PDA

View Full Version : Can someone please explain Sarah Palin's to me?


nameless
06-12-2010, 03:59 PM
Bleh, posted accidentally before I was done. The title's supposed to read "explain Sarah Palin's 'feminism'"

So I've seen this newsweek article floating around the internet in a bunch of different incarnations now, and it dumbfounds me every time.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/06/11/2010-06-11_sarah_palin_viewed_as_a_modernday_prophet_to_ev angelicals_newsweek_profile_sugge.html
Particularly, I'm baffled as to why the writer seems to believe that Sarah Palin is creating a new brand of feminism. Feminism is the advance of women's rights. Sarah Palin has never made women's rights one of her platforms. I'm not just saying that because of her stance on reproductive rights; I've met pro-life feminists before, so I know they exist. But Palin has never done or said anything that I'm aware of to indicate that she's less than 100% satisfied with the status quo of gender roles in this country. She doesn't want women to stop being soccer moms and start being CEOs, or to make it possible for a soccer mom to become a CEO. She wants soccer moms to keep doing what they've always done as long as they vote for her candidates. For the love of god, this is a woman whose hand-picked chief of police began billing rape victims for the medical tests necessary to convict rapists:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-alperinsheriff/sarah-palin-instituted-ra_b_125833.html

Are there any Palin supporters out there that consider themselves feminists who can explain this to me? I'm totally confused.

Terez
06-12-2010, 04:00 PM
Sarah Palin's what?

(I have a feeling the question is actually appropriate this time.)

nameless
06-12-2010, 04:22 PM
mispost :P

I fixed it.

Terez
06-12-2010, 04:47 PM
We don't have many Palin fans here. A few noobs, mostly - we chased all the rest of them away or put the fear of godlessness into them. Or something. Even our conservative old-timers think she's fairly retarded.

Ivhon
06-12-2010, 05:44 PM
Not.....saying....anything....must...bite...tongue ..... OWWWW

brainlesslyinghypocriticalcmorruptmoneygrubbingmor ontwofacedbackstabbingIIIIDDDDDIIIIIOOOOOOTTTTTT

dammit. failed.

Frenzy
06-12-2010, 06:28 PM
Particularly, I'm baffled as to why the writer seems to believe that Sarah Palin is creating a new brand of feminism.
The writer must think that since she's an uppity woman, she must be a feminist.

What she really is is annoying.

Davian93
06-12-2010, 09:14 PM
She's the greatest female politician in the history of the United States. Thank you John McCain for giving us her as a gift. Before she entered the national scene, my life was bland and colorless. Now, we finally have a standard bearer who lives up toe the true values of Conservativeism and Boot-Strappy Independents.

You Go Girl!!!

Terez
06-12-2010, 09:50 PM
Love it (http://www.bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2010/04/doof_quote_of_t_79.html).

Ivhon
06-12-2010, 10:11 PM
Love it (http://www.bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2010/04/doof_quote_of_t_79.html).
AAAAAHHHHHHHahahahahahah
Whadda marooon!

Birgitte
06-12-2010, 11:35 PM
She's the greatest female politician in the history of the United States. Thank you John McCain for giving us her as a gift. Before she entered the national scene, my life was bland and colorless. Now, we finally have a standard bearer who lives up toe the true values of Conservativeism and Boot-Strappy Independents.

You Go Girl!!!

Thank you, Dav, for sharing one of your classic practical jokes with us. But you seem to have forgotten something.

Bazinga (http://www.instantsfun.es/bazinga)

Zaela Sedai
06-13-2010, 07:05 PM
no...

BAZINGA

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a241/Zaela/DSC_0010.jpg

Gilshalos Sedai
06-14-2010, 08:02 AM
Thank you, Dav, for sharing one of your classic practical jokes with us. But you seem to have forgotten something.

Bazinga (http://www.instantsfun.es/bazinga)

nah... I think he's just lost it.

Davian93
06-14-2010, 09:00 AM
nah... I think he's just lost it.

Why are all of you threatened by a strong independent female Conservative with real family values?

Crispin's Crispian
06-14-2010, 11:16 AM
So, just to be clear, is it the possibility of a right-wing, pro-life, Christian feminist that is dubious, or that Sarah Palin is that person?

It's one thing to criticize Palin, but I'm curious about the other aspect that nameless brought up.

But Palin has never done or said anything that I'm aware of to indicate that she's less than 100% satisfied with the status quo of gender roles in this country. She doesn't want women to stop being soccer moms and start being CEOs, or to make it possible for a soccer mom to become a CEO. She wants soccer moms to keep doing what they've always done as long as they vote for her candidates. Do all feminists want women to stop being soccer moms and aim to be CEOs instead?

I'm unclear as to the perceived goals of feminism, I guess.

Ivhon
06-14-2010, 12:38 PM
So, just to be clear, is it the possibility of a right-wing, pro-life, Christian feminist that is dubious, or that Sarah Palin is that person?

It's one thing to criticize Palin, but I'm curious about the other aspect that nameless brought up.

Do all feminists want women to stop being soccer moms and aim to be CEOs instead?

I'm unclear as to the perceived goals of feminism, I guess.

Feminism can mean a lot of things for a lot of people, I reckon. However, I would think that one common element would be advocating for the power of womEN. Palin seems fully committed to the empowerment of one particular womAN - herself - but not so much for women in general. Note, this has nothing to do with her pro-life stance.

However, the whole thing with making women pay for their own rape kits is not terribly empowering.

Sinistrum
06-14-2010, 12:39 PM
I wouldn't even care to try. That would me delving into her mind a lot more deeply then I think anyone would be comfortable with.

JSUCamel
06-14-2010, 01:24 PM
Do all feminists want women to stop being soccer moms and aim to be CEOs instead?

I'm unclear as to the perceived goals of feminism, I guess.

I swear I posted on this two hours ago, but can't find my response... maybe I hit Preview instead..


Anyway, I think feminists want equal opportunity, not necessarily to act on said opportunity. One can be a soccer mom and be a feminist, just as one can be a childless attorney and be a feminist. It's more about having the ability to have equal opportunity -- a soccer mom could become a successful businesswoman if she wanted -- than it is about women actually becoming successful businesswomen.

Basel Gill
06-14-2010, 01:46 PM
Unfortunately, the biggest Palin proponents are those that either know her personally or are mindless idiots that just support her because she became thrust into the spotlight.

I suppose it is possible that she's not as annoying and/or dumb as she seems, but I doubt it. Politics is as much about perception as anything and if the GOP gets saddled with Palin in 2012, I'm gonna bet 90%+ of TL is going to be partying and I'll be in the corner crying...:(

Brita
06-14-2010, 01:49 PM
The writer must think that since she's an uppity woman, she must be a feminist.


This.

Ivhon
06-14-2010, 01:53 PM
This.

/agree

On the other hand, I call her a mindless backstabbing bitch because that's what I think of her...not because she is a woman.

Davian93
06-14-2010, 02:15 PM
~serious Dav for once~

All SP is interested in doing is making $$$...everything she does is aimed at that. Look at her actions in that aspect and it all makes a lot of sense. She's a moron (perhaps the dumbest individual to ever be elected to a Statewide office) but she's just smart enough to know how to cash in on this...or she has handlers that are just smart enough.


I absolutely hate everything she says and does...and I think she does more damage to the women's rights movement than any guy could ever do.

Sinistrum
06-14-2010, 03:30 PM
I absolutely hate everything she says and does

I never would have guessed...

Sei'taer
06-14-2010, 03:57 PM
Seriously? I can give you this gist of why people like her, even though I don't understand it.

She is a woman who has a set of standards that she is willing to stick too. Her daughter had a child out of wedlock, she has another child with downs syndrome, she made a name for herself in AK by standing up to the status quo. People who like her enjoy seeing that and they particularly enjoy seeing it in a woman. She comes off as "I'm just like you...see the trials and tribulations I've been through and I'm doing great!" I'd call it the "Kate plus 8" syndrome that has a lot of the American people by the 'nads/nipples. I guess she is a person that a lot of people feel like they can look up to when their life is in the crapper. That's about the best explanation I have.

Incidentally, if her name is on the ballot in the upcoming election, I'll be in deep trouble. I refuse to vote for Obama. I hope there's another conservative type running also or instead. Otherwise I'll throw my vote away just like I did last election which really friggin pisses me off because then I have to go to Washington with a sign on my ass asking Obama to kiss it way up in there where it's brown and stinky. fuck.

Ivhon
06-14-2010, 04:20 PM
Seriously? I can give you this gist of why people like her, even though I don't understand it.

She is a woman who has a set of standards that she is willing to stick too. Her daughter had a child out of wedlock, she has another child with downs syndrome, she made a name for herself in AK by standing up to the status quo. People who like her enjoy seeing that and they particularly enjoy seeing it in a woman. She comes off as "I'm just like you...see the trials and tribulations I've been through and I'm doing great!" I'd call it the "Kate plus 8" syndrome that has a lot of the American people by the 'nads/nipples. I guess she is a person that a lot of people feel like they can look up to when their life is in the crapper. That's about the best explanation I have.

Incidentally, if her name is on the ballot in the upcoming election, I'll be in deep trouble. I refuse to vote for Obama. I hope there's another conservative type running also or instead. Otherwise I'll throw my vote away just like I did last election which really friggin pisses me off because then I have to go to Washington with a sign on my ass asking Obama to kiss it way up in there where it's brown and stinky. fuck.

Well she has the downsy-homesy story down. Ill agree that among her followers she has an image of one who sticks to her principles and stands up to the status quo. However, looking closely gives a strong indication that she has no principles other than self-aggrandizement.

nameless
06-14-2010, 05:24 PM
I wouldn't agree with the people posting that's she's stupid, though. She's not stupid, she's cynical, and she uses her "aw, shucks, I don't need no book learning" image to manipulate the electorate's resentment of intellectuals.

Terez
06-15-2010, 12:42 AM
I wouldn't agree with the people posting that's she's stupid, though. She's not stupid, she's cynical, and she uses her "aw, shucks, I don't need no book learning" image to manipulate the electorate's resentment of intellectuals.
So she's like Weiramon? Does that mean she's a Darkfriend?

irerancincpkc
06-15-2010, 06:25 AM
I never would have guessed...

Ha... :D

Davian93
06-15-2010, 06:31 AM
So she's like Weiramon? Does that mean she's a Darkfriend?

Yes....YES IT DOES. NO TRUCE WITH THE SHADOW!



WOULD YOU BE NAE'BLIS? -John McCain

"Yes, Great Lord!"-SP

"THEN LISTEN..."

irerancincpkc
06-15-2010, 07:01 AM
Yes....YES IT DOES. NO TRUCE WITH THE SHADOW!



WOULD YOU BE NAE'BLIS? -John McCain

"Yes, Great Lord!"-SP

"THEN LISTEN..."

:D But we need to come up with a better Great Lord of the Dark than John McCain...

Davian93
06-15-2010, 11:19 AM
The quotable Sarah Palin (all of these are real and they are but the tip of the iceberg):


"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

"Well, let's see. There's ― of course in the great history of America there have been rulings that there's never going to be absolute consensus by every American, and there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So, you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but ―"

"We believe that the best of America is not all in Washington, D.C. ... We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation."

"[T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom."

"They are kooks, so I agree with Rush Limbaugh. Rush Limbaugh was using satire ... I didn't hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with 'f-ing retards,' and we did know that Rahm Emanuel, as has been reported, did say that. There is a big difference there."

"I think on a national level your Department of Law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we've been charged with and automatically throw them out."

"I didn't really had a good answer, as so often -- is me. But then somebody sent me the other day, Isaiah 49:16, and you need to go home and look it up. Before you look it up, I'll tell you what it says though. It says, hey, if it was good enough for God, scribbling on the palm of his hand, it's good enough for me, for us. He says, in that passage, 'I wrote your name on the palm of my hand to remember you,' and I'm like, 'Okay, I'm in good company.'"

"How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it's about country. And though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make."

"Left Unalakleet warmth for rain in Juneau tonite. No drought threat down here, ever but consistent rain reminds us: 'No rain? No rainbow!'"

JSUCamel
06-15-2010, 11:30 AM
"Left Unalakleet warmth for rain in Juneau tonite. No drought threat down here, ever but consistent rain reminds us: 'No rain? No rainbow!'"

...wat

Davian93
06-15-2010, 11:38 AM
...wat

Can't you just hear Bill Shatner reciting it in your head? I know I can.

Ivhon
06-16-2010, 08:00 AM
Can't you just hear Bill Shatner reciting it in your head? I know I can.

I was just thinking on my way home last night.

2.5 years ago, I did not think it would be possible to have a major political figure that is more unintelligent as W. Nor did I think we could have one that is more dangerously sociopathic as Dick Cheney.

And then Sarah Palin came along and she wraps them both up in one. Does Revelations have anything to say about the Anti-Christ being a woman?

EDIT: On a completely separate note, some huge styrofoam Jesus statue got struck by lightning and burned to the ground the other night in Ohio. Pastor of the church was interviewed about it and mentioned that the statue was "a symbol of freedom." Is this the new thing with the religious right? Jesus is the symbol of freedom just like the American flag and fully automatic assault weapons?

EDIT EDIT: Im ranting a lot it seems. Ill stop now.

Sei'taer
06-16-2010, 08:05 AM
And then Sarah Palin came along and she wraps them both up in one. Does Revelations have anything to say about the Anti-Christ being a woman?


Come on, Man...how many times is it going to be necessary for me to post this? (http://o.bamapost.com/)

I honestly think Obama is the worst president I've seen in my lifetime (which is saying a lot when you consider Nixon and Carter). Stuff like that is all about your particular perception of the situation at hand. I don't know that there's a way to judge it on a scientific level.

Ivhon
06-16-2010, 08:28 AM
Come on, Man...how many times is it going to be necessary for me to post this? (http://o.bamapost.com/)

I honestly think Obama is the worst president I've seen in my lifetime (which is saying a lot when you consider Nixon and Carter). Stuff like that is all about your particular perception of the situation at hand. I don't know that there's a way to judge it on a scientific level.

Which is specifically why I brought religion into it :D

EDIT: And yes, I completely forgot that the anti-christ would kindof HAVE to be black. Thanks for the reminder.

Davian93
06-16-2010, 08:32 AM
I was just thinking on my way home last night.

2.5 years ago, I did not think it would be possible to have a major political figure that is more unintelligent as W. Nor did I think we could have one that is more dangerously sociopathic as Dick Cheney.

And then Sarah Palin came along and she wraps them both up in one. Does Revelations have anything to say about the Anti-Christ being a woman?

EDIT: On a completely separate note, some huge styrofoam Jesus statue got struck by lightning and burned to the ground the other night in Ohio. Pastor of the church was interviewed about it and mentioned that the statue was "a symbol of freedom." Is this the new thing with the religious right? Jesus is the symbol of freedom just like the American flag and fully automatic assault weapons?

EDIT EDIT: Im ranting a lot it seems. Ill stop now.


http://rabbitstarvation.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/republican_jesus2.jpg

Republican Jesus Loves You (Unless You're Brown or Muslim...Then He Kills You!)

Davian93
06-16-2010, 08:34 AM
Which is specifically why I brought religion into it :D

EDIT: And yes, I completely forgot that the anti-christ would kindof HAVE to be black. Thanks for the reminder.

Makes sense...given that Jesus was likely black too (or at least an unappealing olivey brown with dark hair, dark eyes).

Ivhon
06-16-2010, 08:38 AM
http://rabbitstarvation.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/republican_jesus2.jpg

Republican Jesus Loves You (Unless You're Brown or Muslim...Then He Kills You!)

heheh. "Render unto Caesar. Because it will trickle down..."

Davian93
06-16-2010, 11:39 AM
Come on, Man...how many times is it going to be necessary for me to post this? (http://o.bamapost.com/)

I honestly think Obama is the worst president I've seen in my lifetime (which is saying a lot when you consider Nixon and Carter). Stuff like that is all about your particular perception of the situation at hand. I don't know that there's a way to judge it on a scientific level.

Really? I mean, he's hasn't done the greatest job but he's not nearly as bad as Bush was. Bush is the one that sh!t the bed and left the country broke, fighting 2 costly wars and with no friends internationally.

Sei'taer
06-16-2010, 12:54 PM
Really? I mean, he's hasn't done the greatest job but he's not nearly as bad as Bush was. Bush is the one that sh!t the bed and left the country broke, fighting 2 costly wars and with no friends internationally.

Meh, I've said my piece over the years. He did something last night that I thought would never happen...he made me agree with Maureen Dowd (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/16/opinion/16dowd.html?ref=columnists).


You're also not taking into account what he has failed to do.

Job creation, Faily fail failure (9.7% unless you count people who have given up looking for work and who have run out of unemployment, then it goes to 17%...or you are a teen looking for work, then it goes to 26%) (and please, don't throw that crap at me that has all those census jobs on it, we're all too smart for that here).

Gulf crisis, abject failure. The Oval office speech last night was crap. Even the media is trying very hard to find something nice to say about it...they aren't having much luck. Look up the Jones Act...that's why we don't have any help in the gulf. He decided to go with the union lobby on that deal. It's the "not made here" thing I mentioned when we were talking about the spill initially.



Stopping the wars you are pointing out above, fail. Gitmo goes with this too, Fail. ETA: he shit in Isreal's and the UK's cereal too. Fail.

Single payer healthcare, fail (this doesn't really count because he didn't actually write the bill that wasn't actually single payer, not yet at least, he just spouted off that he wanted it and left congress to write it...all he did was sign.)

There's lots more...all you have to do is look. His ratings are in the crapper. He looks like he's in over his head most of the time, especially last night, and I figure he won't finish his term. My bet is that he quits sometime after November, he looks like he's just not "into it" anymore. Just my opinion on that score. Woohoo...president Biden! At least we know what we're getting with him.

Now, was Bush a bad president? Yes. He did a lot of things that were so far to the left that they made me sick, along with some things that he shouldn't have done, like the Iraq war, which I can gripe about in hindsight, but was he the worst? Not in my opinion. I reserve that place for Carter right now, but Obama is doing a fine job of fixing that. He's probably making Ol' Jimmy pretty happy in the process.

Davian93
06-16-2010, 03:53 PM
I dont really see how Obama could be fixing the Gulf mess any better...if the top oil people in the world cant figure out how to cap it, I doubt the Gov't would do any better. Other than dissolving BP and using their assets to pay for the cleanup (ooh...Socialism), what can he, as President, do to fix it?

On the others:

1. Jobs are always the last thing to come back in a recession and this is the worst recession since the Depression...and it started on Bush's watch, not Barry's.

2. The wars both seem to be going okay...for obvious strategic reasons (thanks Bush) we cant just pull out of either place without the entire area collapsing.

3. His ratings have been pretty steady over the past few months...unless you use Rasmussen, he's doing fine. Rasmussen is a wackadoo anyway.

4. Healthcare was a boondaggle...and it showed that the Party of No is as strong as ever.

Ivhon
06-16-2010, 04:05 PM
I dont really see how Obama could be fixing the Gulf mess any better...if the top oil people in the world cant figure out how to cap it, I doubt the Gov't would do any better. Other than dissolving BP and using their assets to pay for the cleanup (ooh...Socialism), what can he, as President, do to fix it?

On the others:

1. Jobs are always the last thing to come back in a recession and this is the worst recession since the Depression...and it started on Bush's watch, not Barry's.

2. The wars both seem to be going okay...for obvious strategic reasons (thanks Bush) we cant just pull out of either place without the entire area collapsing.

3. His ratings have been pretty steady over the past few months...unless you use Rasmussen, he's doing fine. Rasmussen is a wackadoo anyway.

4. Healthcare was a boondaggle...and it showed that the Party of No is as strong as ever.

He also mentioned during the campaign that it could take two years for the job situation to start turning around, given the extreme nature of the mess that was handed to him.

Yellowbeard
06-16-2010, 04:17 PM
I dont really see how Obama could be fixing the Gulf mess any better...if the top oil people in the world cant figure out how to cap it, I doubt the Gov't would do any better. Other than dissolving BP and using their assets to pay for the cleanup (ooh...Socialism), what can he, as President, do to fix it?

the same thing bush could have done to avoid the housing market collapse?

1. Jobs are always the last thing to come back in a recession and this is the worst recession since the Depression...and it started on Bush's watch, not Barry's.

and the primary cause of the depression had been building for years (irresponsible lending), and that started well before bush himself was elected as well.

just saying it wasn't ALL bush's fault.

Sei'taer
06-16-2010, 04:28 PM
I dont really see how Obama could be fixing the Gulf mess any better...if the top oil people in the world cant figure out how to cap it, I doubt the Gov't would do any better. Other than dissolving BP and using their assets to pay for the cleanup (ooh...Socialism), what can he, as President, do to fix it?

Exactly, yet he's all up in it, isn't he? So much so that he gave his very first Oval office address last night. So he's taken control of it and it's been over 50 days and he hasn't done anything but talk and threaten to sue and hire groups to do studies and then change the wording of the studies after they signed off an it and turned it in, and now he got BP to make a pledge in a meeting today...something they had already said they were going to do. That's leadership. Funny that you blamed Bush for a natural disaster and his failure to react quickly, you even ragged him for continuing to read to school kids on 9/11, yet here, you give Obama a pass. Nicely done. Ah well, you're in good company, Spike and Kanye haven't said much either.



1. Jobs are always the last thing to come back in a recession and this is the worst recession since the Depression...and it started on Bush's watch, not Barry's.

Barrys whole economic fix was based on keeping joblessness at less than 8%...That's what he pushed when he pushed the stimulus package. He and Biden touted it many times. It didn't happen. Also, don't fall for the scam that says jobs are always the last thing to come back. In order for the recession to be over, people have to spend and get companies thriving again. If people don't have jobs, they aren't spending and the recovery can't happen. What is happening now isn't the recession going away, it's simply stabilizing. We're at a holding point. Barry ran on fixing the economy. It's been 18 months...he hasn't done it.

2. The wars both seem to be going okay...for obvious strategic reasons (thanks Bush) we cant just pull out of either place without the entire area collapsing.

According to Obama, when he was campaigning, he was getting us out. This is one of the major beefs hardcore leftists have with him. He promised to get us out and he hasn't, he's increased troops.

3. His ratings have been pretty steady over the past few months...unless you use Rasmussen, he's doing fine. Rasmussen is a wackadoo anyway.

He's well under the percentage he got when he was voted into office. All the polls I saw had him at under 50%. That's going in the crapper when you figure his intial ratings were over 80%. He's dropped faster than any president ever.

4. Healthcare was a boondaggle...and it showed that the Party of No is as strong as ever.

I love that party of No thing. One word, supermajority.

Ivhon
06-16-2010, 04:45 PM
Exactly, yet he's all up in it, isn't he? So much so that he gave his very first Oval office address last night. So he's taken control of it and it's been over 50 days and he hasn't done anything but talk and threaten to sue and hire groups to do studies and then change the wording of the studies after they signed off an it and turned it in, and now he got BP to make a pledge in a meeting today...something they had already said they were going to do. That's leadership. Funny that you blamed Bush for a natural disaster and his failure to react quickly, you even ragged him for continuing to read to school kids on 9/11, yet here, you give Obama a pass. Nicely done. Ah well, you're in good company, Spike and Kanye haven't said much either.


One, katrina and BP are apples and oranges growing in the same spot. The Right is claiming equivalency because it is in the gulf close to N.O. Thats where the similarities end. Nobody (here, at least - Im sure there was a nutjob or two) blamed Bush for a natural disaster. They blamed his lack of response, lack of empathy and rush to help the rich white folks while leaving the poor hanging (remember that bit about supporting Trent Lott through the tragedy?). The Right - as it so often does - is putting Obama in a situation where they will drag him over the coals for whatever he does. You are criticizing him for taking action - Oh, and by the way, securing $20 billion is a damn sight different from the nebulous assurances BP gave (and the $75 million legal cap in place) - while at the same time comparing that to the INACTION Bush took. Now, if he had not taken action, the Right would be raking him for not doing enough - even more than they are already. In that case, the comparison would be more apples to apples. He HAS to act otherwise BP would do what any company would do (look back at Exxon) and dodge behind lawsuits and appeals and whatnot. You have to give someone a way out...not fair to put them in a situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't.

EDIT: The biggest difference in the katrina/BP scenario is that the current mess is man-made with clearly identifiable responsible parties who knowingly slacked. Those parties have to have their feet held to the fire to ensure that they meet their responsibilities. Push too hard, they get legalistic on you or just declare bankruptcy and leave the taxpayer footing the bill. Don't push hard enough and they dick around not doing anything to stop it, clean up or make restitutions...which leaves the taxpayer footing the bill. Now, given his discussions with God, perhaps Bush felt the same kind of pressure...but personally, I don't think that flies.

Katrina was a national disaster. Even staunch anti-governmentals such as yourself would, I think, concede that the federal government should step in in such situations when state and local government is simply not up to the task. Again, there is no-one to negotiate with - save God, if you buy that - nobody to cajole. Once the storms were over, there is no technological hurdle to overcome. No (or very little - some investigation of the levees was warranted) need to investigate what happened and howYou give the Executive Order and get it done. He did not. Not that I am pointing the finger solely at Bush, either. The governor and mayor completely dropped the ball in that situation too.

Sei'taer
06-16-2010, 05:19 PM
One, katrina and BP are apples and oranges growing in the same spot. The Right is claiming equivalency because it is in the gulf close to N.O. Thats where the similarities end. Nobody (here, at least - Im sure there was a nutjob or two) blamed Bush for a natural disaster. They blamed his lack of response, lack of empathy and rush to help the rich white folks while leaving the poor hanging (remember that bit about supporting Trent Lott through the tragedy?). The Right - as it so often does - is putting Obama in a situation where they will drag him over the coals for whatever he does. You are criticizing him for taking action - Oh, and by the way, securing $20 billion is a damn sight different from the nebulous assurances BP gave (and the $75 million legal cap in place) - while at the same time comparing that to the INACTION Bush took. Now, if he had not taken action, the Right would be raking him for not doing enough - even more than they are already. In that case, the comparison would be more apples to apples. He HAS to act otherwise BP would do what any company would do (look back at Exxon) and dodge behind lawsuits and appeals and whatnot. You have to give someone a way out...not fair to put them in a situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't.

EDIT: The biggest difference in the katrina/BP scenario is that the current mess is man-made with clearly identifiable responsible parties who knowingly slacked. Those parties have to have their feet held to the fire to ensure that they meet their responsibilities. Push too hard, they get legalistic on you or just declare bankruptcy and leave the taxpayer footing the bill. Don't push hard enough and they dick around not doing anything to stop it, clean up or make restitutions...which leaves the taxpayer footing the bill. Now, given his discussions with God, perhaps Bush felt the same kind of pressure...but personally, I don't think that flies.

Katrina was a national disaster. Even staunch anti-governmentals such as yourself would, I think, concede that the federal government should step in in such situations when state and local government is simply not up to the task. Again, there is no-one to negotiate with - save God, if you buy that - nobody to cajole. Once the storms were over, there is no technological hurdle to overcome. No (or very little - some investigation of the levees was warranted) need to investigate what happened and howYou give the Executive Order and get it done. He did not. Not that I am pointing the finger solely at Bush, either. The governor and mayor completely dropped the ball in that situation too.

I disagree. Inaction is inaction, whether it's playing soccer or fixing an oil well explosion. three days after the explosion the Dutch offered up equipment to help skim the oil off the water. The president refused. The UK also offered help, the president again refused because the paperwork wasn't done correctly. Today, 50 days later, he accepted the help from the netherlands.

The U.S. Government has apparently reconsidered a Dutch offer to supply 4 oil skimmers. These are large arms that are attached to oil tankers that pump oil and water from the surface of the ocean into the tanker. Water pumped into the tanker will settle to the bottom of the tanker and is then pumped back into the ocean to make room for more oil. Each system will collect 5,000 tons of oil each day.


One ton of oil is about 7.3 barrels. 5,000 tons per day is 36,500 barrels per day. 4 skimmers have a capacity of 146,000 barrels per day. That is much greater than the high end estimate of the leak. The skimmers work best in calm water, which is the usual condition this time of year in the gulf.

These systems were developed by the Dutch as a safety system in case of oil spills from either wells or tankers. The Dutch have off shore oil development and also import oil in tankers. Their economy, just like ours, runs on oil. They understand that the production and use of oil has dangers and they wanted to be ready to cope with problems like spills. The Dutch system has been used successfully in Europe.

The Dutch offered to fly their skimmer arm systems to the Gulf 3 days after the oil spill started. The offer was apparently turned down because EPA regulations do not allow water with oil to be pumped back into the ocean. If all the oily water was retained in the tanker, the capacity of the system would be greatly diminished because most of what is pumped into the tanker is sea water.

As of June 8th, BP reported that they have collected 64,650 barrels of oil in the Gulf. That is only a fraction of the amount of oil spilled from the well. That is less than one dayís rated capacity of the Dutch oil skimmers.

Now, here's the thing, gov't doesn't have to pay for those, BP does. Except that the president decided to follow the Jones Law when he could have easily (as other presidents have done) signed off on it anyway. Inaction because of the Jones LAw.

The UK:

A high-level British offer of help to clean up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill was rebuffed by America shortly after the accident, fueling fresh fears of political tension between the two countries over the disaster.

A few days after the BP-leased rig sank on April 22, the Cabinet Office made a direct offer to the US State Department to airlift half of Britainís 1,200-tonne stockpile of chemical dispersants, The Times has learnt.

At the time there was an urgent demand for fresh supplies. The offer to provide the chemicals, at the cost price of £3 million, was made through diplomatic channels and via the Civil Contingency Secretariat, the Governmentís emergency planning unit.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change, which was also involved in drafting the plan, said that the US had chosen not to accept the offer. Officials said the US claimed that the chemicals held in Britain did not have the correct paperwork.

Again, the US wouldn't have had to pay for it, BP would have to. Inaction because of paperwork.


And then:



Oil boom manufacture Packgen has miles of floating oil containment boom in warehouse right now and they say they can make lots more on short notice. Packgen owner John Lapoint said his company is ramping up production to make 90,000 feet of oil boom per day.

Two days ago, Admiral Thad Allen, the man in charge of the federal effort to manage the crisis, told Jake Tapper that he had never heard of Packgen and their oil boom stockpiles.

Maybe Admiral Allen should clean off his desk.
Gregory Sullivan at Pajamas Media posted this letter today sent to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and to NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco. Copies were sent to Governors Bob Riley, Charles Crist, Haley Barbour, and Bobby Jindal. The letter was signed by two U.S. senators.


Packgen first alerted the government 4 WEEKS AGO. They can produce more boom than anyone in the US and abroad.

Meanwhile at least 18 American beaches may be ruined forever while miles of oil boom sits in a Maine warehouse.



Inaction...for whatever reason.

Now, people say Bush didn't react fast enough to Katrina. It was a disaster. This is also a disaster, one that should have never happened. BP should accept blame and total financial responsibility for it. I'm not debating that. I'm debating the response to the disaster.

nameless
06-16-2010, 05:51 PM
My biggest problem with Bush's response to 9/11 was less the reading to school kids and more the way he publicly admitted before it happened that he never read any of his daily security briefings, blew off his responsibilities to play cowboy at Crawford, and then somehow managed to turn the fact that he fell asleep on the watch into his being the "national security" president while simultaneously cracking jokes to high-rolling GOP donors that the worst terrorist attack in American history was just like his scoring a trifecta at the race track.
http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/trifecta.htm

So if Obama ever starts making jokes about how great the Gulf oil spill was cause it gives him an excuse to push environmental regulations then I'll concede he's on the same level of dicketry as his predecessor.

Sei'taer
06-16-2010, 06:27 PM
My biggest problem with Bush's response to 9/11 was less the reading to school kids and more the way he publicly admitted before it happened that he never read any of his daily security briefings, blew off his responsibilities to play cowboy at Crawford, and then somehow managed to turn the fact that he fell asleep on the watch into his being the "national security" president while simultaneously cracking jokes to high-rolling GOP donors that the worst terrorist attack in American history was just like his scoring a trifecta at the race track.
http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/trifecta.htm

So if Obama ever starts making jokes about how great the Gulf oil spill was cause it gives him an excuse to push environmental regulations then I'll concede he's on the same level of dicketry as his predecessor.

You musta missed the speech last night.

Neilbert
06-17-2010, 02:00 AM
So he's taken control of it and it's been over 50 days and he hasn't done anything but talk and threaten to sue and hire groups to do studies and then change the wording of the studies after they signed off an it and turned it in, and now he got BP to make a pledge in a meeting today...something they had already said they were going to do.

I read a Fox News article and it said some oil industry "expert" had all these complaints about Obama changing the wording blah blah blah. I ignored everything until I found the guys name, and googled the hell out of him. Turns out everywhere else, including other articles on Fox, the oil industry expert was really a consultant.

So I'm really not getting worked up about Obama actually kinda sorta doing the right thing. The rest of the stuff you mention, well, we don't exactly disagree.

Barry ran on fixing the economy. It's been 18 months...he hasn't done it.

He lied. There's a reckoning coming, and everyone since Regan has just punted it as far down the road as they possibly could.

According to Obama, when he was campaigning, he was getting us out. This is one of the major beefs hardcore leftists have with him. He promised to get us out and he hasn't, he's increased troops.

Yeah... :(

I love that party of No thing. One word, supermajority.

Well, Democrats are good cops and Republicans are bad cops, but the thing people tend to forget is that they are both cops and they are both out to screw you.

Sei'taer
06-17-2010, 06:29 AM
Well, Democrats are good cops and Republicans are bad cops, but the thing people tend to forget is that they are both cops and they are both out to screw you.

That's why i won't be voting for any incumbent this year. I think all of them talk out of both sides of their mouths and they are so stupid that they can't figure out how easy it is to get busted for it with the internet and cell phone cameras and sites like youtube.

It's a bummer they can't screw who they want to screw or assault people in the street or claim military service that didn't happen anymore without someone posting a video of it online. Poor guys are so ignorant of technology they can't keep up.

Davian93
06-17-2010, 07:15 AM
I disagree. Inaction is inaction, whether it's playing soccer or fixing an oil well explosion. three days after the explosion the Dutch offered up equipment to help skim the oil off the water. The president refused. The UK also offered help, the president again refused because the paperwork wasn't done correctly. Today, 50 days later, he accepted the help from the netherlands.



Now, here's the thing, gov't doesn't have to pay for those, BP does. Except that the president decided to follow the Jones Law when he could have easily (as other presidents have done) signed off on it anyway. Inaction because of the Jones LAw.

The UK:

.

Again, the US wouldn't have had to pay for it, BP would have to. Inaction because of paperwork.


And then:







Inaction...for whatever reason.

Now, people say Bush didn't react fast enough to Katrina. It was a disaster. This is also a disaster, one that should have never happened. BP should accept blame and total financial responsibility for it. I'm not debating that. I'm debating the response to the disaster.

Citations? (not ball busting...I just want to see the full articles)

Sei'taer
06-17-2010, 08:06 AM
Citations? (not ball busting...I just want to see the full articles)

Not a problem.

The Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/x-325-Global-Warming-Examiner~y2010m6d12-US-reconsiders-Dutch-offer-to-supply-oil-skimmers)

The Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7149576.ece)

This article has the actual letter...that's the only reason I'm using it. (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/06/breaking-government-informed-about-maine-oil-boom-company-back-on-may-21/) Take it as you will.

Davian93
06-17-2010, 08:17 AM
Not a problem.

The Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/x-325-Global-Warming-Examiner~y2010m6d12-US-reconsiders-Dutch-offer-to-supply-oil-skimmers)

The Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7149576.ece)

This article has the actual letter...that's the only reason I'm using it. (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/06/breaking-government-informed-about-maine-oil-boom-company-back-on-may-21/) Take it as you will.

Thanks Taer!


Oh, here's a good one on Obama's Approval Rating...looks pretty stable to me (hasn't changed for 6 months now).

If you also want to see how ridiculously biased Rasmussen is, see their numbers in relation to everyone elses (that's what happens when you only poll landlines in the middle of the day...odd)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

nameless
06-17-2010, 04:36 PM
You musta missed the speech last night.

I did, actually. I assume he used the oil spill as a springboard to push a half-assed environmental agenda that won't actually change anything as per his usual M.O... did he start cracking jokes about how lucky he was that the rig blew up while he was in charge? Cause the laughing is what pushed things from distasteful to downright infuriating.

Sei'taer
06-17-2010, 07:44 PM
I did, actually. I assume he used the oil spill as a springboard to push a half-assed environmental agenda that won't actually change anything as per his usual M.O... did he start cracking jokes about how lucky he was that the rig blew up while he was in charge? Cause the laughing is what pushed things from distasteful to downright infuriating.

Naw...it was even worse than that.

Terez
06-18-2010, 10:46 PM
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
June 15, 2010


Remarks by the President to the Nation on the BP Oil Spill

Oval Office

8:01 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. As we speak, our nation faces a multitude of challenges. At home, our top priority is to recover and rebuild from a recession that has touched the lives of nearly every American. Abroad, our brave men and women in uniform are taking the fight to al Qaeda wherever it exists. And tonight, I’ve returned from a trip to the Gulf Coast to speak with you about the battle we’re waging against an oil spill that is assaulting our shores and our citizens.

On April 20th, an explosion ripped through BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, about 40 miles off the coast of Louisiana. Eleven workers lost their lives. Seventeen others were injured. And soon, nearly a mile beneath the surface of the ocean, oil began spewing into the water.

Because there has never been a leak this size at this depth, stopping it has tested the limits of human technology. That’s why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation’s best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge -- a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation’s Secretary of Energy. Scientists at our national labs and experts from academia and other oil companies have also provided ideas and advice.

As a result of these efforts, we’ve directed BP to mobilize additional equipment and technology. And in the coming weeks and days, these efforts should capture up to 90 percent of the oil leaking out of the well. This is until the company finishes drilling a relief well later in the summer that’s expected to stop the leak completely.

Already, this oil spill is the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. And unlike an earthquake or a hurricane, it’s not a single event that does its damage in a matter of minutes or days. The millions of gallons of oil that have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico are more like an epidemic, one that we will be fighting for months and even years.

But make no mistake: We will fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused. And we will do whatever’s necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy.

Tonight I’d like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward: what we’re doing to clean up the oil, what we’re doing to help our neighbors in the Gulf, and what we’re doing to make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again.

First, the cleanup. From the very beginning of this crisis, the federal government has been in charge of the largest environmental cleanup effort in our nation’s history -- an effort led by Admiral Thad Allen, who has almost 40 years of experience responding to disasters. We now have nearly 30,000 personnel who are working across four states to contain and clean up the oil. Thousands of ships and other vessels are responding in the Gulf. And I’ve authorized the deployment of over 17,000 National Guard members along the coast. These servicemen and women are ready to help stop the oil from coming ashore, they’re ready to help clean the beaches, train response workers, or even help with processing claims -- and I urge the governors in the affected states to activate these troops as soon as possible.

Because of our efforts, millions of gallons of oil have already been removed from the water through burning, skimming and other collection methods. Over five and a half million feet of boom has been laid across the water to block and absorb the approaching oil. We’ve approved the construction of new barrier islands in Louisiana to try to stop the oil before it reaches the shore, and we’re working with Alabama, Mississippi and Florida to implement creative approaches to their unique coastlines.

As the cleanup continues, we will offer whatever additional resources and assistance our coastal states may need. Now, a mobilization of this speed and magnitude will never be perfect, and new challenges will always arise. I saw and heard evidence of that during this trip. So if something isn’t working, we want to hear about it. If there are problems in the operation, we will fix them.

But we have to recognize that despite our best efforts, oil has already caused damage to our coastline and its wildlife. And sadly, no matter how effective our response is, there will be more oil and more damage before this siege is done. That’s why the second thing we’re focused on is the recovery and restoration of the Gulf Coast.

You know, for generations, men and women who call this region home have made their living from the water. That living is now in jeopardy. I’ve talked to shrimpers and fishermen who don’t know how they’re going to support their families this year. I’ve seen empty docks and restaurants with fewer customers -– even in areas where the beaches are not yet affected. I’ve talked to owners of shops and hotels who wonder when the tourists might start coming back. The sadness and the anger they feel is not just about the money they’ve lost. It’s about a wrenching anxiety that their way of life may be lost.

I refuse to let that happen. Tomorrow, I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company’s recklessness. And this fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent third party.

Beyond compensating the people of the Gulf in the short term, it’s also clear we need a long-term plan to restore the unique beauty and bounty of this region. The oil spill represents just the latest blow to a place that’s already suffered multiple economic disasters and decades of environmental degradation that has led to disappearing wetlands and habitats. And the region still hasn’t recovered from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. That’s why we must make a commitment to the Gulf Coast that goes beyond responding to the crisis of the moment.

I make that commitment tonight. Earlier, I asked Ray Mabus, the Secretary of the Navy, who is also a former governor of Mississippi and a son of the Gulf Coast, to develop a long-term Gulf Coast Restoration Plan as soon as possible. The plan will be designed by states, local communities, tribes, fishermen, businesses, conservationists and other Gulf residents. And BP will pay for the impact this spill has had on the region.

The third part of our response plan is the steps we’re taking to ensure that a disaster like this does not happen again. A few months ago, I approved a proposal to consider new, limited offshore drilling under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe –- that the proper technology would be in place and the necessary precautions would be taken.

That obviously was not the case in the Deepwater Horizon rig, and I want to know why. The American people deserve to know why. The families I met with last week who lost their loved ones in the explosion -- these families deserve to know why. And so I’ve established a National Commission to understand the causes of this disaster and offer recommendations on what additional safety and environmental standards we need to put in place. Already, I’ve issued a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. I know this creates difficulty for the people who work on these rigs, but for the sake of their safety, and for the sake of the entire region, we need to know the facts before we allow deepwater drilling to continue. And while I urge the Commission to complete its work as quickly as possible, I expect them to do that work thoroughly and impartially.

One place we’ve already begun to take action is at the agency in charge of regulating drilling and issuing permits, known as the Minerals Management Service. Over the last decade, this agency has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility -- a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations.

When Ken Salazar became my Secretary of the Interior, one of his very first acts was to clean up the worst of the corruption at this agency. But it’s now clear that the problem there ran much deeper, and the pace of reform was just too slow. And so Secretary Salazar and I are bringing in new leadership at the agency -- Michael Bromwich, who was a tough federal prosecutor and Inspector General. And his charge over the next few months is to build an organization that acts as the oil industry’s watchdog -- not its partner.

So one of the lessons we’ve learned from this spill is that we need better regulations, better safety standards, and better enforcement when it comes to offshore drilling. But a larger lesson is that no matter how much we improve our regulation of the industry, drilling for oil these days entails greater risk. After all, oil is a finite resource. We consume more than 20 percent of the world’s oil, but have less than 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves. And that’s part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean -- because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.

For decades, we have known the days of cheap and easily accessible oil were numbered. For decades, we’ve talked and talked about the need to end America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels. And for decades, we have failed to act with the sense of urgency that this challenge requires. Time and again, the path forward has been blocked -- not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor.

The consequences of our inaction are now in plain sight. Countries like China are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should be right here in America. Each day, we send nearly $1 billion of our wealth to foreign countries for their oil. And today, as we look to the Gulf, we see an entire way of life being threatened by a menacing cloud of black crude.

We cannot consign our children to this future. The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash America’s innovation and seize control of our own destiny.

This is not some distant vision for America. The transition away from fossil fuels is going to take some time, but over the last year and a half, we’ve already taken unprecedented action to jumpstart the clean energy industry. As we speak, old factories are reopening to produce wind turbines, people are going back to work installing energy-efficient windows, and small businesses are making solar panels. Consumers are buying more efficient cars and trucks, and families are making their homes more energy-efficient. Scientists and researchers are discovering clean energy technologies that someday will lead to entire new industries.

Each of us has a part to play in a new future that will benefit all of us. As we recover from this recession, the transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of jobs -– but only if we accelerate that transition. Only if we seize the moment. And only if we rally together and act as one nation –- workers and entrepreneurs; scientists and citizens; the public and private sectors.

When I was a candidate for this office, I laid out a set of principles that would move our country towards energy independence. Last year, the House of Representatives acted on these principles by passing a strong and comprehensive energy and climate bill –- a bill that finally makes clean energy the profitable kind of energy for America’s businesses.

Now, there are costs associated with this transition. And there are some who believe that we can’t afford those costs right now. I say we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy -– because the long-term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater.

So I’m happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party -– as long they seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels. Some have suggested raising efficiency standards in our buildings like we did in our cars and trucks. Some believe we should set standards to ensure that more of our electricity comes from wind and solar power. Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high-tech industry does on research and development -– and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development.

All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fair hearing in the months ahead. But the one approach I will not accept is inaction. The one answer I will not settle for is the idea that this challenge is somehow too big and too difficult to meet. You know, the same thing was said about our ability to produce enough planes and tanks in World War II. The same thing was said about our ability to harness the science and technology to land a man safely on the surface of the moon. And yet, time and again, we have refused to settle for the paltry limits of conventional wisdom. Instead, what has defined us as a nation since our founding is the capacity to shape our destiny -– our determination to fight for the America we want for our children. Even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don’t yet know precisely how we’re going to get there. We know we’ll get there.

It’s a faith in the future that sustains us as a people. It is that same faith that sustains our neighbors in the Gulf right now.
Each year, at the beginning of shrimping season, the region’s fishermen take part in a tradition that was brought to America long ago by fishing immigrants from Europe. It’s called “The Blessing of the Fleet,” and today it’s a celebration where clergy from different religions gather to say a prayer for the safety and success of the men and women who will soon head out to sea -– some for weeks at a time.

The ceremony goes on in good times and in bad. It took place after Katrina, and it took place a few weeks ago –- at the beginning of the most difficult season these fishermen have ever faced.

And still, they came and they prayed. For as a priest and former fisherman once said of the tradition, “The blessing is not that God has promised to remove all obstacles and dangers. The blessing is that He is with us always,” a blessing that’s granted “even in the midst of the storm.”

The oil spill is not the last crisis America will face. This nation has known hard times before and we will surely know them again. What sees us through -– what has always seen us through –- is our strength, our resilience, and our unyielding faith that something better awaits us if we summon the courage to reach for it.

Tonight, we pray for that courage. We pray for the people of the Gulf. And we pray that a hand may guide us through the storm towards a brighter day. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

END
8:18 P.M. EDT


.

Sei'taer
06-19-2010, 02:15 PM
Plumber I work with came to work after the speech. Big black guy, tea party, his wife is running for congress down here. His quote (and my new favorite name call) "he ain't worth the jizzrag it takes me to wipes his dumbass off."


I laughed until I choked...

Terez
06-19-2010, 06:21 PM
That's nice. But you were saying something about the speech?

Sei'taer
06-19-2010, 07:16 PM
That's nice. But you were saying something about the speech?

Yup.