The Politics Thread - please direct all related posts here..

[HarthorneWingo]

The GOP pushed those cards as a solution when Dubya was in charge. Ron Paul called Rudy on it during a debate, and Rudy changed his tune to say "only for non-citizens". I find issue with those cards also.

I also am wondering why the complaints about illegals unless it is xenophobia or racism. One speculation I have is that people are scared their places of last resort if they need them, that being emergency rooms and manual labor, will be threatened if you allow more people to come into the country. The hiding behind the "they got out of line" reason seems weak to me.

- Rich

True. The GOP did push for them at that time. But isn't that part of their charm. They take any issue and turn it in its head to suit their purpose at a particular time. (Or they just flat out lie.) And that strategy has worked well for them. Gotta give them credit where credit it due. These days, they are anti-government ("too much government involvement" in your life). Funny, I didn't hear about that complaint when the Bush administration was jamming the Patriot Act down everyone's throats and how they spied on U.S. citizens, listened to our phone calls, tracked our computers and read our email without proper authorization from the FISA court. Conservatives have also been the moving force on the war on drugs - like marijuana .... and pretty much any war on anything. If war is involved, republicans are for it.

So, all those arguments the GOP/T-baggers make about "communism" and "government involvement" ring very hollow to me.

[seren]

I don't get the outrage with these national ID cards. Private companies, ie visa, mastercard, know all your information and even where you shop, what you shop etc. What is the big deal if the government actually collects some useful information?

[richardhutnik]

I don't get the outrage with these national ID cards. Private companies, ie visa, mastercard, know all your information and even where you shop, what you shop etc. What is the big deal if the government actually collects some useful information?

"Papers please".

Go look up the fullness of what that means. I also don't see private companies capturing biometric info as part of credit card info.

Here is one example:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ9BzwtTG-k[/youtube]

You get put into jail because you don't have proper papers?

- Rich

[seren]

I don't get the outrage with these national ID cards. Private companies, ie visa, mastercard, know all your information and even where you shop, what you shop etc. What is the big deal if the government actually collects some useful information?

"Papers please".

Go look up the fullness of what that means. I also don't see private companies capturing biometric info as part of credit card info.

You get put into jail because you don't have proper papers?

- Rich

So are you to tell me that we would be the first nation to introduce a national ID? Or all those European countries that have a national ID are nothing but fascists?

[seren]

There you go. A full list of countries with national IDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ID_card

[richardhutnik]

There you go. A full list of countries with national IDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ID_card

So, you want all your personal information in one spot? Then you can get an increase in muggings to steal people's wallets and be able to forge fake information cards also. You also then force people to have to carry the cards with them for random stops by the police. See what I posted on what can happen there. Passports were used to travel into and outside of the country. Next up, you require it while people travel? That will follow next.

Why would an American citizen care what other nations do? Other nations don't have something like the Bill of Rights, that limits what governments can do.

- Rich

[seren]

There you go. A full list of countries with national IDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ID_card

So, you want all your personal information in one spot? Then you can get an increase in muggings to steal people's wallets and be able to forge fake information cards also. You also then force people to have to carry the cards with them for random stops by the police. See what I posted on what can happen there. Passports were used to travel into and outside of the country. Next up, you require it while people travel? That will follow next.

Why would an American citizen care what other nations do? Other nations don't have something like the Bill of Rights, that limits what governments can do.

- Rich

I do not want what other nations do not already have. This has not much to do with Bill of Rights. And no. We are not a superior or a better nation than the rest of the world. It is sometimes OK to learn from other countries.

[orangeblobman]

Back where I was born, in the hills of a foreign land, we had both ID cards and random police stops. You can be driving and there would be a cop on the side of the road with a little stop sign in his hand and he waves it at you and you stop. Show ID card. Keep it moving.

[richardhutnik]

Back where I was born, in the hills of a foreign land, we had both ID cards and random police stops. You can be driving and there would be a cop on the side of the road with a little stop sign in his hand and he waves it at you and you stop. Show ID card. Keep it moving.

In the United States, there is a principle known as "probable cause" that is supposed to be basis for police searches. Police aren't supposed to be just doing random searches for the heck of it, to see what they can find. Cases that can justify this is an escaped convict on the loose, checking to see if you have proper vehicle registration, or other things like checking for driving under the influence.

- Rich

[HarthorneWingo]

Back where I was born, in the hills of a foreign land, we had both ID cards and random police stops. You can be driving and there would be a cop on the side of the road with a little stop sign in his hand and he waves it at you and you stop. Show ID card. Keep it moving.

... as long as they don't ask me ... "What's in the film canister?"

As for a national ID card .... I really don't see the need for them, but if they make people feel safe, then ok. But this biometric stuff ... please.

[HarthorneWingo]

If you want to read up on and the story of the BP oil rig of Louisiana, I highly recommend this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/us/08rig.html?hp

Workers on Oil Rig Recall a Terrible Night of Blasts
By IAN URBINA and JUSTIN GILLIS
Published: May 7, 2010

NEW ORLEANS — Nearly 50 miles offshore at the big oil rig floating on a glassy-calm sea, a helicopter landed early on the morning of April 20, carrying four executives from BP, the oil company. The men were visiting the Deepwater Horizon to help honor the crew for its standout safety record.

The rig workers were buzzing for another reason. They were nearly done with the latest job. It had been a little tricky, but it was nothing they could not handle.

As night fell, Micah Joseph Sandell, 40, was in the small cab of his crane, three stories above the bustling deck. Two floors down from the helipad, men in red coveralls waited for dinner in a hall lined with gold safety plaques. Eugene Dewayne Moss, a 37-year-old crane operator, realized he needed to tear himself away from a movie to get ready for his overnight shift.

(click on link for full article)

[orangeblobman]

Back where I was born, in the hills of a foreign land, we had both ID cards and random police stops. You can be driving and there would be a cop on the side of the road with a little stop sign in his hand and he waves it at you and you stop. Show ID card. Keep it moving.

In the United States, there is a principle known as "probable cause" that is supposed to be basis for police searches. Police aren't supposed to be just doing random searches for the heck of it, to see what they can find. Cases that can justify this is an escaped convict on the loose, checking to see if you have proper vehicle registration, or other things like checking for driving under the influence.

- Rich

Yea, in the United States there used to be a thing called the "constitution", too, but hey, we all know how that turned out!!

[richardhutnik]

If you want to read up on and the story of the BP oil rig of Louisiana, I highly recommend this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/us/08rig.html?hp

So is "Drill, Baby, Drill" officially dead?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4TFPlfPM6o[/youtube]

The entire GOP Convention in 2008 apparently breaks out in that chat.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6MOzmiY9iQ[/youtube]

- Rich

[HarthorneWingo]

If you want to read up on and the story of the BP oil rig of Louisiana, I highly recommend this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/us/08rig.html?hp

So is "Drill, Baby, Drill" officially dead?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4TFPlfPM6o[/youtube]

The entire GOP Convention in 2008 apparently breaks out in that chat.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6MOzmiY9iQ[/youtube]

- Rich

Unofficially ... but dead nonetheless. I think Americans are now seeing from all the various examples out there these days (oil, coal, banks, etc.) that corporations cannot be allowed to continue to run amuck and unchecked.

[HarthorneWingo]

How BP Used All The Political Muscle Money Can Buy To Fend Off Regulators

http://www.newsweek.com/id/237651

Slick Operator
How British oil giant BP used all the political muscle money can buy to fend off regulators and influence investigations into corporate neglect.
By Michael Isikoff and Michael Hirsh | NEWSWEEK
Published May 7, 2010

Tony Hayward, the CEO of BP, has a couple of major problems on his hands these days. One lies down near the earth's crust; the other exists deep in the muck of Washington politics. It may take many months to cap the 5,000-foot-deep oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico. In the meantime, Hayward has to cap the damage to BP's reputation, and reduce its liability for what could be the costliest cleanup in corporate history. He was already hard at work last week, making the rounds of key senators from coastal states affected by the spill. Described as exhausted but wearing a "wry smile," Hayward impressed several lawmakers with his earnestness about stopping the leak. He also seemed intent on deflecting questions about responsibility. "He was candid on most of his answers," says Florida Sen. Bill Nelson. But when Hayward was pressed on how much BP will compensate businesses and fishermen harmed by the spill, Nelson says, "he dodged" and became "very lawyerly."

The Obama administration has promised to "keep the boot on the throat" of the giant British company, as White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs put it. Others will be trying to do the same. In the coming months there will be lawsuits, hearings, and investigations galore on the spill and who's responsible for it, as well as heated debates over President Obama's offshore-drilling plans and new legislation, including a bill raising a $75 million ceiling on BP's liability for compensation to injured parties. But BP will seek to leverage every penny of the $15.9 million it spent on lobbying last year (its most ever) as it seeks to fend off allegations that the company and its contractors failed to abide by safety provisions for deepwater drilling. Most of all, it will try to contain the penalties it has to pay. If the past is any guide, BP will succeed at that. The story of the company's handling of other safety problems illustrates how easily high-powered lawyers and sheer corporate muscle can often overwhelm the best efforts of federal regulators. (A BP spokesman said the company "will honor all legitimate claims" stemming from the oil spill. The spokesman declined to comment on all other questions posed by NEWSWEEK.)

BP was once known as British Petroleum, but the company changed its name in 2000 to project a more environmentally friendly image, saying the initials stood for "Beyond Petroleum." Hayward deserves credit for improving on the legacy of former chairman John Browne, whose efforts in acquisition and cost cutting left serious questions about BP's safety and environmental policies. Part of Hayward's effort, however, was to increase the company's lobbying "exponentially" in Washington and to dilute new laws on the prevention of oil-spill pollution in 2009, says Dave Levinthal of the Center for Responsive Politics. At times BP has enlisted powerful Washington types like Leon Panetta (now CIA director), George Mitchell (now Obama's Middle East envoy), Christine Todd Whitman (the former EPA administrator), and Tom Daschle (the former majority leader) to serve on its various boards of advisers and "independent" panels. In his rounds on Capitol Hill last week, Hayward was escorted by a former aide to Ted Kennedy who now works for the Brunswick Group, a powerhouse public-relations firm recently hired by BP to help it deal with the oil-spill crisis.

(for more, click on link)

[andrenym00]

If you want to read up on and the story of the BP oil rig of Louisiana, I highly recommend this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/us/08rig.html?hp

So is "Drill, Baby, Drill" officially dead?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4TFPlfPM6o[/youtube]

The entire GOP Convention in 2008 apparently breaks out in that chat.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6MOzmiY9iQ[/youtube]

- Rich

Unofficially ... but dead nonetheless. I think Americans are now seeing from all the various examples out there these days (oil, coal, banks, etc.) that corporations cannot be allowed to continue to run amuck and unchecked.

I dont think so. So lets hand over the power from corporations to government? Hasn't our government run amuck?

[andrenym00]

Isn't Obama real close to la-raza? Check this out:



SHOCK VIDEO: 'Professor' Calls for Mexican Revolt in America...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s

[richardhutnik]

I dont think so. So lets hand over the power from corporations to government? Hasn't our government run amuck?

I can fire those who run government. Contrast that with corporations, where they fire workers, and I don't think it is good to say what you said.

So, you personally would rather have multinational corporations, particularly those run by the likes of China, doing whatever they like without government interfering?

- Rich

[cgf]

I don't have a very good understanding of the law in this area but won't the people of louisana be able to sue the **** out of BP? It seems like any damage this oil spill does BP should be completely liable, right? If so I trust that cost to their business to do more than any regulators we find willing to take on such a job, because as wingo astutely points out above regulators are always corrupt and will be bought and sold just like politicians.

As for the naitonal ID I'm german and russian, so forgive me if I have a very visceral reaction to the idea. And no the fact that we europeans do it does not somehow make it okay, but if the vast majority of people approve lets hold a constitutional convention and amend the constitution so that national ID cards are acceptable. Otherwise it'll be just another unconstitutional law that cedes power from the individual to the government for "security", which is such a moronic myth.

[richardhutnik]

I don't have a very good understanding of the law in this area but won't the people of louisana be able to sue the **** out of BP? It seems like any damage this oil spill does BP should be completely liable, right? If so I trust that cost to their business to do more than any regulators we find willing to take on such a job, because as wingo astutely points out above regulators are always corrupt and will be bought and sold just like politicians.

A problem I see that happens with the libertarian argument regarding property rights as a resolution to every evil (and having a said violation of property rights be how we deal with evil) is that there are externalities that fail to be accounted for, and fall in the cracks. Unless you want to privatize the air we breath, for example, then we have issues regarding air pollution and tracking down who is to blame. If people buy cars that drop air quality, and everyone is driving them, then exactly who do you take to court to deter people from doing it? I believe part of the opposition to the argument that man is causing climate change, is trying to end up accounting for externalities that could end up being on part with large numbers dying, ends up looking so large that people don't want to have to thinking about the lifestyle changes that are needed to prevent it from happening. This is particularly true when the issues aren't seen as a slam dunk. In short, not every evil can be seen as having a price tag associated with it, and a dollar amount. To the extend as to what can, that is up for debate.

In regards to the oil spill, it is out in international waters, which would likely fall under "Commons" category, and hasn't hit anyone yet, but definitely has a risk of doing so.

- Rich