guts of Stalin.
Heh,
Obama has a problem though. We, (including our fine military), have all the guns.
You are screwed.
Heh

Swiss Bob| 6.10.10 @ 2:36PM

BP didn't drill the hole, an American company Transocean did and it was Haliburton who cocked up the cementing but carry on blaming 'British Petroleum' 40% owned by US shareholders.

Greg| 6.10.10 @ 2:57PM

Fair points SB, but a deflection nonetheless. As a company owner, if I outsource part of the work I do, I'm still responsible for fixing whatever goes wrong later -- even if I'm 40% owned by someone else. BP should certainly require all involved parties to join them in shouldering the remedy, but the responsibility to do so is still 100% theirs.

Swiss Bob| 6.10.10 @ 4:27PM

Isn't Obama's anti-British rehetoric the deflection?

...

"When Piper Alpha exploded in 1988 and killed 162 in the North Sea, no one in Britain spoke suggestively about an American company. Where the parent company is domiciled does not matter: you get British companies whose share capital can be owned by various people. BP is 40% owned by British shareholders and 39 perccent owned by American ones: its board has six Americans and six Brits. This disaster happened on an American-owned, Korean-built rig leased by BP’s American subsidiary. But to listen to Obama, it is as if a few blokes from Stoke-on-Trent sailed over, and drilled a wildcat well – then buggered off and left Uncle Sam to suffer all the damage.

Transocean, the owner of the destroyed Deepwater Horizon rig, relocated for tax reasons first to the Cayman Islands and then to Switzerland. But blaming the Swiss would not quite have the same political effect in America. Halliburton, the controversial Texan firm once chaired by Cheney, had a hand in the ‘cementing’ processes that failed to protect the rig against explosion."

The UK Spectator:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/cof.....ship.thtml

Jeff Perren| 6.11.10 @ 2:08AM

Thank you, sincerely, for that very useful information. Blaming "the British" would be colossally dumb, even if BP were 100% British owned and the Deepwater site were 100% BP operated.

But then, we already know there's no rhyme, reason, or justice in whom Obama blames. He blames anyone and everyone it's useful to blame in order (a) to deflect blame from himself and the Federal Government (who are, in fact, chiefly responsible for the severity of the problem, by forcing oil exploration so far off shore) and (b) to further his Progressive/environmentalist political agenda.

MacAoidh| 6.10.10 @ 3:05PM

http://thehayride.com/2010/06/.....lling-ban/

"The Obama administration is teetering on the brink of collapse. Never in American history has the federal government so drastically violated a state’s economy. It comes out that the administration has done so against the advice of its own experts. The administration apparently has strategized that it would smooth over the consequences of its decision by imposing the costs for it on BP, at a time when Obama’s Justice Department is pursuing criminal charges against the company and engaging in a full-on rhetorical assault complete with references to a “boot on the neck” and an “ass to kick” and bragging about the refusal to engage in dialogue with BP’s CEO because of an assumption Tony Hayward would merely shine the president on – all the while expecting BP to both stop the spill and head efforts to mitigate it on land. At some point, it was inevitable that BP – in the face of collapsing stock prices and what could plausibly become an existential crisis which threatens its ability to pay the legitimate claims of fishermen and others affected in the Gulf states harmed by the spill – would begin to push back."

Rankle| 6.10.10 @ 3:14PM

Time for a Atlas-Shrugged style strike--I just want to see what the OA will do if BP decides to just stuff it.

Lazy Jack| 6.10.10 @ 4:36PM

Thanks Quin,

The modern refuge of the scoundrel is the accusation of racism, apparently. Old Nate up above appears to be taking you to task for your application of the word thug as it relates to the president.

For those that confuse this word for something it is not, Webster's says:

Thug

1.A cutthroat or ruffian; a hoodlum.

2.also Thug One of a band of professional assassins formerly active in northern India who worshiped Kali and offered their victims to her.

[Hindi ṭhag , perhaps from Sanskrit sthagaḥ , a cheat , from sthagati, sthagayati , he conceals ; see (s)teg- in Indo-European roots.]
thug'ger·y n. , thug'gish adj.

The word origin from Hindi is especially enlightening here. I will let you draw your own conclusions about the words "cheat" and "he conceals."

One has to wonder how much more action we would have had if our leader had thrown less Molotov Cocktails and ordered more action. For example, perhaps he should have ordered Bobby Jindal to build barrier islands. Or perhaps he should have ordered the early burning of the top water slicks. Or perhaps he should have demanded all the other oil companies to make resources available to help on day one (in fairness, this may be happening already, but it certainly does not appear to be if the media is anything to go by).

On a side note, I almost hope you are right that this is thuggish behavior. At least that means it has a purpose, even if it is malignant. I am beginning to think the better noun is "absentee."

Of course, what do I know.

Best,

Lazy Jack

www.thanksforthelaughs.wordpress.com

Nate| 6.10.10 @ 9:52PM

"Thug" implies that Obama has taken something by violent force.

This is inaccurate.

Obama was elected president in the time honored fashion.

He is, scandalously, and simply, a Democrat. I'd put him a notch to the left of Clinton -- although temperamentally he's more conservative. That is to say, he's not at all interested in radical change.

He's liberal. He's reform minded, not revolutionary or radical.

He's SURROUNDED by establishment-types.

We can disagree on all or any of this, of course. And I wouldn't want to live in a country that didn't have fierce opposition to the government, no matter who controlled it. (Hence the term, LIBERAL.)

But calling him -- repeatedly -- a "thug" to me suggests a kind of racism.

I don't remember people calling -- for example -- Clinton or Carter "thugs." And it's not as though people didn't call either of those two guys -- sometimes with good reason -- names.

Thanks for the etymologies. Good reading all the same.

Curtis Rasmussen| 6.11.10 @ 11:12AM

Nate has pulled the race card again, meaning he has already lost this argument and many others. Ignore him.

Nate, thanks for the scatology. Poor reading all the same.

Lazy Jack| 6.11.10 @ 12:52PM

We should call this debating point the greatest convenience in te history of forensics. Any time anyone disagees with the administration, they appear to be branded racist. It is the go-to defense. Pretty soon, even adverbs used to describe the man or is policies will be considered slurs.

Don't like higher taxes, you are a racist. Think offering Sestak a job to drop out of a campaign is worng, you obviously belong to the KKK. Think Israel is worth defending on principle, you are the modern George Wallace (a Democat, by the way).

Ironically, one can imagine that some of the political fixers in the administration secretly delight in the word thug. Its implications have little to do with race, and everything to do with power.

Lazy Jack

Tish| 6.10.10 @ 5:12PM

Obama is a product of the Chicago political machine, which he selected for his entrance to the world of power. You don't get into Chicago politics unless you are a thug because nice guys have no chance there. His Oneness is much to fastidious and cerebral to get his own hands dirty, but he has always had patrons lacking such qualms.

Hoppy| 6.10.10 @ 6:44PM

You can bet that if the most corrupt political machine in America hadn't wanted Obama in elected office at any level, he damn sure wouldn't be there.