ace, start another thread already. What does any of that have to do with Rand, Barack, and our friends at BP?

Who is Rand Paul?
Why did he win the primary?
Who supports him?
Why do the people who support Rand Paul, dislike Obama?
Why do people who support Rand Paul believe he more closely reflects American values and Barack Obama does not?
What statements does Barack Obama make that puts him at odds with those who support people like Rand Paual and those in the Tea Party?

I have given thought to those questions and I think the answers are very relevant to the topic.

It seems to me that when someone has a question that may shift the discussion, perhaps the questioner should ask that question in a new thread. And as usual, everyone has the ability to ignore a post, and the moderators can step in anytime they feel things are getting too far afield.

---------- Post added at 11:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:54 AM ----------

Why not answer the question? Don't you think your response supports my point? Some have the courage (agree or not) to state what they stand for, like Rand Paul.

I don't support politicians that I don't think are honest, do you?

I have a bias against people who subtly or not so subtly say that I don't have a clue. I also find it interesting how some of those people have an attitude that they deserv to be thanked for telling me I don't have a clue and gracing me with their condensation all while not being able or willing to address simple and direct questions.

The issue is not intellect, the issue is condescension. There have been many instances that clearly define what I describe available for everyone to see who reads this forum regularly. It is in the media. It is in Washington. And, it comes direct from the President - exemplified by his bitter people who cling to their guns and religion remark. And some wonder why there is a Tea Party movement or a Rand Paul.

Oh, and what is the difference between a latte and a cup of coffee?:orly:

Your question: What role should tax policy play in our nation?

Answer: Taxes should be used to pay the operating costs of our government and should be distributed and collected sensibly.

As for Rand Paul, he doesn't really have the courage to state what he stands for, because he knows that the more he does, the fewer people are going to vote for him.

Says the Palin fan. I typically don't support politicians at all (aside from voting occasionally).

Dude, you have a bias against anyone who finds themselves on the wrong side of one of these mythical narratives you've created to help yourself make sense of the world. Like latte sipping liberals. I suspect you may be biased towards noble long haul truckers. In either case, the source of your bias is an intellectual approximation which, in my experience, doesn't necessarily accurately reflect reality.

Do you realize how condescending your little scribe about the typical long haul trucker was? Really, you don't have to be peddling negative stereotypes to be condescending. Your ostensible concern about the condescension of liberal elites on behalf of long haul truckers is condescending.

Lattes are used as rhetorical cudgels by intellectual elitists to motivate emotionally insecure members of the political underclass. Coffee is delicious.

I make my own lattes at home, which costs less than a regular cup of coffee from a coffee shop.

I think there is something quite American about DIY, no?

So, tell me, what's so un-American about Obama's criticism? Have we answered that?

The GOP has the copyright on "True American", so they get to determine what is and isn't American (duh)

Well, the right seems to have a monopoly on the use of the term un-American. I'll reiterate: I think it's the political equivalent of Godwin's law.

This is my view.

Obama is the President of this nation and has a responsibility to serve the nation first. Obama, in this case, has failed to act responsibly as President, and the initial reactions from his administration was to pass blame, and to grandstand rather than address the catastrophe. The problem is bigger than BP, his focus on BP is untimely. To they degree that BP did or did not do what they should have done, there is "government" that allowed it to happen. At the end of the day I think we will find that regulations were in place that could have prevented this. So, is the problem lack of regulation? Is the problem BP? Certainly, more regulation may help and BP failed, but the issue today is to get the leak stopped and the oil cleaned up. We should expect more from the President than what Obama has delivered.

---------- Post added at 03:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:45 PM ----------

I was being condescending. I know what I did. I know why I did it. I will admit it. If I am ever condescending when I don't do it to make a point or on purpose, and it is pointed out to me, I will apologize and try to explain what I did if it would be helpful to the person I offended. However, some don't either realize when/why they do it or they can not be honest about it. The biggest kicker to this is when a guy like Obama gets offended when he gets called on it as do some here. It is like they insult you and then get pissed at you for not sitting silently and taking it. I used to fight it, now I can not begin to explain how entertaining it is - and I actually think I am now the only one left who gets it.

Ace,

what specifically could obama have done different? Don't reply with "he needs to lead". what specifically do u want done that isn't?

It's clearly Obama's fault, not the laundry list of Senators and Congressmen (on both sides of the aisle) who took money from big oil to lessen regulations (or avert their gaze at the obvious breaking of said regulations)

I have stated many times (to be fair, perhaps in another thread) that I would have "fired" BP, and assigned responsibility for stopping the leak to a "team" or another company. Second, I would have used the power of the government to get all available equipment (tankers, skimmers, boom, etc.) in the Gulf in the first week. I would have clearly assigned operational control to a government entity, perhaps even the Navy. I would have flown in every expert in the world to the Gulf to review and give input. I would have told Congress to hold off on hearings until after the situation was resolved. I would have made sure the relief well drilling started within the first 2 or 3 days. I would have made sure that Gov. Jendal and I were on the same page, and that our communication was not via his news conference, etc, etc,etc.

your 20/20 hindsight vision is remarkable

Seconded, Derwood..

ace: How do you know that Navy engineers know any better than BP (you know, the company who has been drilling for decades) in well management and containment? BP owns (as employees) the experts. How do you know that BP (you know, the company that has been transporting oil for decades) doesn't own all of the supertankers necessary to cart the stuff way? How is the Navy equipped to deal with an oil disaster, at all?

Sure, they screwed up, but throwing BP out is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Not only that, but I doubt that legally the government would be able to take over that infrastructure.

If you consider the origin of that phrase, it's sickeningly appropriate in this usage.:sad:

Done nearly a month ago. On April 30, Coast Guard Admiral and Commandant Thad Allen was made the National Incident Commander for the federal government's response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

The reason I would fire "BP" has nothing to do with what they know or don't know...as we have seen BP's interests are not consistent in all cases with what is in Our interests. I would resolve that from day one. I would also eliminate any false perceptions of who may be in charge. We did not need the CEO of BP saying things inconsistent with what the administration was saying, it causes confusion. I have already been mocked regarding my attitude in these matters - what I would do has no value. If you are satisfied with what the administration has done, I think you are in the minority at this point.

---------- Post added at 09:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 PM ----------

Perception is often reality. BP is still acting like they are in charge.

So you knew you were being condescending in a post where you were complaining about how you were being condescended to, but the fact that you knew you were being condescending makes your condescension somehow different and less complaint-worthy than the condescension you perceived from others, whose condescension you have assumed was unintentional, and therefore more complaint-worthy, for no apparent rational reason?

It's no wonder you find it entertaining. You're completely insane, but you've convinced yourself that your particular delusions are proof that you're the only sane person.

So even though your suggestion was done almost a month ago, it still isn't what you percieve to be so, I mean ace you seem to have no idea what you want them to do, you say you have an idea, but when shown something you suggest has already been done, you still don't buy it because BP is 'acting like they're in charge'? How does one act like they're in charge anyways? I suspect you'll complain no matter what happens, you just like to complain for complainings sake.
A smart person would have had it drilled at the same time, it's purpose is to relieve pressure if there is a blowout is it not? Even starting it 2-3 days afterwards, it would still take 2-3 months to finish, so the damage is already done, that's a concept you can't seem to grasp, or are just I don't know, that is if the platform could be brought to the location and prepared to start drilling within this '2-3 days'.

reality is not the most important element here for ace. i learned that in the thread i made in which i was trying to assemble an idea of how this fiasco was possible and why it's played out the way it has. ace was of course entirely opposed to this reality business and instead quite insisted that things excluded a priori by the regulatory apparatus should happen and straight away and that it was some failure of leadership or some other conservative-specific Bad Thing which explained why this or that uninteresting thing that was entirely excluded by reality in any event hadn't happened yet. like firing bp when the regulatory system presupposes that bp would be the source of contingency plans and technologies fitted to deal with them. unless of course they're exempted from having to produce the plans. which minerals management did. but it's unamerican to point that out apparently. and it's obviously the fault of the government that they do not now have the plan and technologies that their regulatory system prevented them from having. so what we should do is assemble a dream team of really smart people who will figure everything out and then call a superhero to put it into motion.

it's really a joke.

meanwhile, lots of aspects of the gulf ecosystem die.

call superman now.

I honestly stated a bias that I have and I was compared to Pol Pot. I have been told that I am clueless. I have been told that what I describe as real is just in my imagination - just in the past week - just in this thread. I have tried to give an example of why a Tea Party conservative like me and other average Joe's finds the movement attractive to have that dismissed out of hand. So, then I start to have some fun - I think condescension, as of form of arrogance is counter-productive - but at this point in these interactions no one has an open mind.

I don't think that is what I wrote, but I can admit I am wrong, I can tell you when I have an agenda and what it is, I can respond to direct questions, I can enjoy responding to posts even when they make personal attacks, I can proudly say what I am - a free market capitalist pig, I try to understand myself and others, I understand my biases and can admit them openly. Not many here can say the same.

---------- Post added at 02:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:36 PM ----------

So, why did Obma spend the majority of his news conference yesterday needing to explain the he was in charge?

Of course as usual totally ignore this question, give it no though and please tell me about how clueless I am - that just never gets old.

You take the position that there are no "smart" people involved in the decisions to drill in the Gulf including those in government who allow it? You may be 100% correct, I don't know for certain at this point, I just find it hard to accept - that is my point.

---------- Post added at 03:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:43 PM ----------

Please tell us what is important to you and why?

Please direct me to the posts where you describe what you would have done to first, prevent this accident, second, respond to it?

ace--you're getting similar responses from alot of different people in the various threads that you've used to repeat the same points and absurd questions over and over. all that's changed is where you tack on the story of your own martyrdom.

if you're getting similar responses from alot of different people, maybe it's time to reconsider how you operate.

personally, i don't think that the central problem is that you stage yourself as a "tea party conservative" or a "capitalist pig"---the problem is how you proceed individually, what you think is ok, what you think effective as conversational approaches.

you generate responses that are symmetrical with your own obtuseness more often than not. none of that is necessary. it follows from choices.

but let's not pretend that you're interested in dialogue. you aren't. i don't know what you think you are doing, but dialogue ain't it.

We can go to any thread where you and I have interacted and the pattern will be clear. I post my view in response to the OP or I respond to someone who asks me a question or seeks clarification - and you respond with a personal attack. If you can show me one interaction where that has not been the pattern I will apologize to you and never engage you again.

Exactly. Didn't anybody learn from the atrocious mistakes of the McCarthy era????

Ummm where have I told you how clueless you are ace? Are you pulling a pan and turning to the victim act now? If so this is really pointless, I've dealt with one pan, I don't need another. If you think you've been attacked, report the fuckin post, on't whine about it like a teenage girl who got dumped on prom night, it's rather pathetic.

I don't know why, I never watched the news conference, I'm not Obama so I don't know what goes on in his head, but something you suggested was done a month ago, yet you satill complain.

i told you that you were clueless in the deepwater thread because you won't interact with information that you don't like ace. you don't understand the regulatory scheme. you don't understand the mms. you don't understand the actual history of bp. you don't seem to know what anyone else does who's following this about the run-up to the accident itself. but you persist. it's a problem.

like another, better whitehouse once said: get yourself together, chum.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say it's because of folks like you who insist that Obama's sitting around with his thumb up his posterior while the Gulf dies.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'd say the person with the perception problem is you. The FACT is that Coast Guard Commander Allen has been on the job, running the government's response to the spill, since April 30. It's unfortunate that doesn't jibe with your odd perception of things, but reality can be a cruel teacher.

Start studying!

Everything I know about drilling, I learned from Bruce Willis.

That being said, I think it's pretty clear that neither Obama nor BP are in charge. Again, I'm just a layman, but it seems to me the goddamn leak is in charge.

I am not a victim, I am a volunteer here.

This was from you:

"...I mean ace you seem to have no idea what you want them to do..."

Perhaps my interpretation was incorrect. But, I have stated what I would do and why.

---------- Post added at 06:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:19 PM ----------

On several occasions I have challenged you on what you have posted. I have asked you simple and direct questions. Your pattern is to ignore substance and go into silliness mode. Whenever you start a response by addressing me as an individual rather than the point of the post, consider that you are taking the discussion in a direction not worthy of seriousness. If you are serious about what you say about me, you would not read what I post - again I ask why do you waste your time given what you write?

Let's take the Pol Pot reference targeted to me. No reasonable person could seriously equate a personal bias openly shared with readers of TFP with the atrocities committed by Pol Pot. So, the tone of silliness is perpetuated. When I engage in silliness I do so willingly (not a waste of my time, etc), I know I am doing it I know why, and I am usually sitting back munching on some almonds with a smile on my face. I am wondering do you even know when you are in a cycle of silliness? It seems you get perturbed by it, but you are a willing participant, I don't get that.

Are there any conservatives on TFP who aren't convinced they're being personally persecuted? I'd really like to have their input on these topics, because they deserve an actual opinion, rather than a few ramblings followed by pages of defensiveness. The only two I can think of are ace and pan..? Ustwo, but I imagine he's long gone by now..

This is rich....

Obama's in bed with big oil, Palin says

Have you been compared to Pol Pot? Have I ever compared a participant here to someone like Pol Pot? Is what Roach did, o.k. with you?

Like I said I am a volunteer. I have no problem giving back, it is actually a major personality flaw that I have. Believe it or not I don't take it personally, which is the odd part about my personality flaw. And I am running out of almonds, time for a Costco run. Have a good weekend.:thumbsup:

So, ace, you admit that you are trolling.

Oh, and Plus one towards the pol pot reference.

I found it spot on.

So, back to the point of this thread.
It's about being called un-american.

I don't capitalize the usa, or patriot, or any other goofy acronymn.

'nuff said.

ace--poor you. poor persecuted you.

i made the pol pot reference after the first of your ridiculous posts in which you outlined a biais against intellectuals, against university educated people, parasites who sucked the blood of ordinary working fellers blah blah blah.

stop with all this, will you?

You want me to stop responding to charges you make against my intellect, character, and compare me to a man who had 2 million people (25% of his nation's population) executed? And you expect to be take seriously? Why not admit what you did was wrong, and just simply silly? That would end it.

---------- Post added at 07:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 PM ----------

The point of this thread as it relates to the "un-American" comment is exactly what happens here. A liberal makes a silly comment, a Conservative responds with a silly statement - and the liberal gets his underwear in a bunch. And then other liberals blame the conservative for engaging in silliness.

There's really only one way left to settle this. At least y'all will put US out of our misery.:)

LOL. No there is another way. On occasion I have admitted when I was wrong, others can do the same.

Ummm ace, you seem to have your knickers in a twist as well, otherwise we wouldn't have two threads with you complaining about how you were attacked, you aren't new here, report the fucking post if you think it's offensive, that's what the button is there for, otherwise knock off the bullshit, and that's all it is pure bullshit. It's a he won't say sorry mommy for saying I'm like Pol Pot, get over it, or report it.

I have not set the tone of these exchanges. I have even said give me one example that has not followed the pattern I described and I would apologize and not engage roach any more. Why direct your comments to me, Roach can stop doing what he does and end this any time he wants. I want to participate in a forum focused on issues not individuals, I think on one level I have to do this to shed light on the problem here, and help people understand why things deteriorate in almost every thread.

So now you're shedding light on things by not reporting a percieved attack, this is useless, as I've said before, you'll complain for the sake of complaining, and see yourself as the victim and having done nothing wrong, enjoy it, I'm done, this is utterly useless.

News Analysis - Responding to Spill, Obama Mixes Regret With Resolve - NYTimes.com


Here you go, ace. Obama takes full responsibility. How will you spin this?