ext_85238 (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
fizzyland.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
talkpolitics2010-06-24 09:39 am
fizzyland.livejournal.com) wrote in talkpolitics2010-06-24 09:39 am
Entry tags:
Today in 'Libertarians are Dumb' News
Rep. Paul Casts Sole ‘No’ Vote on Oil Spill Subpoena Power
When the House agreed to give subpoena powers to President Barack Obama’s newly formed oil-spill commission, 420 members voted for the plan and only one voted against it: Texas Republican Ron Paul.
A spokeswoman for Paul declined to elaborate on the congressman’s vote.
Paul’s son, Rand Paul, a Republican running for the open U.S. Senate seat in Kentucky, came under fire last month for supporting BP. In an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” he said Obama was “un-American” for criticizing the oil company, and said attacks on BP were part of the “blame game,” where tragedy is “always someone else’s fault.”
What is the rationale for this? I suspect it's something along these lines "Accountability of private companies isn't in the constitution. They should be free to do whatever damage they want - the founding fathers would have wanted it that way." Which would be consistent - and patently wrong, bad, stupid.
Today's poll:
[Poll #1583304]
Newsflash: General McFly(err, McChrystal) was just fired, which is what happens when one combines incompetence with public insubordination.
When the House agreed to give subpoena powers to President Barack Obama’s newly formed oil-spill commission, 420 members voted for the plan and only one voted against it: Texas Republican Ron Paul.
A spokeswoman for Paul declined to elaborate on the congressman’s vote.
Paul’s son, Rand Paul, a Republican running for the open U.S. Senate seat in Kentucky, came under fire last month for supporting BP. In an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” he said Obama was “un-American” for criticizing the oil company, and said attacks on BP were part of the “blame game,” where tragedy is “always someone else’s fault.”
What is the rationale for this? I suspect it's something along these lines "Accountability of private companies isn't in the constitution. They should be free to do whatever damage they want - the founding fathers would have wanted it that way." Which would be consistent - and patently wrong, bad, stupid.
Today's poll:
[Poll #1583304]
Newsflash: General McFly(err, McChrystal) was just fired, which is what happens when one combines incompetence with public insubordination.
Re: Two words
Re: Two words
Re: Two words
He was writing in response to Kongzi; he was certainly part of a dialogue of ideas and was/is being discussed in academic circles. Are you unaware of this or are you merely being difficult?
Re: Two words
Well there you go then.
Re: Two words
Re: Two words
Re: Two words
I should have instead assumed you just don't know about Zhuangzi--no reason for me to assume you were trying to be difficult; apologies.