Jon Stewart Rips Right-Wingers A New One

    When Unarmed Blacks Are Killed By Cops

    No Wrongdoing With Benghazi

    Right-Wingers Fuel Racism And Paranoia

Thursday, June 3, 2010

What He's Doing Is Fine, KTHXBYE

Thomas Lindaman writes:

When Barack Obama was running for President, his supporters said that he was smarter than George W. Bush and talked about how good it would be to have an intelligent man at America's helm after Bush. Now, less than two years later, Obama's supporters are stuck saying that Obama couldn't have been prepared for the mess George W. Bush left.

Micromanagegate again!

But yep. It takes a LONG while to clean up Republican messes.

Take the Gulf Coast oil spill, for example. After over 40 days, even a number of his supporters are starting to wonder if he's on the ball. When James Carville starts openly questioning you, you know the Left isn't happy with you. This has left Obama's supporters asking, "Well, what would you have Obama do?" The question is designed to show that not even Obama has all the answers and that the people who are questioning him are hypocrites because they don't have answers.

Allow me to fill that void, my fellow Obama critics.

1) Send down the Environmental Protection Agency after the spill happened. One of Obama's first actions after the Gulf Coast oil spill happened was to dispatch people from...the Department of Homeland Security. What were they going to do? Arrest the oil spill? Set up a color-coded system to let people know the threat level of the spill? Maybe the best thing to do would have been to send down people whose job it is to address ecological matters. Maybe a government group like...oh I don't know...the Environmental Protection Agency? I know it's a stretch, but maybe Obama could have send them down first thing.

To do what? Rescue the workers? Plug the hole? Because that's not their fucking job.

Why isn't EPA the lead for this environmental disaster?

Typically for off shore environmental incidents the U.S. Coast Guard is the lead agency for a response. As this oil slick approaches and reaches the shoreline, EPA has been preparing to ramp up its efforts as necessary to respond to a broad range of environmental impacts.

2) Spend some Super Fund money. Part of the EPA' s budget is a little thing called Super Fund, a fund designed to help clean up ecological disasters. I'm sure some Super Fund money could be released to buy clean-up equipment that should have already been bought and in place. And I'm pretty sure an oil spill constitutes an ecological disaster.

Superfund: Contracting Opportunities in the Gulf Oil Spill

But yeah, the EPA isn't doing anything.

Obama does what he can and he gets lambasted for whatever it is. He takes a hands off approach and lets the experts handle something, he gets lambasted.

Make up your minds, you right-wing idiots.

The EPA doesn't matter anyway as a retroactive solution for Obama. Do you know why? Because even if the EPA jumped in the middle of the explosion fire, waved a magic wand, and cleaned the spill... one third-level EPA member may not have been there. Then right-wingers would say "Hurr hurr so much for all hands on deck!" while eating a deep-fried Shetland pony.

So, no. That plan wouldn't work. Next?

3) Encourage BP. Since the beginning, Obama and his supporters have attacked BP at every opportunity, saying, "It's their spill." That has yet to be discovered in full, but that hasn't stopped Obama from laying the blame at BP's feet. Yet, who is doing most of the work in the Gulf Coast? BP. Instead of criticizing BP, the President could show some leadership and become BP's biggest fan. Being negative at this stage doesn't help the situation.

Good god. It's THEIR responsibility. BP more than deserves criticism (and a criminal investigation).


BP causes a spill, and your solution is to have Obama say "BP is great!" That's the same moronic right-wing thinking that gave us hilarious soundbites like these:

"Bush is great because he stops terrorist attacks! We've only had ONE during his presidency! So what if it was the worst in history?"

No, "BP rules!" wouldn't work to win the hearts and minds of Americans.


4) Listen to the states impacted by the spill. Is there a reason Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is being ignored by the federal government? Because of the length of time for the oil spill to get clean, Jindal wants to build sand berms designed to protect Louisiana's wetlands. Yet, the Obama Administration hasn't seen fit to give the green light? With hurricane season just starting, the more the Administration drags its feet, we could be seeing the Gulf Coast oil spill spread out a lot more. Jindal's request isn't out of the ordinary, nor is it out of the question. Obama would be well-served to listen the people like Jindal and not to his Leftist base.

Leftist base? What TF ever.

Mr. "anti-socialism" Bobby Jindal, who lied about a high speed train between LA and Las Vegas on national TV, is whining that the government isn't doing enough. No, Bobby, you failed. There is nothing about protecting shore lines in the Constitution, so that is a "states rights" issue. Thus, you should have already had the infrastructure to deal with it in place. No, Bobby, you didn't act fast enough if we are to judge you by the political ideology you profess.


White House approves Louisiana berm project-Jindal

But that doesn't matter. No matter if it's approved through the proper channels. You right-wingers would just say it "took too long" just like you did with the health care reform. So nope, that plan wouldn't work either. Next?

5) Be a visible leader. One of the biggest knocks against Obama's handling of the oil spill is that he doesn't seem to be all that engaged. He does small, meaningless things, but usually in private and far away from the media's eyes. Obama may think this makes him look deliberate and thoughtful, but in truth, it's made him look distant and thoughtless. With America being fans of visual media, it's increasingly important that leaders actually appear on them. Obama didn't even mention the oil spill for nearly 10 days after it happened. That's far too long in this media environment. A lot more visibility could have helped him appear more like a leader and less like a President in a bubble.

Actions are what matter, not words. For you people who HATE Obama so much, you sure do want to see him!

When he does make a visible speech (and he has), you would say it's a photo-op. So no, that wouldn't work.

See? Five suggestions on what Obama could have done, and I'm not even a graduate of Harvard Law. Then again, given some of the bozos that have come out of there, I might have been able to come up with these suggestions because I didn't graduate from Harvard Law.

At least a Harvard Graduate usually can get a decent dental plan. Take the hint.

The GOP is The Party of Personal Responsibility! In particular, poor people should take personal responsibility to being a burden on society. They get to shoulder the responsibility of rich people's and giant corporation's fuckups too, since they need the practice.

Obama knew that the MMS was in the pocket of the oil industry and that he probably should have reviewed the lackluster safety policies prior to like... now. I mean hindsight is 20/20 and who knows what other surprises a deregulated US has in store for the world.

But the underlying issue is very basic: we don't know how to fix problems a mile under the surface. And for that reason, we shouldn't be doing this.

These companies have been flying below the radar in regards to regulation for decades...paying off inspectors, cutting corners, anything they can do to keep the oil flowing and their profits high.

Did you see the story on ABC News the other night about major safety violations among the oil companies over the last three years?


BP had 760 violations over the last three years.

The next highest number of violations over the same period?


We cannot allow companies to ignore safety/environmental violations and just pay the fines as a course of doing business. They are/were violating regulations at nearly 100x the rate of the next worst offender in the industry. That shit cannot stand. There must be a reckoning.

Obama's accepting more blame than he needs to be accepting. But whatever.

Is Obama a Business hating socialist, or in bed with big oil ignoring regulating business?

Republicans don't just ignore the problems, they actively work with anti-environmentalist sentiment. See Reagan's hiring of James Watt and Anne Gorsuch for the DoI and EPA respectfully, Bush putting out a "Clean Skies" law which actually rolled back portions of the Clean Air Act, ect, stopping Superfund, worked on cutting EPA enforcement branches.

In life words matter, but deeds matter far more and the results of those deeds matter the most.

But the best you fucks can come up with is Ted Kennedy and WindFarmGate.

As president, Jimmy Carter installed solar panels atop the White House. He championed coal and nuclear power. He taxed oil company profits. He created the U.S. Department of Energy. He introduced America to ethanol.

Oil imports plummeted during the Carter administration. Renewable energy research skyrocketed. Cars got more miles per gallon of gas. Thermostats were lowered to 55 degrees at night.On Feb. 2, 1977, Carter donned a wool cardigan and asked a national TV audience to conserve energy. Two months later, he likened America's struggle to reduce Middle Eastern oil imports to the "moral equivalent of war.

Reagan reversed it all. He even tore down the solar panels.

With Katrina, the government had an agency, FEMA, that was suppose to respond adequately to the disaster, which it didn't. Whereas this disaster was man made, thus the fault of a corporation and it is the responsibility of that corporation, not the US government, to clean up the mess. The US Government should simply be there to prod BP and make sure they actually do fix it.

The simple fact is that Carter's ideas were largely right, they just were difficult and not popular. If we had stuck to Carter's energy policy we would be much, much better off. But Americans don't want to hear that things are hard, that we have to make changes and sacrifices.

Now, let's reiterate that Energy Task Force, shall we?


"The Washington Post reported on November 15, 2005 that it had obtained documents detailing how executives from major oil corporations, including Exxon-Mobil Corp., Conoco, Royal Dutch Shell Oil Corp., and the American subsidiary of British Petroleum met with Energy Task Force participants while they were developing national energy policy. Vice President Cheney was reported to have met personally with the Chief Executive Officer of BP (formerly British Petroleum) during the time of the Energy Task Force's activities."

BP wrote the policy!

Here's another little gem from the small government Conservatives:

GOP Blocks Oil Spill Liability Bill

The Republicans want TAXPAYERS to pay, not the oil companies at fault. Again, it's all about the corporate anarchy.

Now, you tell me:

Did Bush increase or decrease the likelihood of an accident?

Did Obama increase or decrease the likelihood of an accident?

There are a couple of things Obama did wrong:

About a year ago, Obama admitted that he had expected to be able to explain issues to the American people, and that they would understand. in other words, he expected Americans to be informed adults. He was wrong.

Now he trusted the oil industry to be responsible adults. He was wrong.

I would not blame him if in 2012 he said "I did not sign up to babysit a bunch of retarded kindergartners. You idiots are on your own." But I seriously doubt he will do a Palin. He loves his country far more than teabaggers do, obviously.

You're Even Funnier

On a SATURDAY NIGHT, because he had nothing better to do with his life, Thomas Lindaman writes:

The past 48 hours has seen attention paid to Glenn Beck's radio show where he pretended to be Malia Obama in a comedy bit.

GFY with that bullshit disclaimer. It wasn't "a comedy bit." It wasn't some pre-planned sketch.

Beck broke one of his own rules by bringing in a politician's children to criticize the politician, and he has since apologized.

Yeah, by criticizing the President again. Nice apology. Stay classy, repugs.

The thing about the controversy, though, is that the reports are only telling half the story. I happened to listen to the bit that day and he did pretend to be Malia. However, he also transitioned from being Malia...to "Sesame Street" puppet Elmo. Yes, he did break his own rules, but to leave out how he switched characters is more than a little intellectually dishonest.

Ah, okay! So if Obama says all white people need to be lined up and shot, then talks like Elmo afterwards, it totally negates what he said? I'll keep that in mind.

Which brings us to Bill Maher.

No, it doesn't actually. Since Maher didn't make fun of anyone's children. But go ahead with your "I'm an Independent(tm). Both sides are bad as these two different subjects show... so vote Republican! But I'm totally not 'carrying the water' for any right-wing pundits!"

On "Real Time With Bill Maher" he suggested that President Obama isn't a "real black President." Then, he went on to portray a "real black President" as a gun-toting thug.

Yeah, take Beck to task for going after Malia Obama, but don't say anything about Maher suggesting a "real black President" would be a thug. At least Beck was man enough to apologize,

Beck is as far removed from a "man" as one can get. A backhanded apology isn't an apology.

even as Leftist websites took him to task. Will those same websites take Maher to task?

Let's just say I'm not holding my breath on that one...

Republicans honestly don't see the difference? Riiight. lol

Oh, look, another false equivalency from the Right to justify their racism and ignorance. I'm so utterly shocked that neocons would be so dishonest. Look at me, can you see how shocked I am?

Even ignoring the main point that Maher is a fucking stand-up comedian and Beck is a dipshit political pundit... Are there any actual black people with an opinion on this? I'd like to hear it. I bet that most Republicans don't want to hear black people's opinion on the matter between the two, though. hehe

You know why Maher's joke isn't causing an outrage among the black community? Because certain people have leeway when it comes to racist jokes. You get more leeway when you support anti-racist causes, because it's more likely you're not a racist. You get less leeway when you support racist groups... like, y'know, the Republican party.

Ya see, that's why I can get away with posting a picture like this without worrying about offending my black friends:

As for Maher's joke -- there is a big difference between making a joke about the president being a stereotypical black man (which Maher did not) and making a joke about wishing the president would behave more like a stereotypical black man (which is what the joke actually was). Most black people DON'T act that way. THAT'S the joke. The fact that it's a ridiculous concept. It's a brutish concept displayed in popular culture -- movies and music. Maher didn't invent it -- he cracked a joke about it.

Liberals weren't so lenient on Michael Richards, were they?

Everyone knows Bill Maher's politics and he has ZERO history of being a bigot, and he has a black girlfriend, so a joke like this is considered funny because of how laughably extreme it is. Had Limbaugh or Beck made it, yeah, it'd be a very different story. You reap what you sow. Don't like it? Tough shit. Stop being a part of a racist party.

Oh, and you must hate Blazing Saddles.

It's only Republican (aka white) people with fake outrage who are "upset" about this. Please spare the world your fake outrage on behalf of the "other" people. That's the funniest joke of all.

No! Keep Doing Business As Usual!

On an early SATURDAY MORNING, because he had nothing to do on a Friday night, Thomas Lindaman writes:

The past couple of days has been filled with an allegation that the Obama Administration offered Rep. Joe Sestak a job in exchange for dropping out of the Democratic primary against Senator Arlen Specter. Conservative talk radio hosts have devoted time towards trying to get to the bottom of this situation, suggesting that Obama could be impeached over it.

Allow me to throw a bucket of cold water on that notion, at least for now. On the surface, it looks like a slam dunk with the possibility of taking down a sitting President, a former President, and the party in power. It's a perfect scenario...except that it's not.

The more facts that come out about the situation, the more I can't help but think we're being played for dupes in a poorly-constructed scam. Even with the power of the Presidency and a sympathetic Congress willing to run interference for Obama (at least until after the November elections), committing an act that is so blatantly against the law is monumentally stupid, even for this Administration. Also, why drag Clinton into this? He lacked the power to give Sestak any position in the Administration, and the job offered wasn't really that much of a step up for Sestak. Add to the fact that Sestak ratted out the Administration for what appears to be no political gain whatsoever.

Put simply, there are too many things that don't make sense about the Sestak job offer, but there's just enough meat on the bone to give conservatives and Republicans reason to pounce. And that's a problem if the meat turns out to be nothing worth pursuing or a fabrication designed to discredit Obama's critics. Having Republicans go on a wild goose chase over this would go a long way towards that end, which is why Republicans and conservatives need to be very careful and do their homework before jumping on this bandwagon. As much fun as it would be to put Obama and the Democrats in a bad position over this, there are too many unanswered questions for my taste.

Hahaha!! The right-wingers create yet another bullshit scandal (SestakGate!), they see it isn't getting any traction, so they try to pass it off as a liberal scam. Funny!

I think it's hysterical that the Right has so little information that's actually damaging to Obama, that they have to puff this thing up. Why discourage them?

Oh, by the way... Will somebody please explain why Reagan doing the same thing is OK, but Obama not?

Rove, too.

"Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

What act of Congress provided for or made possible the job he was offered? It's unpaid, meaning Congress' control of the purse strings is irrelevant, and it's a Presidential advisory position, created by the Executive branch, which requires no approval from the Legislative. Congress has set rules about hiring for positions it creates or provides for. This wasn't one of those positions.

Here's why NOTHING was illegal: If they said "IF you quit running, you'll get this job." But that's not what happened. They straight up offered him the job. So, that's that.

If we go by the usual retarded Republican logic: Anytime someone is offered a job in the administration to a congressman, it is illegal. You know why? Because every time a congressman is offered a job in an administration THEY MUST QUIT CONGRESS IF THEY TAKE IT. Which may allow someone else to run for that office, or it will stop that person from making certain votes in the future. Republicans are accidentally saying EVERY president has broken this law. Why? Because Republicans are idiots.

Why do conservatives think they'll win an election by making a giant issue out of their opponent being a stand-up guy who said no to cronyism and politics as usual? What's funniest about this, is that the story really makes Sestak look like a stand up guy. Why are Republicans trying to push a story that does not serve their interests? Especially when so many Republicans turned a blind eye to the many illegal acts of the Bush administration?

I can just tell what the right-wingers are thinking. It's like the fire boom bullshit. "That fire boom shit-flinging stunt didn't work, so let's pull up THIS code and find something else. HAH, that one looks good, let's fling that one at them! Woohoo, I'm awesome!"

The idiotic right-wing pundits really understand law, don't they? They understand it about 20 times better than all the lawyers (including Republican ones) who have come out and said this is not breaking the law.

This is the same nonsense most Conservatives pull. "I know more by looking into the subject for five minutes, than the expert does who has been working on the subject for decades!" (see Evolution, Manmade Global warming, Constitutional law, History, etc..)

They have no idea about the depth of the subjects, and they think everything can be covered by bullshit talking points.

The president offers jobs to all sorts of people with political offices ALL THE TIME. Every president does. It's how cabinets and other offices get filled. Clinton was a senator. So he offered her Sec. of State -- but first she'd have to agree to get out of the office!

Have Republicans simply gone insane? Yes.

That's why this is particularly hilarious.

Don't listen to Lindaman, right-wingers! It was totally a bribe! See?

What more proof do you need? Since when does evidence matter to you guys? We have a totally unretouched photo here!

Go on, keep running with the accusations! It'll go over well with your party! Just like cheering American losing, booing America winning, the Teabaggers, the ACORN Pimp, and blaming Obama for the oil spill!

Keep fucking that chicken!

Nope, Not Hypocrisy

Thomas Lindaman writes:

The Left has been crowing a lot about conservatives asking for federal assistance with the clean up of the Gulf Coast and the Tennessee flooding. To them, it's hypocritical of the right to ask for federal help, what with them being advocates of smaller federal government and self-reliance.

One tiny problem: it's not all that hypocritical.

Conservatives believe that government should do for citizens what they cannot do for themselves. Flood recovery and oil spill clean up have pretty big price tags, costs that would bankrupt states if they were to pay them themselves. That's why the government has FEMA and the EPA in place: to pick up the slack.

What the Left doesn't understand is that a desire for smaller government is not the same thing as a desire for no government. Asking for federal assistance in dealing with those things that the citizens cannot do for themselves isn't hypocritical; it's consistent with what conservatives actually believe. For the Left to crow about what they see as hypocrisy is laughable at best because it shows how little they actually understand about the right.

No, what's laughable is right-wingers that suddenly care about small government when there's a Democrat in the White House.

On the other hand, one could make the argument that the Left is being hypocritical with the Tennessee floods and the Gulf Coast oil spill. For all of their talk about compassion and helping the less fortunate, I haven't heard the Left doing much to help the flood victims in Tennessee or to help clean up efforts along the Gulf Coast.

But I have heard them making plenty of comments from the sidelines.

If you care so much about those in need, it's time to man up, roll up your sleeves, and do something. Until you do, you're bigger hypocrites than you say the right is.

Yeah, those Democrats just don't care.

Guess you can blame the liberal media for ignoring the Tennessee flooding. Liberal media like Fox News.

I guess those left wing socialist faggots like Olbermann just don't care!


Funny, I don't see right-wingers getting off their fat asses, either.

Oh, wait... there are people helping the flood victims.

Are they right-wingers? Are they left-wingers?

Hmm... they're people.

Are you just assuming they're all right-wingers? Just because Tennessee is full of rednecks, doesn't mean there aren't liberals there, too.

The left AND the right are helping the flood victims.

Why are right-wingers caring about Tennessee flood victims, and not the Katrina victims? Ohhh... right... there's something a little bit different between them... can't quite place my finger on it. Can't possibly figure out what it is...

And as far as right-wing hypocrisy... you're right. It's not.

The right-wingers LOVE big government, as long as it supports corporate anarchy.

It's not right-wingers being hypocrites... it's just right-wingers blatantly lying.

Bitter Cause You Hate YOUR Job?

Thomas Lindaman writes:

While the Gulf Coast Oozes...

...President Obama schmoozes.

A four day weekend, Mr. President? Really? I guess all that running from the Gulf Coast oil spill and running to events that show you really don't care about the situation just tuckered you out.

Yeah, cause those poor BP CEO's don't take time off!

Obama's been at the spill several times now, and he's covered other matters, some of which are in the very article you linked to. But all you retards focus on is the Memorial Weekend? You call that running away? Hey, at least he can "run" four steps without passing out.

Accountability = No Accountability?

Thomas Lindaman writes:

Liz Birnbaum has left her position as head of the Minerals Management Services, the government entity that is supposed to oversee offshore oil drilling. In the light of recent controversies surrounding the agency, this seems like a good move.

Whether it is...that's another story. It's entirely possible that Birnbaum's departure is a ruse. After all, much of the controversy surrounding the MMS occurred before her tenure, so why would she voluntarily leave without a fight?

Simple. She's the first government scapegoat.

As oil has been leaking into the Gulf of Mexico, public confidence in the Obama Administration's ability to address the spill has also been leaking. With each passing day, people question whether the Administration is capable of anything more than blaming BP and telling the public not in so many words that the government is incompetent. (Of course, I could have told you that for free...)

Given that situation, and knowing how Obama operates, I'm convinced that he was looking for someone who would be willing to take the fall for the Gulf oil spill, while being far enough removed from the Administration as to not create more blowback than necessary. Birnbaum fits the bill perfectly. It was her agency that was supposed to keep a regulatory eye on offshore oil drilling and failed, and few outside of the policy wonks and power players in Washington, DC, have even heard of her.

Thus, a scapegoat is born.

However, if the Obama Administration and its allies think Birnbaum's departure fixes the problem even temporarily, they're sadly mistaken. The Administration's window of opportunity to address the oil spill in a meaningful way closed a long time ago. Now, all they're doing is trying to put a Band Aid on a gushing chest wound.

Or would that be a gushing oil spill?

So holding the person in charge of MMS accountable is "finding a scapegoat"?

Honestly, what do you WANT? Do you want accountability or not?

Obama did increase regulations and accountability, and the Republicans attacked him for it. Do you have short-term memory issues? This is from just a few months ago, before the spill:

OKLAHOMA CITY - Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced in a media conference call Wednesday that the oil and gas industry will face stiffer hurdles, starting this year, when it comes to drilling on public lands in the U.S.

And this could have a detrimental effect on Oklahoma's energy sector, triggering the wrath of Rep. Dan Boren and critical comments from others in the Oklahoma congressional delegation and representatives of the oil and gas industry.

According to a report in the Houston Chronicle, Salazar told the media that new Department of the Interior policies will "limit the federal government's practice of fast-tracking some drilling proposals by exempting them from detailed environmental studies."

What should Obama have done differently -- assigned someone to examine the entire MMS department and write a report recommending rebuilding of the department? Survey the employees to find out how close their relationships were to the oil industry?

They did that.

So a pat on the back for Obama.

I'll criticize him, though -- he didn't do photo-ops (not nearly enough) so the average dimplehead with a COMPREHENSION GAP thought nothing was going on.

"Look, blame Obama for something! Anything! Help!" If you like, you can blame him for not cleaning up Republicans' shit fast enough.

And yes, that would be accurate.

Or blame him for not having enough "heck of a job Brownie" photo-ops.

But that's about it. Everything substantial, fact based, rests on the Republicans and the Bush administration.


Sorry, but there aren't always two sides to every issue.

Yep, He Sure Is

Thomas Lindaman writes:

If there's one politician in Washington who can give Joe Biden a run for his money with completely inane comments, it's Massachusetts Senator John Kerry.

Because you say so. Right.

During a speech at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, Kerry said that the "anger" directed at Washington is misplaced. It's not Washington's fault that things are perceived as being bad. Oh no.

It's because we're just not smart enough to realize the good things President Obama is doing.

But, wait! There's more!

Kerry's said that the anti-Washington sentiment is hypocritical because...people want to keep their Social Security and Medicare and want the government to take a bigger role in the Gulf Coast clean up. Well, right now I'm not taking Social Security or Medicare,

You'll just take your three years worth of Social Security that you've paid in, right? And your personal insurance will fully cover your inevitable cardiac arrest. Right.

and the federal government has this thing called the Environmental Protection Agency whose job it is to help with the clean up of big messes like the Gulf Coast oil spill.

Ah, so this is the NEW right-wing soundbite of the week, eh? EPA-gate?

Do you know know what role the EPA is supposed to have? Did you even read their own website?

Why isn't EPA the lead for this environmental disaster?

Typically for off shore environmental incidents the U.S. Coast Guard is the lead agency for a response. As this oil slick approaches and reaches the shoreline, EPA has been preparing to ramp up its efforts as necessary to respond to a broad range of environmental impacts.

No, Senator, my "anger" towards Washington is the fact that your ilk just doesn't get it. No matter how much you try to whitewash the job Obama is doing and try to convince others that people who don't see things the way you do aren't thinking logically, the fact is that things aren't as rosy as you claim them to be. We still have high unemployment,

Right, and Obama is doing nothing about it.

1. The Recovery Act, that gave small businesses tax breaks.
2. Tax credits for small businesses that hire new employees.
3. Tax incentives for all businesses to open new plants.
4. Elimination of capital gains taxes on small business investment.
5. A new small business lending fund, now that the banks are recovering.

I guess Obama is doing nothing... to people that have a comprehension gap.

the deficit and the national debt have skyrocketed,


Right, Obama did nothing about that. At least, to people that have a comprehension gap.

and the sheer ineptitude of the current Administration is on full display with the Gulf Coast clean up.

It sure was inept. To people that have a comprehension gap.

There is one thing Kerry said that I agree with. Kerry said he thought there was a "comprehension gap" that prevents people from seeing the truth. Yes, there is, Senator. The comprehension gap, however, isn't on the part of the TEA Parties or people who agree with them, though.

It's with entrenched government officials like you who have shielded themselves from the reality of what you have wrought.

Yeah, the same reality that involves invisible men in the sky, and Climatologist Rock Stars?

A study from the Journal of Research into Personality that concluded that insecure kids look for the reassurance provided by tradition and authority, and find it in conservative politics. The more confident kids are eager to explore alternatives to the way things are and gravitate toward liberal politics. A similar 2003 study out of Stanford concluded that people who are dogmatic, fearful, intolerant of ambiguity and uncertainty, and who crave order and structure are more likely to gravitate to conservatism.

Saying you guys have a "comprehension gap" is being generous.

Rightard Opinion Piece = Fact?

Thomas Lindaman writes:

Another Factual Post Regarding the Gulf Coast Spill


So Lindaman, who squawks about posting partisan links, uses a partisan opinion piece as evidence of... something.

Gee. Isn't that what I've been saying all along and what Leftists have been trying to deny?

No, you haven't been saying any of what was in that column. All you've been doing was blaming Obama. Even the rightard isn't doing that.

I can do that, too, ya know:


Republicans right now have stopped the senate from raising the liability cap 3 TIMES.

Doesn't it just suck having to carry the water of an inept President whose indecision and limp responses to the oil spill have damaged the Gulf Coast?

What "indecision"? What "limp responses"?

People aren't "carrying the water" for anybody. Oh, and stop with the Rushisms, that's as bad as your "Alinsky/Statist" Beckisms.

You're blaming Obama for the MMS, staffed entirely under the Bush administration? That's nothing new, as you right-wingers blamed Obama for TARP, and the economic collapse that happened during Bush.

Oh, and while we're here, I'm waiting for the Left to start holding the Administration responsible for not having fire booms ready to go like federal law required them to have. Until you man up and do that, you have zero credibility calling out BP or anyone else.

Adviser: "Sorry to interrupt your breakfast. Mr. President, North Korea has manufactured another atomic bomb, Iran is saber rattling, and... and..."

Obama: "What is it?"

Adviser: "Sir, I... Uh... there's an issue in a 16 year old emergency response plan an aide found while checking his computer..."

Obama: "And?"

Adviser: "Well, according to this line in the plan, in case of some offshore oil rig spillage, among the various responses includes some fire booms..."

Obama: "Dear God! Cancel my lunch with Netanyahu, or just make him a sandwich. To the Obamamobile!"

Blaming Obama for not using his time machine again! MicromanagementGate!

Do you think the government should spend Trillions to be ready to fix any problem the private sector gets in?

You know who else is supposed to have fire booms? The fucking corporation that causes the spill! Did you know that?

And yet, even if they had a thousand fire booms four feet away from that one rig: They wouldn't have been able to use them any sooner than they did with the booms they wound up using. Because 1. They HAD TO PUT OUT THE RIG FIRE. 2. They had a RESCUE OPERATION going on, you can't go around setting things on fire when there are PEOPLE MISSING. 3. They couldn't use booms due to weather conditions. 4. They were reluctant to use booms due to air pollution. 5. When things settled down, they had to do tests first. By the time all these things were finished... they had the booms they needed anyway. Even NOW, their use of booms is limited due to weather.

BP told the government this could never happen.

BP said if anything happened they had a plan.

Cheney/Bush energy plan made it so government had to TRUST BP and not make sure they had a plan or properly used safety devices.

Remember that energy plan that Bush/Cheney REFUSED TO SAY WHO THEY MET WITH? Remember when they were criticized by the left about only meeting with the oil industry?

Remember the Republicans saying "shut up, it's not important who they met with". Remember that?

Obama is guilty of one thing only: Expecting the previous administration to have things in order.

Takes awhile to undo eight years, and impose accountability.