Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-27-2010, 02:43 PM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,022,870 times
Reputation: 2521

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRUEGRITT View Post
No, not at all...I wrote what I heard him say while listening between his lines and added my own translations. I am sorry you did not pick up on that.

Again if the way you heard it is different than mine, I want to read it.

This thread was not started to debate what I wrote, it was started to debate what you think about what Obama had to say that may be different than what I heard him say.
Listening between the lines; a translation Instead of writing down what he said, why didn't you just wait for the online transcript, and actually "listen" to what he was saying You might have picked up more than than the translations you posted.

But then again, some folks only want to hear what they want to hear, anyways
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-27-2010, 02:49 PM
 
Location: The Heartland
4,458 posts, read 4,193,044 times
Reputation: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
Listening between the lines; a translation Instead of writing down what he said, why didn't you just wait for the online transcript, and actually "listen" to what he was saying You might have picked up more than than the translations you posted.

But then again, some folks only want to hear what they want to hear, anyways
While attempting to disparage me...do you have a thought on what was said? Do you have an opinion on Obama being "for drilling" but against "drill baby drill"? If you are only capable of attacking the OP, then you are only capable of adding absolutely ZERO to the topic.

If I said I absolutely love what you bring to this thread, do you think there might be something being said other than what was actually said?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 02:56 PM
 
1,038 posts, read 1,226,222 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRUEGRITT View Post
That's debatable because states absolutely have a right to make laws to protect themselves and NO ONE can say that the illegal immigration problem in AZ is good for AZ.

Illegal immigrants cost AZ 1.3 Billion annually. How is that good?
Thats a federal issue. States don't have the authority to make laws affecting national issues. Illegal immigration is a national issue, not a state issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 03:05 PM
 
Location: The Heartland
4,458 posts, read 4,193,044 times
Reputation: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holdencaulfield View Post
Thats a federal issue. States don't have the authority to make laws affecting national issues. Illegal immigration is a national issue, not a state issue.
Until AZ passed SB1070 it wasn't an issue because the feds were doing absolutely nothing despite repeated pleadings for help. Well guess what...it's an issue now and I bet it does get dealt with because the vast majority of the country wants something done about it.

Tell me why they cannot knock at the front door where the door will be opened instead of illegally entering our country through the back door like common criminals and steal from American citizens who are forced to take care of them weather they want to or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 03:26 PM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,022,870 times
Reputation: 2521
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRUEGRITT View Post
While attempting to disparage me...do you have a thought on what was said? Do you have an opinion on Obama being "for drilling" but against "drill baby drill"? If you are only capable of attacking the OP, then you are only capable of adding absolutely ZERO to the topic.
I added the transcript Your thread should have been the titled: I think lies and contradictions whenever Obama speaks (and your entitled to that opinion) but
obviously, you did not HEAR what he actually said

I don't think Obama is "for drilling in deep waters" if it means compromising safety or if there is no plan of action if an accident of this magnitude would happen again.

"Drill baby drill" is such an irresponsible chant, it deserves no credit other than to the mentality of the ones who started it. That mentality will be questioned by more and more Americans in the near future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 04:17 PM
 
Location: The Heartland
4,458 posts, read 4,193,044 times
Reputation: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
I added the transcript Your thread should have been the titled: I think lies and contradictions whenever Obama speaks (and your entitled to that opinion) but
obviously, you did not HEAR what he actually said

I don't think Obama is "for drilling in deep waters" if it means compromising safety or if there is no plan of action if an accident of this magnitude would happen again.

"Drill baby drill" is such an irresponsible chant, it deserves no credit other than to the mentality of the ones who started it. That mentality will be questioned by more and more Americans in the near future.
I think we are starting to get to an actual debate now instead of just flaming.

He is not for drilling in deep water now, (after the fact) but now is too late for this incident. When he realized there was a problem with MMS he should have done something immediately and admitted they moved too slowly.

How can you call "drill baby drill" an irresponsible chant? If even one well is being drilled the term is applicable. If you are at a ball game and yell win baby win it would be applicable and not an irresponsible chant.

I do not think anyone, (left or right) wants to drill if it means compromising safety. I am sure BP did not want this to happen even though they overlooked signs that things were going bad. If they had it to do over I am sure they would.

I am not defending BP, I think they should be made to pay for every cost that this disaster will cause without passing along that cost to consumers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2010, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,981 posts, read 22,167,958 times
Reputation: 13811
Quote:
Originally Posted by carterstamp View Post
This is what I got from it:
  • BP is under Government Supervision.
How so? BP is doing whatever it wants, are you saying that 0bama has a legal standing to order BP around in international waters?

Quote:
Originally Posted by carterstamp View Post
  • There are 20,000 people working in the cleanup.
These people are boats and crews hired by BP, they report to BP, very, very few are federal employees, even though 0bama and his HLS secretary would infer otherwise. Its a part of the Vessels of Opportunity program. DHR: Vessels of Opportunity Program

Quote:
Originally Posted by carterstamp View Post

  • He took responsibility for the response to the oil spill disaster
  • He said Government was too cozy with big oil before and after he came to the Whitehouse.
  • They erred in assuming the oil co.s had their act together in offshore drilling.
  • There will be more information re: Sestak shortly.
My thoughts? I don't think the Government was, nor is it now prepared for a disaster this big. The Feds don't have the necessary technology needed to deal with this kind of f*** up on the part of BP. Why? Because nobody thought this was going to happen.

The MMS was waaayyyy to cozy with the oil industry for a long long time, and this is an object lesson on what the drill-baby-drill, the end justifies the means let oil do what it wants mentality that has pervaded Washington DC for much too long can result in.
I agree.

A few other things I heard, was the president stating that this oil leak disaster was "priority number one" for he and his administration, that he goes to bed at night and wakes up in the morning, with it on his mind. In other words, what we are witnessing is 0bama and his administration at their finest, and its been a slow motion, five week disaster.

He said he was mistaken to believe that the oil companies "had their act together", and yet the federal government's response thus far as been lethargic, and apathetic, an epic failure. The same description he used for BP should also apply to the federal government, should it not?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 06:36 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,119,250 times
Reputation: 8527
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRUEGRITT View Post
I never said you weren't against it. Obama said he was for drilling and all I ask is what is the difference between being for drilling and "drill baby drill"?

We cannot allow what has been business as usual in offshore drilling. That kind of thinking resulted in the destruction in the Gulf.

Drill-baby-drill is business as usual.

I do not know what Obama meant by drill. If he meant drill responsibly, then, great, if it is business as usual, then, hell no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 06:49 AM
 
Location: New Kensington (Parnassus) ,Pa
2,422 posts, read 2,280,661 times
Reputation: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRUEGRITT View Post
I never said you weren't against it. Obama said he was for drilling and all I ask is what is the difference between being for drilling and "drill baby drill"?
You must be mentally impaired if you don't get it. What he's saying is not letting the oil co's run amok without being regulated, pretty much doing anything they want with blatant disregard for safety and the environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Eastern NC
20,868 posts, read 23,565,307 times
Reputation: 18814
Drill baby drill is for drilling anywhere and everywhere no matter what the recourse or problem, the Palin way.
Obama wants drilling where it is effective and safe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top