|
10005. greystoke - 6/3/2010 5:52:39 PM I stopped by to see how the race for 10000 was going, maybe get a chance to snag it. Imagine my disappointment!
That's what happens when I leave it hanging ........
Congratulations, Ms. No. 10006. arkymalarky - 6/5/2010 2:40:57 AM Yay No!
It seems unreal Obama's now dealing with this oil spill. I'm frustrated with him, but I don't know what he can do that he's not doing. I just hope he makes BP pay as much and in as many ways as possible. We're going to the gulf at the end of July. I can't imagine what it'll be like by then. 10007. greystoke - 6/5/2010 3:04:44 AM What I would like to see is Obama calling out those who are responsible. I realize he shouldn't do it now while the crisis is still ongoing. But when the plume is capped .....
For example, my former Congressman, John Peterson was a tireless advocate of offshore drilling. And he was promoting it even after he retired from Congress in 2008. I believe he was author of legislation to open up previously protected offshore areas. (By the way I never voted for the son-of-a-bitch.) 10008. greystoke - 6/5/2010 3:13:41 AM Time May Be Right For Offshore Oil Bill
In late May, Peterson wrote to President Bush and once again requested that the moratorium on off-shore production be lifted.
Peterson noted that a recent Gallup poll indicated that 57 percent of Americans now support offshore energy production.
Peterson said in his letter to Bush, “Small businesses are laying off employees, and large manufacturers are moving offshore where energy is more affordable. In my home state of Pennsylvania, residential shut-offs are up 51 percent because of record high energy prices.”
Peterson said, “Offshore is the safest place to produce energy in the world. The vast majority of oil spills come from transportation, recreation and natural seepage — not from drilling.”
10009. greystoke - 6/5/2010 3:15:34 AM "natural seepage" my ass 10010. arkymalarky - 6/5/2010 5:19:27 AM I'd love to see that same question polled now. 10011. greystoke - 6/6/2010 2:44:16 PM Gov. Jindal Was a Water Boy for the Oil Industry
Jindal's outrage is understandable and even admirable in the sense that he's not afraid to sound like an environmentalist. But the media's panegyrics have ignored Jindal's own weak response to the oil spill and his outsized role in promoting the kind of regulatory cutbacks and dangerous offshore drilling policies that are now wrecking Louisiana's economy.
In February, 2006, while serving as a member of the GOP-controlled US House of Representatives, Jindal introduced the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act. Passed by the House a few months later, the bill would have opened up the entire US coast to offshore oil drilling. States could override the law and ban rigs in their territorial waters, yet the law would let them share lease royalties with the federal government--a strong incentive to drill.
10012. greystoke - 6/6/2010 2:50:44 PM Drill Baby Drill
Dear President Obama and Secretary Salazar:
I am writing to express my grave concerns regarding the severe economic impact of a six-month (or longer) suspension of activity at 33 previously permitted deepwater drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, including and in particular the 22 deepwater drilling rigs currently in operation off the Louisiana coast.
Already, Louisiana has suffered severe negative economic and ecological impacts from the BP oil spill. Our seafood industry is experiencing huge economic losses that have only been partially mitigated by a frustratingly slow and inadequate BP claims process. Moreover, our precious wetlands are suffering incalculable, permanent damages, while our tourism industry faces escalating losses.
During one of the most challenging economic periods in decades, the last thing we need is to enact public policies that will certainly destroy thousands of existing jobs while preventing the creation of thousands more.
...
...
Sincerely,
Governor Bobby Jindal 10013. thoughtful - 6/7/2010 6:09:10 PM i don't understand why exxon and shell et al aren't in helping out bp in this oil spill...it is no longer a bp problem but an oil industry problem and it would be in all of their interests to see the damage minimized and the fix executed immediately. Certainly this is something obama should be pushing for and can suspend any laws against collusion to make it happen. 10014. thoughtful - 6/7/2010 6:10:59 PM so let me see...helen thomas has had to retire because someone asked her opinion and she stated it. People are claiming that she can't be objective given her feelings toward israel....excuse me. Is there anyone who things all other reporters have no opinion on anything they write about? Or are we realistic enough to recognize they do have opinions but hopefully professional enough to stick to the facts when they report...Sheesh!
10015. arkymalarky - 6/8/2010 2:09:32 AM I can't believe that a 90 year old veteran who's covered presidents since Kennedy would be so unceremoniously booted for a statement she apologized for. 10016. thoughtful - 6/8/2010 4:21:56 PM My antisemitic father always used to say jews run the world...in this case, given a lebanese woman chose to state her opinion which was viewed as antithetical to the state of israel and gets ousted for it...it would seem to be a point for his camp. (Of course I always used to counter him with, if jews really ran the world, don't you think they would've been able to prevent the extermination of 6 million of their own people?)
Of course, many people have gotten ousted for a statement or an action that was considered inappropriate only to be redeemed in the media a few years later (see g. gordon liddy or oliver north). Unfortunately for Helen, she's not got that many years left. 10017. judithathome - 6/8/2010 8:14:07 PM If you don't want an opinion, don't ask a 90 year old for one.
Had she made a statement favorable to Israel, do you think she'd have been lauded...or even ignored?
This is ridiculous...I may not agree with her but if you ask for an opinon, better be prepared for it not to jibe with your own...50% chance either way. 10018. thoughtful - 6/8/2010 9:28:38 PM I think a distinction should be made in what's said given the person's role in life.
It's one thing when someone in congress who is supposed to represent all his constituents makes a 'macaca' remark vs someone who has no power or decision making over other people. 10019. alistairConnor - 6/8/2010 9:58:39 PM Sorry, I disagree with you all, dears. I don't know the lady or her work, probably that helps.
Try this exercise : somebody says :
"XXX category of people cause YYY type of problem, they should all go back to ZZZ where they came from."
Plug in some variables, and see if you like any of the outcomes.
I'm reminded of the Abbé Pierre, who died a couple of years ago. He was voted most popular Frenchperson every year, for his outstanding humanitarian work over 60 years. In his nineties, he expressed anti-semitic opinions, in support of a negationist friend of his. He disappeared from public view after this; and rightly so.
I'm afraid that old people tend to lose it, and go back to their original prejudices. The ones they grew out of, moved on from, or at least kept in check.
I think it's indecent to go and solicit unacceptable opinions from old folks; but on the other hand, such opinions freely given are proof that it's time to retire from public view. It was right to fire her. 10020. thoughtful - 6/8/2010 10:37:24 PM OK, let me try it:
"Al Qaeda murdered thousands of innocent people....they should all go to hell where they came from."
Works for me!
if you're specifically asked an opinion then you are free to express it...it is entirely up to her readership if they choose to stop reading her material or not as a result of her opinion.
It's my choice to refuse to see any mel gibson movies anymore...but he is still has a box office despite his disgusting remarks.
Who said: “The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.” and “We need segregated buses… This is Obama’s America.”
And by the way he's still employed because his audience supports him.
It was Rush Limbaugh. 10021. Dubai Vol - 6/9/2010 5:45:18 AM Poor Helen Thomas; that'll teach her to have two mimosas and shoot her mouth off.
Seriously, kids, she's Lebanese. What on earth do you expect her opinion to be? Of course having an opinion and being stupid enough to say it out loud are two different things.
Go back to Germany and Poland? Really? Sure, as a crazy old lady you are welcome to think that. To sit front row center at White House press briefings and say that? Not so much. 10022. Dubai Vol - 6/9/2010 6:03:32 AM Poor Helen Thomas; that'll teach her to have two mimosas and shoot her mouth off.
Seriously, kids, she's Lebanese. What on earth do you expect her opinion to be? Of course having an opinion and being stupid enough to say it out loud are two different things.
Go back to Germany and Poland? Really? Sure, as a crazy old lady you are welcome to think that. To sit front row center at White House press briefings and say that? Not so much.
And I'm sorry, but saying that we should tolerate bigotry on the part of Helen Thomas because the right wing are a bunch of bigots and Rush is their voice? No. Just no. 10023. thoughtful - 6/9/2010 2:41:49 PM First of all she did not say it from the front row of the white house press briefing. Second, her reporting has never revealed her personal sentiments, thus she has been doing her job well and did it extremely well for many decades. Third, like it or not there are bigots in this world. They have the right to speak their bigotry...otherwise how will we know who they are? That doesn't mean we have to like what they are saying. But if rush can be an idiot and a racist all the time and keep his job then why should the standards be more stringent for helen who not only has a far greater track record than rush ever did, but who, given her position, has far less influence in the world than rush does. 10024. vonKreedon - 6/9/2010 4:08:44 PM I think that Helen's statement was easily reason enough for Hearst to fire her. Come on, telling the citizens of Israel that they should go back to where they came from? And that the places they should go are Germany and Poland? It's one thing to say that Israel needs to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, or that there needs to be a one state solution in Palestine, or even that the UN resolution legitimizing the state of Israel was a mistake, but it is purely anti-semetic to say that the citizens of Israel are all outsiders and should all return to the scene of the Shoah.
Yes, Rush et al say as bad on a variety of fronts and it is their meat and potatoes, but I'm really not going to take Rush's ethics as my benchmark in evaluating journalists.
|
