Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I Has a Bucket: Preventing bucket theft on Bleeding Hollow | FUBU: A better BH Forum
It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2025 11:16 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Is it even fair that Obama is getting blame/credit for anything related to the oil spill?
Poll ended at Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:27 am
Yes 10%  10%  [ 1 ]
No 90%  90%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 10
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:11 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:39 pm
Posts: 3686
Location: Potomac, MD
Offline

Eturnalshift wrote:
What if Jubber has a reason to hate the government or not trust this administration? Why are you so loving and trusting of this administration? What have they truly done right?


Fantastique wrote:
While I am not the biggest fan of some of the government's shenanigans


Which means that while I might be wary, I dont immediately assume, for no reason, that they are lying about everythign.. illustrated by my follwoing line..

Fantastique wrote:
I dont outright assume that everything they say is false


You may think I'm a fool for doign so, but I believe it is far more retarded to make baseless and unqualified accusations. Doing so is akin to accepting everything the administration says as fact based on Obama saying "Yes, I inhaled - that was the point."


[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:51 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Fantastique wrote:

Also, I'm no tree-hugger, but I dont think that restrictions in place for the protection of the environment are worthless. We share this planet, and you must be made of stone to not be at least a LITTLE BIT concerned for the wildlife that is currently affected by this disaster. Will we have to pay more for oil that we have not drilled up ourselves? Yes. Am I okay with that if it helps the environment? Yes.



The oil has to come from somewhere. If you're so concerned about the environment, ride a bike.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 12:02 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:39 pm
Posts: 3686
Location: Potomac, MD
Offline

Wow, do you people not even read what I write before you quote it? It's not simply black and white, there is a gray area. If you care for the environment just a BIT then you are not considered an environmentalist. Likewise, if you support SOME oil drilling then you are not a heartless jerk. It is possibe to care for the environment and drive a car.

Thinking otherwise makes you dumb. And I hate dumb.


[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:15 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Fantastique wrote:
Jubber, you sound like the stereotypical, erratic, hate-the-government-for-no-good-reason republican.

That would make sense if I were a republican. I'm not.

Fantastique wrote:
While I am not the biggest fan of some of the government's shenanigans, I dont outright assume that everything they say is false. Until proven otherwise with some sort of tangible EVIDENCE, the $20 billion is NOT a cap and you sound silly if you continue to argue otherwise (which doesn't seem to phase you, but that's your choice).

The whole episode is completely shady. The executive branch assumed extralegal powers, and said/did no one knows what to effect something that if done appropriately would have been properly accomplished in either the legislative or judicial branch. Not surprisingly, this is not the first "shakedown" a chief executive and/or his representatives have been involved in. The World's Worst Republican's treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, said the following during a meeting with bankers when they started the TARP program: “We plan to announce the program tomorrow – and that your nine firms will be the initial participants. We don’t believe it is tenable to opt out, because doing so would leave you vulnerable and exposed.” Hint, hint. At least Obama's administration is smart enough to keep that kind of thuggery under wraps, but it's still wrong.

It also proves something else I said. Once we let our government get away with something once, it's assumed they can continue to do it in perpetuity...I was just wrong in forgetting that the Crackpot from Crawford did it first.

Fantastique wrote:
Also, I'm no tree-hugger, but I dont think that restrictions in place for the protection of the environment are worthless. We share this planet, and you must be made of stone to not be at least a LITTLE BIT concerned for the wildlife that is currently affected by this disaster. Will we have to pay more for oil that we have not drilled up ourselves? Yes. Am I okay with that if it helps the environment? Yes.

Well, that's just swell. Of course, the rest of us just want dirty air and water and love all those animals dying all over the place.

No one said the regulations were worthless, but there needs to be a cost-benefit analysis. I'm not OK with paying more for something just so some people can feel good about themselves because they think they've effected some sort of positive change when all they've really done is make life more difficult and expensive for others.

That was my point about why they're in the deep water drilling now. By localizing all offshore drilling to only those states that are so economically impoverished that they have no choice but to embrace the oil industry, we have not only put all our eggs in one basket (hello hurricane season), we've put the burden of providing the resource on the poorest among us while the wealthy get to skate off without doing their fair share.

Fantastique wrote:
The same applies to your argument about healthcare. My family is rich, and I plan on being rich. Will I be footing the bill for Obama's healthcare plan? Yes. Am I okay with that? Yes.

You want to "foot the bill" in this case, then you should insist that your peers among the wealthy in Florida should pay the same "cost" as those Creole and Cajun bastards in Louisiana by having to look at oil derricks from their vacation homes. At least you Rockefellers would only have to see them for a few weeks out of the year.

When the income tax was first enacted, it was promised to the American people that it would only impact the wealthy. Look where we're at with it now. We'll just go down the same road with healthcare, especially when the cost start exceeding projections just like every other government program that's been put in place over the last century.

Fantastique wrote:
Jubber got crushed, and I <3 Laelia for presenting my thoughts and resonses to Jubber's statements in a clear and concise manner.

Translation: Never mind that all Laelia's assertions were so full of holes that somebody drove a truck through them. I agree with those assertions, and that's all that matters.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:20 am  
User avatar

Obama Zombie
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm
Posts: 3149
Location: NoVA
Offline

Jubbergun wrote:
We'll just go down the same road with healthcare, especially when the cost start exceeding projections just like every other government program that's been put in place over the last century.
Remember how Obama said his Health Care legislation would drive down costs? Insurance premiums have risen 9.5% since, and are expected to rise another 9% next year, according to the WSJ... premiums that all Americans pay. And to think, an overhaul of the system to help less than 10% of Americans, paid for by 100% of Americans.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:36 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Fantastique wrote:
Will we have to pay more for oil that we have not drilled up ourselves? Yes. Am I okay with that if it helps the environment? Yes.


The problem with this argument is that the oil has to be drilled somewhere. SOMEONE's environment is at risk for something like the gulf episode now.

Pushing that risk on someone else isn't a solution any better than "out of sight, out of mind," and it smacks of what jubber is accusing the floridians of doing.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 11:16 am  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Jubbergun wrote:
Translation: Never mind that all Laelia's assertions were so full of holes that somebody drove a truck through them. I agree with those assertions, and that's all that matters.


What holes do you think there were in my arguments? You didn't bring any actual evidence countering my points, and the conspiratorial speculation and ad hominem attacks on environmentalists you did bring are entirely unconvincing.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:51 pm  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Laelia wrote:
What holes do you think there were in my arguments? You didn't bring any actual evidence countering my points, and the conspiratorial speculation and ad hominem attacks on environmentalists you did bring are entirely unconvincing.


You made the assertion that oil companies are in deep water because "that's where the oil is," in response to the idea that the only reason they're drilling there is because they've been denied access to land and shallow water sites. I countered that by pointing out that this is obviously not the case because they are very clearly denied access known deposits on land (hell, you even cite one of the largest yourself--ANWAR) and offshore deposits stretching from the Florida Gulf Coast all the way around the wagging dong of the state on up the eastern seaboard. Since the resource expenditure for recovery is greater in deeper water, common sense dictates that if shallow water sites were available those would be drilled instead. That's a pretty big hole.

This is on top of the unusual logic of complaining that BP could pull an Exxon and run to the courts ad nauseum, then suggesting that if the executive branch is doing anything sleazy BP should...run to the courts? You're just all over the place.

You seem to think we should place our trust in what BP says after complaining that BP has lied about the amount of oil released into the gulf. You can't set an Evil Corporation up as an unscrupulous liar and then try to convince anyone that anything they say can be trusted.

You also seem to think that we should put our trust in politicians who have abused their positions of trust by overstepping their legal authority. In the current climate, President Obama could have easily gone to Congress and gotten appropriate legislation passed that would have accomplished what he likely accomplished through veiled threats. That's not the way this country is supposed to work. I'm not going to put any faith in anything said by anyone who engages in such activity. I don't think it's the least bit coincidental that Attorney General Holder hasn't made any more comments about criminal charges since the meeting.

You complained about BP fudging the numbers on the oil that's been dumped into the gulf by this, but you don't seem to have any problem at all with the government abdicating responsibility and allowing BP to monitor themselves.

So basically, you're provably wrong about resource exploitation, you can't make up your mind about whether or not it's acceptable for BP to avail themselves of the legal system, and you seem to believe that we should just put our trust in people who have proven themselves unworthy of our trust. If you don't consider those to be holes, then I'm betting you'd be fairly unimpressed with the Grand Canyon.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 4:43 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:39 pm
Posts: 3686
Location: Potomac, MD
Offline

A) I didnt say you were a republican, I said you sounded like one.
B) You still have not shown any sort of tangible evidence for any of your points, but instead try to fill the gaps in your arguments with speculation and conspiracy theories (like a republican).
C) When did I say that I am fine with the people who own beachfront property causing a ruckus about seeing oil drilling shit outside their windows? Never. Dont assume that all rich people are like them and lump me in with that crowd (like a republican).
D) That's all you really do in anything you've said thus far - assume, assume, and assume. You dont have to be a premed student or come from a scientific background to know that making wild claims with nothing to back them up is really stupid and makes you look really stupid.

So in your next post, which I'm sure is ready and waiting, dont point out any thing wrong with our posts, but instead try and back up some of your claims. Maybe then we can take what you say seriously. Otherwise you just sound like a primitive who still yells at fire.


[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:41 pm  
User avatar

Obama Zombie
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm
Posts: 3149
Location: NoVA
Offline

Fantastique wrote:
speculation and conspiracy theories (like a republican).
* Bush created Hurricane Katrina to kill all the Blacks he hates so much.
* Bush also worked with the Jews to bring down the towers on 9/11 - a total inside job. (OMG DUDER WATCH LOOSE CHANGE ITS TRUE!)
* Bush went to war with Iraq to kill the man that tried to kill his daddy and for oil.
* Bush used to dance naked in the Bohemian Grove.
* Bush used the war on terror only so he could listen in on your phone calls and read your e-mails because everything you say is so important and interesting.
* Bush wanted all the Mexicans to move out of America so he purposely crashed our economy.
* Teabaggers and Republicans are bible-loving, fear-mongering racists.

Yea, because Democrats never make shit up. Moron.

And for lols...
Quote:
Dont ... lump me in with that crowd (like a republican).
ITT: Pot calls kettle black.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:49 pm  
User avatar

French Faggot
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:15 pm
Posts: 5227
Location: New Jersey
Offline

Eturnalshift wrote:
* Teabaggers and Republicans are bible-loving, fear-mongering racists.


Republicans can't be generalized as such, no. Assuming Teabaggers means those Tea Party retards, however, that assessment seems spot-on.


If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:24 pm  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Jubbergun wrote:
You made the assertion that oil companies are in deep water because "that's where the oil is," in response to the idea that the only reason they're drilling there is because they've been denied access to land and shallow water sites. I countered that by pointing out that this is obviously not the case because they are very clearly denied access known deposits on land (hell, you even cite one of the largest yourself--ANWAR) and offshore deposits stretching from the Florida Gulf Coast all the way around the wagging dong of the state on up the eastern seaboard. Since the resource expenditure for recovery is greater in deeper water, common sense dictates that if shallow water sites were available those would be drilled instead. That's a pretty big hole.


It was never in dispute that certain areas are closed to drilling. The question is where the oil is - merely opening areas to new drilling is meaningless if there isn't any oil there. The MMS data I linked makes it quite clear that a large majority of undeveloped offshore oil in the US is in areas that are open to drilling. This would be true even if the entire coast was open to drilling. Why would oil companies ignore the huge deposits in the Gulf and Alaska just because new areas opened up? The deep water wells they're drilling are profitable (they wouldn't be drilling them if they weren't) and the relatively small amount of oil available elsewhere wouldn't suddenly make them unprofitable.

As for the ANWR, it is indeed closed to drilling, but not because rich environmentalists think drilling there would block their ocean views, which was your original argument. However, as with offshore areas, even if it were open to drilling, it would not suddenly make deep water drilling unprofitable. The US simply does not have enough oil available, whether open for drilling or not, to drastically reduce world oil prices, and that's the only thing that would make drilling in deep water unprofitable.


Quote:
This is on top of the unusual logic of complaining that BP could pull an Exxon and run to the courts ad nauseum, then suggesting that if the executive branch is doing anything sleazy BP should...run to the courts? You're just all over the place.


Again, a criminal prosecution of the government would be a different matter from civil proceedings to determine liability for nebulous damages. If the government took the $20 billion and spent it on something other than compensation for spill victims, there would not be any dispute how much money was involved or whether it was legal for the government to spend it on things it was explicitly not intended for. This would be something quite simple for a court to figure out. You seem to read everything in extremes, but I was not saying that courts are always bad, just that they are slow and inefficient at the rather difficult task of determining liability for an environmental accident of this sort.

Quote:
You seem to think we should place our trust in what BP says after complaining that BP has lied about the amount of oil released into the gulf. You can't set an Evil Corporation up as an unscrupulous liar and then try to convince anyone that anything they say can be trusted.


I only brought up BP as a source there because I knew you wouldn't take Obama at his word, so I figured you might be inclined to believe someone diametrically opposed to him on this matter. I guess not. I would not personally trust BP on this matter, but then I do trust Obama to some extent, while you do not.

Quote:
You also seem to think that we should put our trust in politicians who have abused their positions of trust by overstepping their legal authority. In the current climate, President Obama could have easily gone to Congress and gotten appropriate legislation passed that would have accomplished what he likely accomplished through veiled threats. That's not the way this country is supposed to work. I'm not going to put any faith in anything said by anyone who engages in such activity. I don't think it's the least bit coincidental that Attorney General Holder hasn't made any more comments about criminal charges since the meeting.


This is a circular argument. You don't trust Obama that he didn't do something wrong because you think he did something wrong.

Quote:
You complained about BP fudging the numbers on the oil that's been dumped into the gulf by this, but you don't seem to have any problem at all with the government abdicating responsibility and allowing BP to monitor themselves.


I was clarifying the existing situation, not defending it. I agree that letting BP monitor themselves is a bad idea.

Quote:
So basically, you're provably wrong about resource exploitation, you can't make up your mind about whether or not it's acceptable for BP to avail themselves of the legal system, and you seem to believe that we should just put our trust in people who have proven themselves unworthy of our trust. If you don't consider those to be holes, then I'm betting you'd be fairly unimpressed with the Grand Canyon.

Your Pal,
Jubber


I think it's quite clear where the holes are in the arguments here, and who has actually offered evidence supporting their position. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader to figure out.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 12:20 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Yuratuhl wrote:
Eturnalshift wrote:
* Teabaggers and Republicans are bible-loving, fear-mongering racists.


Republicans can't be generalized as such, no. Assuming Teabaggers means those Tea Party retards, however, that assessment seems spot-on.


lets be clear, there's crazies on both sides.

http://zombietime.com/berkeley_marines_2-12-2008/


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:04 am  
User avatar

Kunckleheaded Knob
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 319
Location: NH
Offline

Quote:
This is a circular argument. You don't trust Obama that he didn't do something wrong because you think he did something wrong.


well.. even if he didn't do anything wrong "in" the meeting, the meeting itself was wrong >.>


Çhubathingy - Shaman - Royal Militia
Hoenhiem - Paladin - Royal Militia
Contact: Bnet= nurindun#1138 / twitter / twitch
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:29 am  
User avatar

MegaFaggot 5000
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:39 pm
Posts: 4804
Location: Cinci, OH
Offline

Usdk wrote:
Yuratuhl wrote:
Eturnalshift wrote:
* Teabaggers and Republicans are bible-loving, fear-mongering racists.


Republicans can't be generalized as such, no. Assuming Teabaggers means those Tea Party retards, however, that assessment seems spot-on.


lets be clear, there's crazies on both sides.

Nobody's denying that, but the crazies on the right seem a hell of a lot more organized, a lot more numerous, and a lot more violent/angry than the same people on the left during the bush years.

Nobody was calling Bush a WASP and demanding to see his birth certificate and nobody was threatening their congressmen or shouting over them in those retarded "town hall" debates.


RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

World of Warcraft phpBB template "WoWMoonclaw" created by MAËVAH (ex-MOONCLAW) (v3.0.8.0) - wowcr.net : World of Warcraft styles & videos
© World of Warcraft and Blizzard Entertainment are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. wowcr.net is in no way associated with Blizzard Entertainment.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group