Saturday, May 29, 2010

More Marxist Style Politics

BP paid workers $12-per-hour to show up for Obama visit, be props for the photo ops
By: Mark Tapscott

Has it really come to this? Yahoo News' Brett Michael Dykes reports that BP paid busloads of temporary cleanup workers to show up as stage props for President Obama's visit to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill cleanup operations on Grand Isle.

Dykes quoted Jefferson Parish councilman Chris Roberts who said "the overnight contingent of workers was there mainly to furnish a Potemkin-style backdrop for the event — while also making it appear that BP was firmly in command of spill cleanup efforts. New Orleans NBC affiliate WDSU reports that the workers were paid $12 an hour and came mostly from neighboring Terrebonne and Lafourche parishes."

For more, go here.

Obama was enjoying a bit of a recovery in the presidential approval numbers earlier in the week, after hitting the lowest point of his presidency. You think BP also paid those four percentage points to show up for the president in the latest Rasmussen polling?

HT: Examiner contributor Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit.com.

Read more at the Washington Examiner:

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

|

Monday, May 03, 2010

The Hammer On Rush On the Oil Rig

The Alternative, Non-Truther Reading of Rush's Oil-Rig Rant

BY Mary Katharine Ham

Several bloggers are calling Rush Limbaugh the equivalent of a 9/11 Truther for alleging on his radio show that the oil-rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico was an inside job perhaps perpetrated by the Obama administration. I didn't listen to the show, so I don't have the full context, but judging from the transcript of the segment, there's pretty clearly a different, more reasonable conclusion one can draw from it.

It's Occam's Razor time.

Ezra Klein and Kevin Drum say Limbaugh is accusing the Obama administration of blowing up the rig based on this paragraph. James Joyner is more circumspect, but comes to a similar conclusion:

RUSH: "I want to get back to the timing of the blowing up, the explosion out there in the Gulf of Mexico of this oil rig. Since they're sending SWAT teams down there now this changes the whole perspective of this. Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they're sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they're sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I'm just noting the timing here. "

The last sentence does sound suspect—frankly, it's hard to tell what exactly he means in that paragraph alone—but the paragraph before it makes a lot more sense and colors the one above. The full segment transcript is here:

RUSH: "Wow. All right, so SWAT teams, we're sending big sis down there, Janet Napolitano, to look at all the valves and stuff, make sure they're properly greased. He-he-he-he. Ahem. And Lisa Jackson is doing the same thing. So obviously the regime is open to the idea that this is not an accident. The regime is open to the possibility that this could well have been on purpose. Don't forget, the original Earth Day, 40 years ago, was inspired by the river in Cleveland catching fire. Forty years later, the day before Earth Day this year, the Gulf is on fire. Coincidence? Jury's still out. The regime is on the case, soon to tell us what happened."

In this paragraph, Limbaugh is not saying SWAT teams are proof that the Obama administration is blowing things up, but proof that the Obama administration thinks there's a possibility that the explosion could have been eco-terrorism, and is guarding against it on other rigs. This is not a totally outlandish thought, as the FBI deemed eco-terrorism the nation's biggest domestic threat as recently as 2008.

Glenn Reynolds expressed the same fear of foul play, albeit much less colorfully. Another report linked by Glenn suggests "swat team" might just be the way the Interior Department is referring to its inspector squad, which would invalidate Limbaugh's theory, but that wasn't at all clear at the time he was on air.

When Limbaugh goes on to talk about timing, in the paragraph cited by Drum and Klein, my read is he's talking about the fact that an oil-rig explosion happened the day before the 40th anniversary of Earth Day and just weeks after the Obama administration announced it was open to more offshore drilling—a move that would have undoubtedly incensed the kind of people who perpetrate eco-terrorism.

He mentions in the segment that Al Gore encouraged civil disobedience, which he seems to posit eco-terrorists could have taken to heart. He also mentions strongly worded press releases from environmentalist groups like Sierra Club. (Maybe Rush is moving toward the "words matter" camp?)

I have a story here from Reuters, September 24th, 2008 (shuffling paper) right here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers: "Nobel Peace Prize winner and environmental crusader Al Gore urged young people on Wednesday to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon."

So you got the guru here urging civil disobedience, you got the regime sending SWAT teams down there to all the rigs in the Gulf. They're sending SWAT teams to all the rigs in the Gulf! Whoa ho-ho-ho. So obviously Obama thinks the tea partiers are expert scuba divers as well or maybe they have their own fleet of underwater submarines that can go deep enough to go undetected, set explosives, and hightail it back to the protests in Ohio, or wherever they (laughing) happen to be.

The second paragraph is a joke about how SWAT teams were seemingly called out at an Obama event to defend against a group of peaceful Tea Party protesters. (They were actually just police in riot gear, and were likely there just to protect against the worst-case scenario at an Obama event, but the video juxtaposition was funny.)

Here, Rush seems to be sarcastically analogizing what the left sometimes describes as tantamount to a domestic terrorism movement (Tea Party) and what he believes may be a more immediate domestic terrorism threat (ecoterrorism).

I'm not sure why Limbaugh didn't just say eco-terrorism, and that leaves it up to interpretation, but there is a much more innocuous reading of this passage than, "Obama blew up an oil rig on purpose."

If Limbaugh were saying Obama is using SWAT teams to blow up an oil rig to foil future off-shore drilling, why would he also say SWAT teams are proof that Obama's "open to the possibility that this could well have been on purpose?" Limbaugh either thinks Obama sent SWAT teams to defend/investigate or to destroy, but he doesn't believe both. The former is more likely.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

|

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Reactions to Obama Flipping Us The Finger

Since there are just too many better writers out there, and many of you are working too hard to take the time to find them, here's a round up of reactions to ObamaCare.

Roger Kimball at Roger's Rules talks about Obama as Tony Soprano.

He introduces Thomas Sowell's piece on Obama vs. Common Sense.

But he absolutely loves Shikia Dalmia's PutUp or Shut Up.

Obama swears that there will be no rationing. But he's going to cut costs. TigerHawk and Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) talk about how ObamaCare will cut investments in medical innovation.

TigerHawk: As we have long predicted on this blog, the health care "reformers" propose to finance at least part of the "savings" or new benefits -- it is impossible to know which -- by decreasing the rate of return on medical technology. There are many ways in which this might be done, but the Senate Democrats are proposing to do so directly, by levying a "value added tax" on medical device companies according to their proportion of U.S. sales. This tax would be without regard to profitability, so it would amount to a capital tax on start-ups and a massive income tax surcharge on profitable companies, varying as net margins do.

Glenn Reynolds: The normal critique of socialized medicine is to point out that people have to wait a long time for these kinds of treatments in places like Britain. And that's certainly a valid critique. I'm sure my mom and daughter would still be waiting for their treatments, while my father and wife would probably be dead.

The key point, though, is that these treatments didn't just come out out of the blue. They were developed by drug companies and device makers who thought they had a good market for things that would make people feel better.

But under a national healthcare plan, the "market" will consist of whatever the bureaucrats are willing to buy. That means treatment for politically stylish diseases will get some money, but otherwise the main concern will be cost-control. More treatments, to bureaucrats, mean more costs.



Obama Care. Flipping you the finger while you wait to die.

cross posted at RedState

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

|

Thursday, September 03, 2009

SSL Certs, White House and Privacy

Huge H/T to my bud Bigg Bill in PA for sending out the email. Hand salute to SWWBO over at Castle Arrghh for taking the initiative.

This is serious stuff, friends, if its true.

Glen Reynolds had a short post that the White House is looking to harvest personal data from Social Networking Websites like Twitter and Facebook. He doesn’t think that’s as scary as it sounds.
I do.
In fact, I wonder if someone at the White House has already been fiddling around with trying to insert SSL Certificates on unsuspecting users’ computers.
Last week, I made a somewhat disparaging remark about the Obama White House (not at all an unusual thing for me to do). I shut down Twitter, then about an hour
later, reopened it and saw this warning:

You'll have to click this link for the images.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

|

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Richmond makes the big leagues

The BlogFather links to a Richmond Times-Dispatch article on the infamous non-existent gun show loophole.

Now he just needs to read the VCDL website.....

Labels: ,

|