Be careful what you wish for.
 

The big government vs small government fight is supposedly on again. I'd rather we framed it as insensible vs sensible regulation. From the Bush years we got a lot of targeted deregulation and some regulation organized around the principle that what is good for big business is good for America. This turned into the recent subsidies for too big to fail companies. The democrats end up taking a lot of heat for increasing regulation often because it is poorly done or they fail to argue it as a protection of small business or competitiveness. Net neutrality would be an obvious case where regulation could protect innovation. An argument against regulation would be our present situation where small scale local slaughterhouses were put out of business by the good intentions of the left mixing with the reality that agribusiness owns agricultural rule-making. Here are some opinions on ag reg from the NYTimes. A lot of libertarian ideas make sense in isolation, but the reality has always been that those ideas are used by the GOP as excuses to deregulate to the advantage of big business. Maybe the Dems need to steal some of the rhetoric and the occasional idea.

All form of governments are evil
 

When do we reach the intolerable or have we already reached it?

Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Thomas Paine

When another Civil War starts again.

"Let's Roll!"

Your bravado just indicates how small your penis is.

:lol:

Only you would want to think about another posters Dick. Are you interested in my Dick? :eek:

Spexx -- how could you imagine that your posts do not? By claiming your dong is so vast that it sucks necessary bloodflow from your forebrain? No, my Southeast Vulgarian friend -- posts like 651986 just don't impress us with any idea that the Left can sustain wit or wisdom.

:lol:

He is "dong" worried.

That, and he doesn't want anyone thinking heroically. Bothers him. That's fuckin' low.

Deregulation is what has caused the major disasters the BP mess and the recession are direct results of deregulation and laxed enforment of regulations in place.

Beyond that, I'd say the problem they have is a lack of expertise. How can you regulate what you don't understand?

I don't know;however, that was part of why derivatives were so complicated.
So that they would be hard to regulate

And you wonder why it is suggested that you get slapped with exclusion from politically charged threads. Kthnx.
How does this serve the topic? At all?
I am happy to stay out of the mud-slinging most of the time, but this kind of post automatically deteriorates the quality of any sincere discussion. Just stop mmm'kay?
This was a great topic! Try to keep up instead triangulating your hatred on other posters.

I didn't understand prior to this why members were on you about your posts. This clears it up quite well.
OK done. Everyone resume.
This belongs back in the militia thread. I am not a fan of that thread but now I see exactly why it's necessary.

Thanks, I'm hoping some of our sharper thinkers can run with it.

I'm certainly not one of them, but here are couple thoughts fwiw . . .

not entirely - -their requests to drill in shallower water were refused. Something about environmental concerns. hmmm
I disagree with the former and agree with the latter. It is the Govt's inability or refusal to regulate. You can pile on regulation all you want and make the ill-informed happy, but without enforcement of the regulations already existing adding more serves no benefit except increasing costs.
Thats a whole nother can of worms. Good food for thought.

Its Reagan's fault!

He imposed the moratorium that limited new offshore drilling permits. And GHW Bush added his own Executive Order.

Two wacky environmental extremists!

You gotta love the classic Palin/Fox "blame the environmentalists" argument.

added:
For the ill-informed......You cant enforce what no longer exists and the near full repeal of Glass Steagall left little in the way of banking/financial services regulation.

Oh, yea, let's drag the new take over by this Administration of the next industry to fall to the socialist agenda of George Soro's!

Hows about you two shitheads take the fucking nonsense somewhere else.

What nonsense is that?

The fact that the moratorium limiting permits to drill on the OCS goes back to 1981?

Or the fact that the Financial Services Modernization Act effectively repealed Glass Steagall and tore down the wall between commercial banking and investment banking?

Welll shithead, I see this as normal political banter. Tell us shithead why we should not have this exchange of banter on a political thread. Please shithead, tell us...

It is apparent you enjoy each other immensely but your banter is destroying discourse.

You forgot to add IMHO... because that is all it is.

And Griff, you neglected to answer my question....what nonsense is that?

Sucks man. I was interested...

What a load of crap.

Classicman makes a comment:

...their requests to drill in shallower water were refused. Something about environmental concerns. hmmm

And I point out that it goes back to Reagan's moratorium.

along with MHO that the blame the environmentalist game is a load of crap as well.

Who fucking cares?! Not everyone plays team politics, some actually want to DISCUSS THE ISSUES. It was Reagan that offered up the last round of amnesty for illegal aliens - doesn't stop you from carping that the conservatives are all opposed to it.

Please dont put words in my mouth or crap that you want to DISCUSS the ISSUES and I (we) dont.

IMHO, both Merc and I have toned down the rhetoric.

If you dont like what/how I (or we) post......ignore it.

Close to shore drilling has been limited for awhile, probably 'not in my back yard' and 'out of sight, out of mind' thinking. Whereas out in deep water, it couldn't possibly mess up the shore areas, could it?:rolleyes:

Peace.

Yep for those reasons as well. It originally started back in 1982, when the Democratically led Congress restricted more and more areas through appropriations.
Through this annual process, Congress chose to deny the funding necessary to conduct leasing of new offshore areas to oil companies. The restrictions were renewed annually. This went on until recently through both R & D led congresses until the price for oil skyrocketed.

There have been several legislative efforts to eliminate them over the last couple years by the R's, but none none have been successful. They have been rebuked by the environmentally conscious D's and their majority in the house.

What Democratic-led Congress was that?

In 1981, Congress voted to stop the sale of leases off the coast of Northern California. The moratorium was included in the Interior Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1982. The provision was supported by almost every member of the California delegation from both political parties. It was approved by the House and by the Republican-majority Senate, and signed it into law by President Reagan.

In 1982, Congress extended the moratorium for Northern California and expanded the area to include the Central California coast. The House also approved an amendment by Republican Congressman Jim Courter to prohibit leases off the coast of New Jersey. Again, the majority-Republican Senate approved the bill and Reagan signed it into law. In 1983, the moratoria on offshore leases were continued in Northern and Central California and were expanded to include Southern California, the Florida Gulf Coast, and the Georges Bank off the coast of New England. Republican and Democratic Members of the California and Florida delegations pushed for the moratoria. The Republican-majority Senate approved the Interior Appropriations Act and President Reagan signed it into law.

The Exxon Valdez spill off the Alaskan Coast in March 1989 increased environmental concerns. The Interior Appropriations Act for FY 1990 includes moratoria on leases off of California, Florida, Massachusetts, Bristol Bay of Alaska, and the Atlantic Ocean from Rhode Island to Maryland. President Bush signed the bill into law.

And then came the GHW Bush Executive Order

In June 1990, President George Bush announced a 10-year moratorium on drilling off California, Florida, and New England. The Interior Appropriations Act for FY 1991 included one-year bans on leases for areas not covered in Bush's order, including Bristol Bay in Alaska, the Florida Panhandle, and the Atlantic from New Jersey to Maryland.

You cant just make shit up about a Democratic-led Congress....when the Republicans controlled the Senate and/or the White House.

And the Clinton and Bush years, with majority Republican Congress for most of those years.

From 1991 to 2007, the Interior Appropriations Act for each year included moratoria on drilling except off the coasts of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and parts of Alaska. There was no significant change in policy toward offshore drilling even though Republicans controlled Congress for twelve years from 1995 through 2006.

But you know all about the appropriations process....and its the Democrats fault.

I thought everything bad was GWB's fault.:)

Oh..I forgot the rules.

Thou shall not question the veracity of anyone's posts...particularly, classicman's cuz it upsets him....and evidently griff and jinx as well.

Slapping my own wrist...bad!

"It's Bush's Fault Goddamit!"

It's your blatant bias that we disapprove of, Redux. Not so much your "questioning." It's that you're such a bigot, and that your attitude seems so much to be "what need have I of principle or values, as long as there is the Party?" In your case, the Democratic Party, a crew only slightly more worthy than the CPUSA, and for the same reasons.

Meanwhile, the kind of people you support, and we're too principled to, are under discussion in this article.

Your mind is a terrible thing to waste, UG.

When Classicman stated...

It originally started back in 1982, when the Democratically led Congress restricted more and more areas through appropriations.

...he was factually incorrect....ie, spreading bullshit on an issue of which he has little knowledge.

Not only was the Senate (and the White House) controlled by Republicans, but the votes for the expanded moratorium was bi-partisan.

Facts are a stubborn thing.

Yeah, because this
was quality and sincere discussion. :rolleyes: