If you are still on the fence about whether or not to vote against the incumbent dimwits running our national government, here are a couple quotes from this week's news:
1. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Today she decided that the U.S. court system is not capable of handling matters related to the inevitable onslaught of lawsuits coming BP's way. It is Speaker Pelosi's studied opinion that BP must . . . MUST . . . stop paying dividends to its shareholders immediately. Until such time that . . . well, until Speaker Pelosi thinks it is okay. When she gives the thumbs-up (and Hell actually does freeze over, due to the inevitable global cooling wave that is coming our way - - just wait, you’ll see), then BP can pay dividends. Or was it, until those individuals hurt by the oil spill in the Gulf start getting some dollars from BP . . . either way, Speaker Pelosi will let us know and then BP can start paying dividends. Because our court system is obviously not up to the task of sorting out legal rights and issues.
2. President Obama (only reason I didn't put this one first is out of respect for the President) stating that he is looking for some "ass to kick" about this whole oil spill thing going on down there in the Gulf. Man, is he pissed off. And, he is going to kick some "ass". I think it is really cool for the President to be talking about kicking some ass. When was the last time we had a President who would say such things? I mean, it is clear that somebody has to pay and Obama is the Chief Asskicker, or the Asskicker in Chief (whichever) so he is going to administer the kicking.
My only question is . . . how is he going to reach his butt with his own foot? Because clearly he should start with his own ass. For his instinctive desire to point fingers, assign blame and acting (as in performing for an audience), rather than actually doing the job we elected him for. Today’s show includes a berating of the Chairman of BP . . . as if that is going to solve anything. But, it looks oh so good to his audience to be chewing out some greedy corporate type. Obama really did learn a lot from fellow Chicagoan Oprah. He puts on a heck of a show.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You seem understandably upset about this issue, however, you're having a double standard. When regan called for a "star wars missle defense system" and a "rambo-style" worldwide butt kicking, I assume you did not consider a need for a change in command, but when Obama's out to "kick ass", you feel it's juvenile. I am not aware of your views on Sarah Palin, but my thought is that you stood behind the one-liner, "drill baby drill". It's understandable that many politicans have calls to action that are more schlitz than shakesperean, however, it's not a pick and choose kind of thing, either they're a call to action or a bad judgement call. I think it's fair for you to decide.
ReplyDeleteYou had made a good point previously that the goal of business is to make money (your example of stockbrokers getting a bad rap), but where is the line to be drawn when it's between profit and the environment? The shareholders won't starve if they don't recieve their money for a few months or even a year while the problem is being fixed. It's difficult to gauge your views on government involvement as a help or a hinderance and when it's asked for/needed.
Also, not being a political strategist or environmental specialist, I'm not sure what to do about the BP oil spill. However, is it really the government's job to fix a companie's problem? If you would rather have the government stay out of big business (feel free to correct me if i'm wrong), isn't it another double standard to get upset at Obama for not doing enough? If Daeger or Learning Resources had a big environmental problem, who would you expect to fix it?
Also, what could the government do? So far, they've brough in experts, mandated changes, fees and applied pressure to BP to fix it. At least in my opinion, there's so many ways to dilute responsibility for these actions for large companies that it's hard to figure out a punishment for them. I live in an apartment complex and the only way they can punish residents (for non-illegal situations) is through fines. It suprises me that you disagree with berating the head of BP, once again, shouldn't someone be punished somehow for the mistake BP, and not the US government made? When a company such as BP is immune to any other form of punishment, the fines that they have levied, and hopefully fines in the future, will solve the problem.
I guess in summary, I'm confused on your views on the job descriptions of Nancy Pelosi, Barak Obama and the upper management of BP.
Sorry for not being clearer on this, Jacob. Let me clear up a few things raised in your comments:
ReplyDelete1. The responsible parties should pay for the cleanup and environmental consequences. Of that, there really is no debate. However, I believe that the courts are fully capable of handling this matter, assessing liability and financial damages. I also believe that it is not the role of the President to interfere in a tort claim, which is what this amounts to.
2. Similarly, I believe Nancy Pelosi has no business telling a private corporation how to handle its treasury (i.e. payment of dividends). If this were just politicking, I would feel better, but I think Nancy Pelosi, and Barack Obama, actually believe that the Federal Government should play this role.
3. There is a need for regulation, environmental and other regulation. Private corporations need policing, just like the rest of us. There are speed limits for a reason and there are police cars with radar guns for a reason, too. Same goes with environmental regulations and enforcement.
More later . . .
2.