Weapons of Mass Discussion - TROLLS wll NOT be tolerated. Period.
Oh, and Matt? That Republican talking point you have been using, and Boehner, and Schmidt, too, and Sean, and who ever else--it turns out it is a lie. A bunch of BS. It's not true.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/s...tory/
40776.html
Remember me saying I didn't think it sounded right? I don't know squat about offshore drilling, but that claim smelled.
I'm sure you'll be more cautious about Boehner claims in the future...
I'm not taking it on the word of some RINO from Florida and a liberal 527 media outlet...
To further my point, Martinez is a NIMBY on top of being a RINO... And here is another point to consider, that article said that they can't confirm the China-Cuba relationship, but they didn't say that they can disprove it either...
And here is point that just came to me: Why does it matter? Does whether or not China is drilling off Cuba change that we need the oil off the coast of Florida? I say no...what say you?
Drill everywhere, and drill now.
I'm even up for an energy blockade against any state that gets too NIMBY. Do you hear me Florida?
OK, so there is no evidence that China is drilling, and no one seems to know where the story comes from. But you want to say--prove that they are NOT?
And then you say, what does it MATTER whether it is true or not, we NEED to drill!
So, when you say that China is drilling off our coasts, and that's one reason why we should, and that turns out not to be true, it doesn't shake your faith at all? Then it wasn't a strong argument to begin with, obviously.
Nor do you seem at all concerned that it isn't true. Spin uber alles.
There was a great little book called On Bullshit by a Princeton philosopher that you might enjoy reading. He distinguishes bullshit from a lie. A lie is at least aware that it is not truth. Bullshit is simply unconcerned with matters of truth and falsehood entirely. I think that pretty much sums up the "China is drilling off our shores!!!!" story.
The very idea that China COULD drill off our coast is enough for us to consider it. That's the whole point of the China-Cuba narrative. We need oil. We need American oil. We have American oil but for some reason Democrats don't want us to have American oil. That is the point. I don't give a rat's patootie whether or not it is true or not, the point remains the same: we need American oil.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/..._cuba/
index.htm
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Plans for foreign oil companies, some from India and China, to drill off the cost of Cuba are prompting calls from lawmakers to ease environmental restrictions that prohibit coastal drilling in most of the U.S., according to a report Tuesday.
and..
"Adding insult to injury, the Times said U.S. firms were invited to bid on the Cuban contracts, but were barred by the U.S. government due to the country's longstanding economic embargo of communist Cuba."
Who knew the NYT recieved their talking points from the GOP?!?...
Lord knows, but occassionaly I am compelled to say it, I LOVE WMD's readers...
We have sufficient oil reserves in ANWR, in the Bakken fields of Montana and North Dakota, the shale oil deposits in Colorado and Wyoming, the continental shelf deposits on both coasts and the deep deposits in the Gulf of Mexico. The Democrats and a few pusillanimous Republicans stand between the American people and access to our own natural resources. If it weren't so serious, it would be funny. Throw the bums out of office! Drill here; Drill now!
Wait, this is GREAT. Repubs say "China IS drilling, and it's the damn enviros fault that we aren't." The facts come out that China isn't drilling. Then it comes out that in fact, they MIGHT be drilling, but they aren't, but we can't compete because of...wait for it...not ENVIRONMENTALISTS but....the stupid, insane, ridiculous, counterproductive, stupid Cuba sanctions.
And you see that as good logic and a happy ending?
The fact that the GOP was using lies in talking points--you don't care about. Because China COULD drill someday, it is okay for them to have said they ARE drilling. Hmmm...reminds me of something I heard about someone saying they were CERTAIN that Iraq had a nuclear program, and then when it came out that was a lie and an exaggeration of the intel, the defense was--yeah, but he COULD have had one!
It's not the same thing, people. And I for one would LOVE to have the cuba embargo overturned, and let our oil companies compete for drilling off of Cuba. We would do a better job than China, it would be safer for the environment, and it would reduce our dependence on foreign oil (actually--it wouldn't even do that last thing--think about it--when Exxon imports oil drilled off of Cuba, that will be foreign oil, and instead of enriching Chavez, it will be enriching Raul Castro. That's progress? I guess it is for you people... SHEESH)
Do we need the oil? I don't care if it comes from Cuba or China or Florida or the Dakotas...do we need the oil?
And again, Matt--do you have any regrets personally for buying and then promulgating the lie about China drilling when America isn't allowed to? They aren't drilling. You said they were. A lot of Republicans did. Is it okay to lie, if you have good intentions?
And then the implication that this was environmentalists, when it is in fact the batshit insane Florida Cubans and their friends in the GOP--do you regret that? If I blamed something on Ohio Republicans, that wasn't in fact happening, and it turns out that not only was it not happening, but to the extent that it was, it was the ACLU doing it...hey, I would feel pretty dumb and make apologies. But now you want to change the subject to--do we need the oil? Slow down their cowboy, and think about what just happened. yes, we need the oil--but you need to stop being so credulous and gullible, and when you fall for malarkey--SAY SO. Isn't that what the tubes of the internets are supposed to be good for? Instantaneous correction of errors?
wait, so surfer supports ending the Cuban embargo?
congrats. you're actually more liberal than Senator Barack Hussein Obama.
It is not a lie if you were misinformed... You'll not see me phrase that the same way from here on in... A lie is deliberate, which is not what happened here on WMD or by Republicans who have used the line...clearly there is a breakdown in the story somewhere...maybe a journalist or some intereted blog reader will track that down and report back to us... In the meantime, I'm not losing any sleep over it.
Let's address the real issue for once, shall we? Do we need the oil or not?
China and Cuba are not the real issue...the real issue is the oil.
OK, so China and Cuba aren't the real issue. Who the heck brought them up...you and your folks did.
OK, so the GOP was misinformed. They aren't going to retract.
And yes, we need the oil. Let's get rid of the Cuba embargo. A lot of market oriented Repubs are for that, like Flake of Arizona, a great guy. it's been more than 40 years. I don't see it working. Moreover, we trade with governments that are FAR worse than Castro--we even traded with Saddam, who killed hundreds of thousands more people, ditto red china. As dictators go, Castro has been less bloodthirsty per capita than the top twenty. He's an awful man and it will be a good day when he dies, but not trading with cuba helped him stay in power, it didn't hurt him. It was the best policy if you liked Castro...
I decided to change my mind, surfer... You're right a Correction was required and has now been issued...
BTW, China and Cuba was brought up to illustrate the point that other countries are not hampering efforts to get oil. That's why China and Cuba aren't the issue and the oil is...
Maybe all of these posters could help Obama name the 57 states he campaigned in. I think it was 57 that I heard him state during a speech.
Oh, Lordy. Do you REALLY think that the Harvard Law School graduate who was the editor of the law review doesn't know there are 50 states? Mary, there is a lot of lame crap spewed against Obama, but you win the prize--that is LITERALLY the stupidest argument you could make! It's actually a very simple mistake to make. There are 50 states. There are six territories/districts (DC, Guam, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Pueto Rico). Then there are Americans abroad, who also get representation at the conventions. So, followed by the media's cameras and microphones for years, Obama once says the word states when he means to say the word "contests".
I love coming here. When I see the arguments y'all have against Obama--it reminds me of the weak crap Democrats had against Reagan in 1980. Y'all think Obama is Jimmy Carter. He's a Democratic Reagan. Remember how there was no way an "actor" with very little experience (none in int. politics) could be president?
How'd that work out?
So keep up with the stupid attacks--they show the intellectual bankruptcy of modern conservatism. Russell Kirk, Gingrich in 94, Reagan in 1980, Goldwater in 64--conservatives had principles. Now they just have the White House, and think anything that happens there is right. And they won't have the WH for much longer...
Wow, now who is guilty of using guilt by association? I don't think anything that happens at the WH is right. I am conservative. Falsehood by surfer...again. And who says conservatives have the White House? Yeah, we really got that conservative immigration policy from Bush, right? We really got that spending curb, right? Uh, surfer, you show your own hubris and hate for conservatives.
And funny, I don't recall reagan calling for capitulation with the soviets in 80, like obama is with iran. I don't recall reagan wanting to raise taxes. I do recall jimmy carter doing those things.
I love how you come on here and get on your high horse about the sad state of dialogue and politics and then you write drivel like this.
Surfer, you really need to manage this multiple personality, manic depressive behavior.
I agree Bush has been a disaster on spending, and far from conservative values, but the modern conservative movement has become very fiscally irresponsible. Democrats believe too much in tax and spend. Borrow and spend is worse, and that's what Republicans tend to do. The Bob Dole wing of the party was once very fiscally responsible. Those days are gone. Back when I was a Republican, we believed in fiscal sanity.
If my rhetoric has sunk, my apologies, Mark. I do get a little heated. If it means anything to you, I don't think you are manic depressive or multiple personality...
I don't think guilt by association should be part of our politics. Whether done by Dems or Reps. If that puts me on a high horse, maybe everyone else should get up here with me.
Incidentally, Obama has run a 260 million dollar campaign better than anyone since Karl Rove in 2000, maybe even better than anyone since Clinton in 1992. That's executive experience. Bush was quite lacking in executive exp in 2000, by the way. He had run several companies into the dust, true, and he had been gov of TX--but that is perhaps the weakest of all 57 governors (there are 57 states, I think)...so it is VERY poor training for the presidency. JFK had had no exec experience, neither had Truman. If that is your argument against Obama...again, I look forward to November.
Yes, limping to the finish line shows great tactical leadership....
Commenting by HaloScan
