Printable View
Trying to get a grasp of whatever Dread is throwing a tantrum over.
Is he saying he doesn't have to admit being wrong about the source quote because we attacked his WTF opinion, and don't fact check everything he posts? :bulb: Using that logic, Lewk would be considered a god damn genius, and Fox would be a reputable news source again.
Let me get this straight: you people are attacking Dread for being wrong about a quote and then admitting that he was wrong when presented with that fact?
It'd be helpful if you named names instead of using your usual "you people"
OG, Chaloobi, and GGT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Actually, I don't understand what Dread's talking about. Or what Nessus has posted in the last page or so here. Or whatever OG is saying. I just posted a mildly arrogant/insulting remark that meant nothing whatsoever, then embellished it with some creative, imo, language. It's entirely open to interpretation because it only peripherally relates to Dread jumping on the Obama bashing bandwaggon on the basis of misinformation likely spewed by some attack pundit wanting to get Republicans back into office so they can try to starve the beast again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Thats why I asked. I missed most of this last night. I caught this quote, and one with him blaming the media, even though he is the one that made the point to post the full and complete Paul quote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Dread's made it perfectly clear he no longer takes part in a discussion that doesn't fit his personal criteria. Also, as Ness pointed out, his insisting on sticking with the fundemental flaw of ignoring "one of these is not like the others." So I didn't see a point in reading a page and a half of him repeating the same stupid crap over and over again while beating around the more basic issue.
But I do like how he complains about mob mentality, but ignores squeaky wheel syndrome.
On Topic:
Big Surprise! Top Kill didn't work. BP admitted that their "mud" is flowing into the ocean instead of sitting in the pipes, which means the oil pressure is still to great to create a seal. Now BP is going to move up to their "junk shot" attempt which mixes the mud with trash, literally shredded trash, hoping that the trash gives the mud something to stick to and and will fill in the holes the mud isn't filling.
Are you sure?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
U.S. official: Flow of oil from spill has stopped
The oil has stop flowing, but the mud hasn't which means the pressure is still there. The mud is heavier than the water, so it shouldn't be shooting up through the plume like it is.
BP moves to Junk Shot.
BP resumes after Top Kill setback
Quote:
BP officials, who along with government officials created the impression early in the day that the strategy was working, disclosed later that they had stopped pumping the night before when engineers saw that too much of the drilling fluid was escaping along with the oil.
The numbers are in!
BP's 5,000 barrels a day? Not a chance in hell.
The current federal esitmates puts it as high as 25,000 barrels a day, but likely 11,000 - 19,000 barrels.
Thats right, oil was spilling into the Gulf at about 3X the rate that BP wanted to admit to. Thats 30 million barrels of oil since this started.
Almost equal to 3 Valdez sized spills.
That means that BP's mile long straw, on its most successful day, was sucking up less than a third of the oil coming out of the pipe.
ArticleQuote:
Those estimates ranged from 11,000 barrels per day on the low end to as much as 25,000 barrels a day on the high end. In a much longer report provided to The New York Times on Friday, the researchers describe the difficulties they faced -- sometimes in wresting information from BP -- and suggest that the flow rate may be even higher than any of their current estimates.
OG, you sound way to happy at this awful news.... :(
Not at the news, only that its finally here. Been waiting all week for those figures. That was the last claim I had of BPs that wasn't officially declared a lie.
Want more shitty news? BP still claims relief wells (required in Canada) should not be required when drilling, because they cost to much money. I'm starting to like Nessus' picture.
They have learned. They're right, they cost too much. Factor in the liklihood of an accident, factor in the liklihood they'll have to pay the true cost of the damage they're doing right now, factor in all the profits they're earning with the vast majority of wells and other activities that go just fine, and they've made the right decision. Because its the Money that counts. Fuck everything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Mmmmmmm....mmmmmmm! Money! Can't get enough of that green stuff. Gonna need alot if you want to eat shrimp. Guess I'll be switching to crawdads. :(
Its the cost of having a capitalist economy. Shrimp's a luxury anyway. Now it's more of a luxury. If you were fortunate enough, or you planned your business well enough, that you're not ruined by this, then your business just got a hell of a lot more valuable, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
I was responding to Rand Paul's assertion about this. He's not a guy I agree with on a lot of issues, but his statement about rhetoric resonated.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
I had overheard some mention/discussion of this "boot on throat" phrase on CNN at the gym and assumed it was Obama. No one here questioned that it was Obama, in fact they encouraged Obama using that kind of rhetoric. Right until Obama said that it was inappropriate for his Interior Secretary to say that. I was wrong on the source of the quote, but they are wrong on the principles. Not even Obama agrees with them.
But let me be perfectly clear, I don't read/consume "conservative media". I don't own a TV, I don't visit conservative opinion sites. I barely have time to read as much news as I would like. The closest thing I get is maybe the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal.
Saying "one of these is not like the others" over and over again doesn't make it right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
When some random administration official says that the government will now assist in the prosecution of illegal music/movie downloaders and keep his "boot to their throats" until the piracy stops, will you complain? Because I will.
If you honestly believe a bunch of stock holders is the same thing vis a vis gubment strong-arming as blacks, fags or Orthodox Christians, you're so marinated in Pubbie Kool-Aid that it's no wonder Rand Paul seems like a stand-up guyQuote:
Saying "one of these is not like the others" over and over again doesn't make it right.
If you think that a random company is just a "bunch of stockholders", you're marinated in the angsty college student Kool-Aid. I don't think Rand Paul is a stand-up guy, but I think he made a reasonable point on this one issue.
{snickers}Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Wow, so the WSJ is now a conservative opinion site?
Is ther a single aspect of this spill, and media circus around it, that BP doesn't try to lie about?
Quote:
BP bused in "hundreds" of temporary workers to clean up local beaches. And as soon as the president was en route back to Washington, the workers were clearing out of Grand Isle too,
Ying and Yang, you missed your side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
I don't really see where it gets more basic than that, but hey whatever. We live in America, in an age that rules corporations to have the same rights as individuals. :noob: No one is really surprised when you're this jaded.
Unless I'm mistaken (and that professor wasn't worth shit) we've been living in that age since the beginning of the corporation in the late 1800s. Its not a modern concept.
Exactly. Though corporations and the underlying concepts of them are quite a bit older, with the first modern corporations arising around some of the colonial entities like the East Indies Company, etc.
But back to our society now...because corporations have rights, they also have responsibilities. Which is why you can sue the eyeball fluid out of BP if you want. But it also means the government can't demonize them. They have rights and responsibilities.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
That's what it amounts to vis a vis the throat comment. I'm aware that corporations provide a living to a bunch of people etc., but when the entity is held responsible for shit such as this, it's the higher ups are the ones who're actually responsible. Or should be. And while your ad hominem is cute, it doesn't change the fact that blacks, fags etc. are categorically different from corporations, both as collectives and as legal agents. Or at least they are so far, I'm sure in the future, when joy has been replaced with shame etc., people are just born as property of some corporation or other, after which you might have some kind of point, but at that stage it's a bit too late to wrinkle.
As I said, corporations have rights and responsibilities. And every group has the right to not be a victim of government demagoguery. I'm looking forward to holding BP fully accountable under the law. But at this point even you can see 'twas Obama who finally made my point about appropriate rhetoric.
Heh, that's actually pretty funny. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Duely noted. Sorry for the micro-troll. :(Quote:
But let me be perfectly clear, I don't read/consume "conservative media". I don't own a TV, I don't visit conservative opinion sites. I barely have time to read as much news as I would like. The closest thing I get is maybe the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal.
Well, editorial is by definition opinion, and the WSJ is pretty conservative. Certainly it's not like a pundit program, but its conservative opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Are we done with the "rhetoric" tangent yet? :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
What happens if this thing can't be plugged, and it spews until that bottom kill well can be completed---JULY. :eek:
We'll have a summer-worth of angsty posts from you and OG. :noob:
Angsty, huh. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
If you don't think our nation's gulf marshlands are worth concern, and you call it angst....then I'll say you're in denial of some sort.
You're doing a good job of fixing that problem by posting here. Once you hit 200 posts on this topic, the problem will get resolved.
Worst criticism ever. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Then we can expect to see a cessation of your posts on anything political, since you're not really fixing any problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
:donkey:
Yeah, sure wasQuote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
If you don't post about the starving children in Africa, you support their starvation. Shame on you. And we can measure just how much you care by the number of relevant posts and level of angst within them.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
What behaviour are you shaming whom into, here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Lok, this is a discussion bb. It's function is to let us post ad nauseum about things that interest us. It's senseless to attack someone for posting too much about a topic instead of doing something about it, especially something like this spill which we are all helpless to stop. Your post sounded like a satire of Sean Hannity or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Exactly. Hurricane season is coming, the gulf coast is already vulnerable. Even if the gusher stops now, any oil and Corexit flooding inland has the potential to do a lot of damage--to people and not just wildlife.
Wonder if FEMA officials are considering this now, and planning ahead....
I'm referring more to her suggestion that anyone who isn't being as angsty about the topic here cares less about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Everyone here for not caring about the poor kids in Africa of course. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...3-21at0323.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Wrong. I refuted your notion that talking about the oil gusher, or watching it unfold, is being "angsty". Or that it's silly to discuss it because it's not solving any problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Simple solution for you Loki---if you're not interested in it, don't post in the thread telling us we're angsty for posting about it.
Thanks for proving my point.