Archive for the Issues Category

More Government Perfidy on BP Oil Spill

Posted in Issues, Obama with tags , on July 7, 2010 by lumpy

CNSNews reports:

Billy Nungesser, president of Plaquemines Parish in Louisiana, sensed that a chart showing 140 oil skimmers at work — a chart given to him by BP and the Coast Guard — was “somewhat inaccurate.” So, Nungesser asked to fly over the spill to verify the number.

The flyover was cancelled three times before those officials admitted that just 31 of the 140 skimmers were actually deployed.

The incident is detailed in a report released Thursday by Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Republicans say the report provides evidence that the Obama administration misrepresented the assets devoted to the cleanup, misrepresented the timing of when government officials knew there was an oil spill and misrepresented the level of control the government had over the matter …

Tuck this into the file with previous reports.

Go on.


New Taxes Hit 1/1/11

Posted in Issues, Obama, Revolution with tags , , on July 6, 2010 by lumpy

January 1, 2011, will see a massive increase in taxes and reduction in tax breaks, including:

First Wave: Expiration of 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief …

Second Wave: Obamacare

There are over twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare. …

Third Wave: The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes …

Mug tip to Power Line.

Yeah, go on, while you can still afford to do so.

Riehl Warning to the GOP

Posted in Issues, Revolution with tags , , , , on July 1, 2010 by lumpy

Dan Riehl warns the establishment GOP:

A big part of my thinking in coming to DC was to try and help to create a synergy between the Right on-line and the establishment GOP. I had hoped to forestall anything like an insurgency from the Right by finding common ground. What I didn’t realize is that today’s GOP is interested in no such thing. It can’t hear anyone outside the Beltway echo chamber and isn’t interested in listening to them even if they could.

And I don’t believe today’s Beltway entrenched GOP is going to bring about the kind of change America needs. The leadership is weak, wasteful, misguided and out of sync with the people. The signs are all there, from Dede Scozzafava, to Charlie Crist – and worse.

And even if they reclaim this, or that majority in the fall, we will most likely see the same old politics as usual that so frustrated the Right under Bush. You don’t really believe they are going to repeal ObamaCare and tell millions of people expecting health insurance at taxpayer expense they can’t have it, do you? That will be politically imprudent to our Beltway ensconced GOP.

Illegal immigration? Led by soon to be ex-border cop John McCain, assuming he’s re-elected, they will be calling us racists and haters, again. They have to worry about that Hispanic vote, after all.

… Today’s Republican Party is broken and corrupt. And they are not my friend, any more than they are yours. They are only interested in themselves.

Preach it, Dan!

Go on!

Why BP Stockholders Should Sue the US Gov’t

Posted in Issues, Obama with tags , , , , , on July 1, 2010 by lumpy

When Obama is looking for whose ass to kick, he should begin taking yoga lessons.  According to the Financial Post:

Three days after the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico began on April 20, the Netherlands offered the U.S. government ships equipped to handle a major spill, one much larger than the BP spill that then appeared to be underway. “Our system can handle 400 cubic metres per hour,” Weird Koops, the chairman of Spill Response Group Holland, told Radio Netherlands Worldwide, giving each Dutch ship more cleanup capacity than all the ships that the U.S. was then employing in the Gulf to combat the spill.

To protect against the possibility that its equipment wouldn’t capture all the oil gushing from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch also offered to prepare for the U.S. a contingency plan to protect Louisiana’s marshlands with sand barriers. One Dutch research institute specializing in deltas, coastal areas and rivers, in fact, developed a strategy to begin building 60-mile-long sand dikes within three weeks.

In sharp contrast to Dutch preparedness before the fact and the Dutch instinct to dive into action once an emergency becomes apparent, witness the American reaction to the Dutch offer of help. The U.S. government responded with “Thanks but no thanks,” remarked Visser, despite BP’s desire to bring in the Dutch equipment and despite the no-lose nature of the Dutch offer –the Dutch government offered the use of its equipment at no charge. Even after the U.S. refused, the Dutch kept their vessels on standby, hoping the Americans would come round. By May 5, the U.S. had not come round. To the contrary, the U.S. had also turned down offers of help from 12 other governments, most of them with superior expertise and equipment –unlike the U.S., Europe has robust fleets of Oil Spill Response Vessels that sail circles around their make-shift U.S. counterparts.

The Americans, overwhelmed by the catastrophic consequences of the BP spill, finally relented and took the Dutch up on their offer — but only partly. Because the U.S. didn’t want Dutch ships working the Gulf, the U.S. airlifted the Dutch equipment to the Gulf and then retrofitted it to U.S. vessels. And rather than have experienced Dutch crews immediately operate the oil-skimming equipment, to appease labour unions the U.S. postponed the clean-up operation to allow U.S. crews to be trained.

If I were the CEO of BP, this would come up every single time the media interviewed me.  Of course, to do that would be to anger the politically powerful.  I’m cool with that.  I would document every way the government took its revenge (as it inevitably would).  Of course, at that point the MSM would no longer report on it, but it would be there, official documents on an official website somewhere, to provide ammo for someone who cares about justice.
Go on, then.

Quick Politics Link Roundup

Posted in Issues, Revolution with tags , , on November 13, 2009 by lumpy

Two lists of proposed objectives for conservatives:

The American Spectator

Valley of the Shadow

And On The Issues, which tracks politicians’ records and offers an interesting political graph for each one (and for readers if they want to take their quiz).

Go on!

Random Things Worth Noting

Posted in Issues, Revolution with tags , , , on July 14, 2009 by lumpy

Backwoods Home Magazine – self-reliance is a good set of skills to have.

Dems rule the campus

Police SWAT teams in Maryland and our psycho laws

Update – New Links:

Reason on Economic Suicide

Harvard economist Robert J. Barro: Government spending is no free lunch

Go on.

Is “Shut Up” Really a Good Argument?

Posted in Issues, Media, Obama with tags , , , , , on May 28, 2009 by lumpy

On the question of whether Sotomayor’s statement was racist, one defense I’m seeing is “Shut up.”

Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesperson, responded initially that, “I think it is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way they in which they’ve decided to describe any aspects of this impending confirmation.” He does not address her statement directly in any way.

Jill Lawrence at Politics Daily echoes this in an oped piece titled Wise Conservatives Might Want to Stop Calling Sotomayor a Racist:

Do Republicans really want to seem like they’re ganging up on Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina nominee to the Supreme Court, by calling her a racist? If they don’t, somebody had better get the word out, because that seems to be the talking point of the week.

The rest of her oped quotes several conservatives calling Sotomayor’s statement racist, and then giving three paragraphs from the original speech to provide context. She does not, however, address whether the statement is racist or not, and, like Gibbs, seems to be offering the argument that Republicans should just shut up.

As Andrew Klavan notes, this seems to be a common reaction from the left.

Because Sotomayor’s statement should be seen in context, here are the paragraphs that Lawrence quoted, taken from the NYT full text of that speech:

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.

However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.

Again, I have no problem with the idea that one’s experiences affect one’s judgment, but to think that one person’s judgment is better than another based on race and gender is racism and sexism. I would not want a white man on the court that believed his experiences as a white man made his judgment better than a Hispanic woman’s, and I don’t think a white man who made a similar statement would be appointed in this day and age.

Oh, go on.