Saturday, June 19, 2010

Miscellaneous 15

1) I'm probably going to take a lot of flack for this, but Barbara Bush (the daughter, I'm saying) is getting majorly smoking hot. I mean, I know that she's not in the White House anymore and all.....BUT, if in fact she was - that Lincoln bedroom, I'd sure as hell try it out for a night or two......2) I'm telling you, If I had been in charge of Fox News back when Glenn Beck called the President a racist, I'd have fired that son of a bitch. Now, would that have made me an anti free speech person? Maybe. Of course, it also would have made me consistent. This, in that damned if I also wouldn't have fired Keith Olbermann (I would have had to have been the head of MSNBC for that move, obviously) when that certain miscreant assisinated the soon to be Senator Brown's character. I'd have fired them both.....without even a twinge of guilt. 3) Ben Stein is a commentator who I generally like. He's funny, smart, and, for the most part, nonpartisan. But I really think that he's overreacting to the President's "shakedown" of (I prefer to call it an arrangement with) BP. He keeps on saying that it's unconstitutional, it's unconstitutional. But, come on here. When, pray tell, has a President NOT stretched the bounds of what is constitutional, especially during a state of emergency? Lincoln? FDR? JFK? Hell, folks, if you're asking me, getting this 20 billion dollars into an escrow account (you know, just in case BP decides that it's going to go bankrupt) is probably one of the BEST THINGS that Obama has done during this crisis. A pat on the back to him in fact.


Oso said...

I'm in agreement with you there Will. A president "leaning" on someone (with no powers to back himself up other than the bully pulpit) is not shaking anyone down.

As you say, an agreement. IMO proof of this is BP stock shot up 10% following the announcement-so a good PR move, is how I'd see it.

My original take on the matter prior to the shakedown talk was to criticize the President. Original estimates of the damage was 40 bill on the high end, using BP lowball figures. It's since edged up to 100 bill by some figures. BP paid 10.5 bill in dividends last year. So Obama jawboned BP into coughing up 2 years dividends over 4 years, with the understanding that the US taxpayer will fork up the rest. .20 on the dollar. I don't see anything great about that. Oughta be 100 cents on the dollar.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Yeah, Oso, to me, this was a total no-brainer. And, yeah, you're probably right, 20 billion was big-time bargain. Maybe some big time lawyers can come down and get the rest of it(wow, I'm arguing for lawyers LOL).

Oso said...

I can visualize it now: The law firm of Will and Hart-stealing dreams and influencing elections since 1999!

Joe "Truth 101" Kelly said...

I think Exxon ended up paying less than a billion for the damage caused by the Valdez. And this ain't over for BP. I do think either the Brits or European Union will step in and bail BP out. Too many in Europe rely on BP's dividend for their income.

On a pinko commie capitalist note, which I've been thinking of renaming myself, if BP gets under $20 a share I'm buying. If it looks too scary though, Exxon buys up it's drilling rights and filing stations. It's stock goes up. I make money anyway. Of course I will will donate a portion to pro atheist and other groups that piss off republicans to assuage my guilty profiteering.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Sounds like a win-win propostion, Truth. I say definitely go for it......Oso, I hear that John Edwards might be available. Give him SOMETHING to do, right?