OT: FOX News and the oil blowout

[eavesdropper]

[quote=afx114]Very good point eavesdropper. But you make it sound as if getting those passed were a cakewalk due to the Democratic majority. Are you arguing that they should have been easier to pass? In hindsight, perhaps they should have been. But it’s clear that they were battles. Were they battles due to the president’s political inexperience, or were they battles because the Dems, while a single group, are a diverse coalition of interests, much more so than the Reps? Is a president’s performance based on how many of the opposite party he can bring on board or is it based on the overall ability to bring diverse interests together to get shit done? We can also refer to the Obameter for some insight: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

No doubt the true test will be when he doesn’t have a majority. And based on what we’ve seen from the Reps so far, it doesn’t look like he will get much help from them. However, there could be more pressure on them to actually get stuff done since their votes will actually matter this time.

Time will tell.[/quote]

Love the Obamameter!! Many thanks for the link.

I was really pumped when the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania came up with the FactCheck.org website. Brilliant idea! Most of our political leaders and their staffs likewise thought so, too, utilizing FactCheck regularly in campaigns, legislative battles, and press releases….until facts came up that were not necessarily in their favor. Now we have a number of similar sites from which you can choose, depending on your particular brand of bias. Oh, well. It was great while it lasted.

In regard to the legislation, mine was an attempt simply to demonstrate the extreme divide along party lines. I have no delusions that any of those battles were easy. As for a change in the balance of the Senate and House, I wish I had your faith. In my eyes, a significant number of Republicans winning the seats of incumbent Dems will confirm what I suspect: that the evidence that the Republicans are drawing large paychecks for obstructing legislative progress hasn’t registered in the brains of American voters, or it simply doesn’t bother them. I’m not sure which of those bothers me more.

[Zeitgeist]

Brian wrote:
“I believe that Obama’s mistake is extending an olive branch to the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship and in hope of cooperation.” When did he do that? He is a Chicago thug and thugs do not use olive branches. He offered an olive branch to the Republicans, like Hitler did to the Jews. You are full of crap, Brian. You are blinded by your stupid ideology and cannot see Obama for who he really is. You are just as stupid as the German people who thought Hitler was their savior.

[Zeitgeist]

Brian wrote:
“I believe that Obama’s mistake is extending an olive branch to the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship and in hope of cooperation.” When did he do that? He is a Chicago thug and thugs do not use olive branches. He offered an olive branch to the Republicans, like Hitler did to the Jews. You are full of crap, Brian. You are blinded by your stupid ideology and cannot see Obama for who he really is. You are just as stupid as the German people who thought Hitler was their savior.

[Zeitgeist]

Brian wrote:
“I believe that Obama’s mistake is extending an olive branch to the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship and in hope of cooperation.” When did he do that? He is a Chicago thug and thugs do not use olive branches. He offered an olive branch to the Republicans, like Hitler did to the Jews. You are full of crap, Brian. You are blinded by your stupid ideology and cannot see Obama for who he really is. You are just as stupid as the German people who thought Hitler was their savior.

[Zeitgeist]

Brian wrote:
“I believe that Obama’s mistake is extending an olive branch to the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship and in hope of cooperation.” When did he do that? He is a Chicago thug and thugs do not use olive branches. He offered an olive branch to the Republicans, like Hitler did to the Jews. You are full of crap, Brian. You are blinded by your stupid ideology and cannot see Obama for who he really is. You are just as stupid as the German people who thought Hitler was their savior.

[Zeitgeist]

Brian wrote:
“I believe that Obama’s mistake is extending an olive branch to the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship and in hope of cooperation.” When did he do that? He is a Chicago thug and thugs do not use olive branches. He offered an olive branch to the Republicans, like Hitler did to the Jews. You are full of crap, Brian. You are blinded by your stupid ideology and cannot see Obama for who he really is. You are just as stupid as the German people who thought Hitler was their savior.

[ucodegen]

Yes, as a consumer of the oil industry, I’m farther removed from the oil industry; so I have more leeway to criticize the oil industry than a government employee or contractor criticizing the hand that feeds.

Non-sequitur, does not follow, nor is it supported by facts presented or at hand.

As an employee, you draw a wage from the employer – you are a cost to the company. Hopefully you produce more than you cost.

As a consumer, you are a source of profit to the company. You have a choice of alternate products. You could choose to go electric and have your own solar farm. By choosing an industry, you are providing support for it.

From a standpoint of supporting an industry, a consumer is much more important that an employee. There has to be someone to sell the goods to.

[ucodegen]

Yes, as a consumer of the oil industry, I’m farther removed from the oil industry; so I have more leeway to criticize the oil industry than a government employee or contractor criticizing the hand that feeds.

Non-sequitur, does not follow, nor is it supported by facts presented or at hand.

As an employee, you draw a wage from the employer – you are a cost to the company. Hopefully you produce more than you cost.

As a consumer, you are a source of profit to the company. You have a choice of alternate products. You could choose to go electric and have your own solar farm. By choosing an industry, you are providing support for it.

From a standpoint of supporting an industry, a consumer is much more important that an employee. There has to be someone to sell the goods to.

[ucodegen]

Yes, as a consumer of the oil industry, I’m farther removed from the oil industry; so I have more leeway to criticize the oil industry than a government employee or contractor criticizing the hand that feeds.

Non-sequitur, does not follow, nor is it supported by facts presented or at hand.

As an employee, you draw a wage from the employer – you are a cost to the company. Hopefully you produce more than you cost.

As a consumer, you are a source of profit to the company. You have a choice of alternate products. You could choose to go electric and have your own solar farm. By choosing an industry, you are providing support for it.

From a standpoint of supporting an industry, a consumer is much more important that an employee. There has to be someone to sell the goods to.

[ucodegen]

Yes, as a consumer of the oil industry, I’m farther removed from the oil industry; so I have more leeway to criticize the oil industry than a government employee or contractor criticizing the hand that feeds.

Non-sequitur, does not follow, nor is it supported by facts presented or at hand.

As an employee, you draw a wage from the employer – you are a cost to the company. Hopefully you produce more than you cost.

As a consumer, you are a source of profit to the company. You have a choice of alternate products. You could choose to go electric and have your own solar farm. By choosing an industry, you are providing support for it.

From a standpoint of supporting an industry, a consumer is much more important that an employee. There has to be someone to sell the goods to.

[ucodegen]

Yes, as a consumer of the oil industry, I’m farther removed from the oil industry; so I have more leeway to criticize the oil industry than a government employee or contractor criticizing the hand that feeds.

Non-sequitur, does not follow, nor is it supported by facts presented or at hand.

As an employee, you draw a wage from the employer – you are a cost to the company. Hopefully you produce more than you cost.

As a consumer, you are a source of profit to the company. You have a choice of alternate products. You could choose to go electric and have your own solar farm. By choosing an industry, you are providing support for it.

From a standpoint of supporting an industry, a consumer is much more important that an employee. There has to be someone to sell the goods to.

[ucodegen]

For a guy without a lot of political experience, he sure has had quite a bit of success in getting his agenda passed: stimulus plan, healthcare, and now DADT. That’s three fairly large agenda items pased in only 1.3 years of a four year term.

It is not the number of bills that get passed, but the quality.

Stimulus plan – still a big question mark as to whether this paid off. Too much of it went towards ‘special interests’. The Bush(like it or not) ‘bailout’ worked quite well, and it looks like it will cost us (taxpayers who a footing the bill) less than the original tab. Many of the banks that were loaned money under TARP had to pay interest on that money, and when they paid the TARP back.. the gov had the interest and the principal on money the gov just ‘invented’.

Health plan – this was too ambitious. There are some good parts to it, but it should really have been re-worked. The real beneficiaries are the insurance companies. Remember to profit margin jump in auto insurance companies where auto insurance was made mandatory in CA?

DADT repeal is going to create a bigger problem than people realize. In the military, there is separation between male and female ‘facilities’. This is to help preserve order and insure safety. When dealing with a homosexual, you basically have a male with ‘interests’ that are structured as a female (or visa versa). It would be like mixing the male and female facilities completely.

You forgot to mention the ‘financial reform’ he is proposing, without really looking at the cause of the failure.

Congress has worked best when it is opposed, when a ‘stalemate’ exists. This allows things to be thought and worked through thoroughly. More laws, regulations going through does not necessarily mean better laws and regulations.

[ucodegen]

For a guy without a lot of political experience, he sure has had quite a bit of success in getting his agenda passed: stimulus plan, healthcare, and now DADT. That’s three fairly large agenda items pased in only 1.3 years of a four year term.

It is not the number of bills that get passed, but the quality.

Stimulus plan – still a big question mark as to whether this paid off. Too much of it went towards ‘special interests’. The Bush(like it or not) ‘bailout’ worked quite well, and it looks like it will cost us (taxpayers who a footing the bill) less than the original tab. Many of the banks that were loaned money under TARP had to pay interest on that money, and when they paid the TARP back.. the gov had the interest and the principal on money the gov just ‘invented’.

Health plan – this was too ambitious. There are some good parts to it, but it should really have been re-worked. The real beneficiaries are the insurance companies. Remember to profit margin jump in auto insurance companies where auto insurance was made mandatory in CA?

DADT repeal is going to create a bigger problem than people realize. In the military, there is separation between male and female ‘facilities’. This is to help preserve order and insure safety. When dealing with a homosexual, you basically have a male with ‘interests’ that are structured as a female (or visa versa). It would be like mixing the male and female facilities completely.

You forgot to mention the ‘financial reform’ he is proposing, without really looking at the cause of the failure.

Congress has worked best when it is opposed, when a ‘stalemate’ exists. This allows things to be thought and worked through thoroughly. More laws, regulations going through does not necessarily mean better laws and regulations.

[ucodegen]

For a guy without a lot of political experience, he sure has had quite a bit of success in getting his agenda passed: stimulus plan, healthcare, and now DADT. That’s three fairly large agenda items pased in only 1.3 years of a four year term.

It is not the number of bills that get passed, but the quality.

Stimulus plan – still a big question mark as to whether this paid off. Too much of it went towards ‘special interests’. The Bush(like it or not) ‘bailout’ worked quite well, and it looks like it will cost us (taxpayers who a footing the bill) less than the original tab. Many of the banks that were loaned money under TARP had to pay interest on that money, and when they paid the TARP back.. the gov had the interest and the principal on money the gov just ‘invented’.

Health plan – this was too ambitious. There are some good parts to it, but it should really have been re-worked. The real beneficiaries are the insurance companies. Remember to profit margin jump in auto insurance companies where auto insurance was made mandatory in CA?

DADT repeal is going to create a bigger problem than people realize. In the military, there is separation between male and female ‘facilities’. This is to help preserve order and insure safety. When dealing with a homosexual, you basically have a male with ‘interests’ that are structured as a female (or visa versa). It would be like mixing the male and female facilities completely.

You forgot to mention the ‘financial reform’ he is proposing, without really looking at the cause of the failure.

Congress has worked best when it is opposed, when a ‘stalemate’ exists. This allows things to be thought and worked through thoroughly. More laws, regulations going through does not necessarily mean better laws and regulations.

[ucodegen]

For a guy without a lot of political experience, he sure has had quite a bit of success in getting his agenda passed: stimulus plan, healthcare, and now DADT. That’s three fairly large agenda items pased in only 1.3 years of a four year term.

It is not the number of bills that get passed, but the quality.

Stimulus plan – still a big question mark as to whether this paid off. Too much of it went towards ‘special interests’. The Bush(like it or not) ‘bailout’ worked quite well, and it looks like it will cost us (taxpayers who a footing the bill) less than the original tab. Many of the banks that were loaned money under TARP had to pay interest on that money, and when they paid the TARP back.. the gov had the interest and the principal on money the gov just ‘invented’.

Health plan – this was too ambitious. There are some good parts to it, but it should really have been re-worked. The real beneficiaries are the insurance companies. Remember to profit margin jump in auto insurance companies where auto insurance was made mandatory in CA?

DADT repeal is going to create a bigger problem than people realize. In the military, there is separation between male and female ‘facilities’. This is to help preserve order and insure safety. When dealing with a homosexual, you basically have a male with ‘interests’ that are structured as a female (or visa versa). It would be like mixing the male and female facilities completely.

You forgot to mention the ‘financial reform’ he is proposing, without really looking at the cause of the failure.

Congress has worked best when it is opposed, when a ‘stalemate’ exists. This allows things to be thought and worked through thoroughly. More laws, regulations going through does not necessarily mean better laws and regulations.

[Author]

Posts