BP Mess proves that the USA may soon collapse

FROM THE NY TIMES, June 21 article "Between Blast and Spill, One Last, Flawed Hope" - "Transocean said that BP, as the rig's operator, would have determined the blowout preventer's configuration. ''Operators select B.O.P. stack configurations based on their anticipated operating environments, including water depths, seismic data, anticipated well conditions and the like.'' "
**********************
SO, THEY BASE ALL REQUIREMENTS ON THE 'BEST CASE' . MEANING, "WE WILL NOT SPEND A PENNY MORE THAN THE LOWEST PRICE, AND WE KNOW DAMN WELL THAT EVERYTHING WE DO IS BASED ON A  "FANTASY" OF HOW THINGS WILL GO."

Hang 'em High. The MMS folks too.

ALSO from the NY Times - "In 2001, just as BP and Transocean were pressing the Deepwater Horizon into service, the Minerals Management Service was being warned against allowing deepwater rigs to operate with only one blind shear ram. The agency had commissioned a study that documented more than 100 failures during testing of blowout preventers. "
BUT the MMS did nothing. They 'signed off' on drilling without EVER checking documents, because that way they have "plausible deniability".

Like I said, the MMS folks too.

***************

THIS is what we get when we have a government that is 'in bed with big business', and don't force out the bad apples. 

We are in DIRE STRAIGHTS, PEOPLE !!! Not only are the shits in Congress in the pocket of big business, but the people doing the "low level control" of big business is either being paid 'under the table', waiting to quit to go work for them, or JUST PLAIN CROOKED and are collecting paychecks (OUR TAX MONEY) while sitting with their thumbs up their butts, playing video games on government PC's, and downloading / copying porn with OUR money.

The Beatles -- "say you want a Revolution". Beginning to sound "better all the time".

2nd Amendment

There have been, of course, many comments in response to stories in the press. I have made several comments myself.

I decided to pull out the sections relating to "Militia" from the Constitution, surrounding text, etc. Below is what I found. My 'parts' are in bold italic.

Article. I.      - Congress, House and Senate
Section. 8.    - Reads, in part

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

[[ Sounds to me like the Militia is doing the work of the National Guard; because the Army and Navy are listed separately, these are clearly NOT the same thing. Therefore, we probably should treat the two entities (Militia and N.G.) as the same. However, in those days, the Militia was ‘average people’, bringing to the battle their personal arms. That has not been done for many decades, but instead we use the National Guard. However the intent of the comment is clear, and I think we do still have on the books the right of the state to draft individuals into a ‘posse’, or similar ‘organization’; if that is a ‘fact’, it would mean that all people MUST be allowed to own guns, in whatever form that would be useful to the state, including (maybe especially) AK47, AR15, or similar weapons. ]]

Article. II       - President
Section. 2.      - Reads, in part
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

[[ Again, the Militia is listed as a separate entity, and belonging to the “several States”; and so again it falls into the category of ‘National Guard’ or other ‘called up’ force. ]]

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[[ The people must have arms so they can be called up to serve as needed. ]]


Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[[ Here again the Militia, and the Army and Navy, are listed as separate. Also note that the Militia has ‘special entity status’ when “in actual service in time of War or public danger”. Clearly denotes that the government expects to use the Militia and therefore that is should be ready to serve. You can’t serve (hold and shoot a gun effectively) if you don’t own a weapon first. ]]



While some may try to say I am using the Constitution’s Sections “out of context”, I have included the complete text, including surrounding text, for completeness and to allow full context to be gleaned. I summarize:

In addition to the National Guard, the Militia is ‘average people’ who own and can bring to battle their own weapons. As the people could be used in War, the weapons should be similar to those used in War; such weapons include everything from handguns to AR15 and AK47. Therefore, any law suppressing the ownership of any gun, or causing undo restrictions (such as NC demanding that the police act like a ‘character reference', and that without it you can’t get a gun), is unconstitutional. Even if the Government is willing to supply weapons at the time of 'call up', there is no provision in the Constitution for such action, and therefore no allowance for restricting weapon ownership.


This 'no restriction' would also include local governments, like Chicago (D.C. was recently changed to 'allow'), telling people inside City limits that they can't own handguns, and that "no guns within 'x feet' of schools", because the Constitution explicitly states that we can own weapons.

The only exceptions that could be allowed is ownership by criminals, and the mentally infirm, though even those exceptions may need an Amendment to affirm them.

Conmen, Cowards, and Thieves

[Original started in 2005 - last updated 3/15/09]

Cher sang a song ["Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves"]  about how a group of people were looked down upon, though they were constantly sought. Congress has shown that they deserve a similar moniker.

Conmen - "I will do what is right for America". Gee, how many times have we heard that? Promises of health care, lower taxes, "no pork", projects for America, foreign policy that promotes peace; all of it costing less than ever before - and none of it is true. But Americans keep voting for these liars.

What is it going to take before we stop voting for them? Unfortunately, I don't think there is a strong enough force in the universe, because the power that keeps getting them voted into office is GREED. And not just the greed of the politicians, but the greed of every American, looking for "a chicken in every pot"  [a slogan from long ago]. Add to that a populace that can no longer think for themselves [ I cite the declining position of American schools as compared to the rest of the planet - what are we now, 98 out of 100? ] and you have an atmosphere where politicians can say anything and be believed.

Have you people ever balanced your checkbook? Income - outlay = what's left. Now while a temporary outlay overage is OK, say for a new replacement refrigerator, or car tires, or even a new couch, should not hurt in the long run, unless your plan is to get more than you will ever [even without interest tacked on] be able to afford then go 'Chapter 13', then how can you justify new cars, new TVs, or houses that cost 5-10 times your annual income [the old norm was about 3 times]? If you can not see how to pay off a credit purchase in 1-2 years [clothes in a couple months], then extras like TVs should wait.  The same goes for these CONMEN in DC - they must be planning to use some kind of 'debt forgiveness' so that the bills for their excesses will never have to be paid. [I guess they just use "debt forget-ness" - they know the people won't remember]

In the 1980's America did not just show the Soviet Union that we had a "better idea" - we out-spent them into the ground. THEY finally gave up the money race and opened their borders. American politicians and economists declared that the Soviet system could not sustain itself, could not spend what it didn't have, and collapsed. However, WE are in the same boat, but refuse to admit it. Mainly Republicans (and their supporters) are the ones claiming that we can cut taxes and offer more services without it costing anything [they claim revenue will increase causing more actual tax money to be collected - kind of like Wal-Mart; lower prices will bring more customers and though the profit margin on each item is small, the total money brought in increases], or even get more in the long run. But since this plan went into effect (I believe in 1981) the total U.S. debt has gone from about $1 Trillion to about $9 Trillion today [would have been MORE if Bill Clinton, for whom I have no love because of the disgrace he brought to our country, had not changed some policies to the point that we had years with no deficit.].

BY THE WAY - have you noticed that YOU have given the former Soviet Union about $1 Trillion since the collapse? The U.S. 'CON'gress thought we should pay them for old nukes missiles, uranium that was laying around, and other weapons, AND straight-up CASH to support their economy as it struggled to become more like ours. But don't you people remember the news reports about hundreds of millions of dollars being directed straight into the Russian mafia, along with other millions simply 'lost'? Just how the hell do you think there became so many Russian millionaires in just a few years? And don't look now - but Putin is planning to stay in power forever!

Cowards - every day they tell us that they are passing laws to help us. Then they insert self-serving "pork projects" and try to tell us that the extra spending is taking care of a true need. The President is also at fault - perhaps, since he can VETO the "pork" laden bills, he is MORE at fault than the self-serving pigs that passed them though Congress. ALL of this could be stopped by a REAL PRESIDENT (I'm not just talking about the current one) making a simple announcement in the Inauguration speech; "I will VETO any bill, for any purpose, that has ANY PORK in it! Further, every bill's contents must pertain only to the bill's subject - amendments, paragraphs, or whatever, for highways can only be inserted into highway bills. This veto would include bills for roads, borders, even flood and hurricane relief; and I will lay the blame right back at Congress for my being forced to veto any bill that does not follow this guideline, as they now have the ground rules and I will demand that they follow this guideline."

However, every past- and present-President has lamented that they signed the "pork laden bill" because there was some provision (usually the name by which it is referred to, like a "Samantha's Law") that was needed. However, at some point the President must STOP BEING A COWARD and STOP THE SPENDING SPREE that Congress has allowed for themselves.

The 'Coward' moniker also fits 99% of the House and Senate membership. Every year we hear that they don't like some bill, but vote for it because they "felt they had no choice". WHAT CRAP. Much of the reason they don't stand up and decry how extra spending has been inserted into an otherwise "good bill" is that THEY THEMSELVES are (or plan to be) guilty of the same "Pork Stuffing".

COWARD can also be a label for them as it regards the "War on Terror". How many of them have sent their kids to Iraq? If they support it, if it is so 'good for America', then they should be able to get their kids to volunteer. I think I have heard of about 10 office holders having direct relatives [child or sibling's child] in the military, and maybe 3-5 of them being in a war zone. But instead, they put out "BONUSES" in the tens of thousands for the poor to join.

AND- a recent [OCT 07] news report showed that they don't want to pay the bonuses as promised. The soldiers have complained that the bonus was set up to be paid if they were in a war zone for X-number-of-days [I believe it was 370 - gee, why just OVER 1 year, when the politicians knew that postings were normally just 1 year?] but that the soldiers were shipped out of the war zone just 14 days, or less, of the "PAY-UP" goal.

ADD to that insult the fact that reservists are being called up at rates not seen since WWII, but are NOT being given full medical coverage! These soldiers DESERVE to get FULL coverage for ALL physical and mental problems when they come back, the same as ANY regular enlistee.

OH YEA - the "Regular Enlistee" also can't get the coverage that was promised. There are multiple reports of soldiers being forced out of the military because they suffer mental disorders as a result of service; they are committing suicide, beating spouses, and a number of other problems are reported. But YOUR GOVERNMENT has decided to REFUSE ASSISTANCE. They don't want to admit they are responsible, neither as the cause or the one responsible to help. [Can we again say "COWARD"?]

Thieves - Mr. Cunningham, of California, for many millions of OUR dollars, what did you get for steering projects to special interests? You got what - house, boat, cars? And that is just ONE example of how these bastards are stealing from us.

Now include the other special interests - Congress people that have special charities in their home districts, where money can be funneled that, despite their claims, does directly benefit them. Come on, take a good look - you will see that while a campaign may not get money from some big corporation, those same corporations are giving money to 'charities' that are not anywhere close to the HQ of the company, but are close to the HQ of the politician. How does this benefit the politician? - they get free rides, use of planes, trains, and automobiles, and houses and private clubs that are all paid for by the 'charities'. There was a bigwig Congressman from eastern Texas a few years ago, whom was forced out because of things he did; I remember news reports that he oversaw some charity in his district which was getting money from around the county even though its area of concern was a couple counties in their local area. Why did this 'charity' get millions? - because the politician was based there.

But the stealing is not just in such 'round about' ways. Did you hear about the plane that gets funded, though over 10 years has not gone into development, many millions spent, and the military says it will NEVER WORK, but because the politician has some small company in his district that the wants to keep running, he funnels money every year to the project? This plane [profiled, I think, on 60 Minutes] has never flown, and at best got 3 feet off the ground [it is a vertical takeoff craft] for less than 10 seconds; but was not allowed to do that attempt without being tethered to the ground for safety! So this guy 'steals' millions from us so he can have a couple jobs in his district, and a few thousand in his campaign coffers!

AMERICA -WAKE UP !!!

A "READ the BILL" BILL - without it, maybe unconstitutional !???

In the Investor’s Business Daily paper last Friday, (July 2009) - there was an article ---

Congress Needs A Read-The-Bill Bill

    WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THE PROBLEM OF MASSIVE BILLS BEING PASSED, SOME WITH AMENDMENTS ADDED AND NOT VOTED ON, AND SENT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR SIGNING? Wouldn’t any amendment not voted on make the BILL invalid since it was not voted on properly?? Wouldn’t that also make that BILL, if SIGNED by the President, either NULL and VOID since there is no “line item veto”, or UN-CONSTITUTIONAL in its entirety?

FOR ALL BILLS REGARDLESS OF VALID SECTIONS, WHY NOT INSIST THAT ANY BILL SHALL NOT HAVE ANY AMENDMENT THAT DOES NOT DIRECTLY PERTAIN TO THE MAIN SUBJECT?   BY THAT, I MEAN A DISASTER BILL CAN’T HAVE FUNDING FOR A LOCAL POOL, OR STATUE CONSERVATION, OR ANY OTHER NON-RELATED ITEM?   Don’t you think that would STOP much of the “PORK PADDING” that is going on in Congress?

Do you support another “STIMULUS PACKAGE”?

If yes -- WHY? They have spent very little of the Obama package.

AND - much of the BUSH package went out the door before you were sworn in. But it clearly has not solved much, and MANY of the SAME PEOPLE that caused the crash are still walking the streets. LAWS WERE BROKEN for so much money to be taken or lost, including people in the SEC. Are you doing anything to push for their being found and jailed??

[[[ 10/27/09 -- I don't remember how much of the above are MY comments, and how much was in the original article, so I won't lay any claims beyond saying that I think everything below the BOLD IS mine because I support it and it seems to be in my writing style. I think this was to be a letter to my "representatives", but not finished.

So HEY to 'them' - take note. ]]]

Bail Out for the Billionaires -- YOUR MONEY, NO CHOICE

From my Sept 23, 2008 Letter to The Washington Post

The current fiasco that has expanded from your street to Wall Street will now kick you in the pants, if President Bush and Congress have their way.

This is going to cost us severely, and blame runs everywhere. However, many in D.C. don't want to place blame because they know that it will lead back to THEM. And unfortunately there are some in the press, such as the Post's own Business Editor, who support this idea. He clearly stated on "Meet The Press" that we should try to pass a solution, and not 'waste time' finding someone to blame. [You should fire him.]

Both political parties have also supported the "we can't go around blaming" - our kids for failing school; 'our' politician' [it's always the other party] for the debt, war, job loss, pork project, etc; ourselves for not getting that raise; and now company executives, and the SEC, Treasury, and the rest of OUR GOVERNMENT, for the loaning of at least One Trillion Dollars to people who had no way to pay it back.

Who really has benefited from all of this run-away lending? The Wealthy. Who can put money in hedge funds? Only MILLIONAIRES. Oh yea - and huge companies with billions of dollars in private funds. Now the 'average Joe' is forced to read the fine print - "you can lose part or all of the money you invest" and have to live by that rule; not the rich, though.

And the filthy rich? They come get the money they lose from YOU! Remember LTCM [Long Term Capital Management], the huge HEDGE FUND, for THE SUPER RICH only that was "too big to fail because it would cause Global Financial Disaster". Sound familiar? Now AIG [et al] is the latest LTCM, and they have come again for your wallet!

I say - the rich caused this problem, so go take THEIR money to fix it. Tax them 50% on their gross income [before any deductions] including capital gains, dividends, and any other income, starting with any person making $2 million or more. Face it, they will cry, but when taxes were 70% back in the 50's and 60's we still had people out trying to become rich, so don't fall for the garbage "if you tax them more than 20% then no will will try to earn a living". Republicans [mainly] throw that lie out as their reason for lowering taxes.

Lowering taxes; let's examine their reasoning. If things are going well, we should lower taxes because people will buy more, thereby raising government income by the "Wal-Mart" effect [profit by volume]. Then when things are bad, we should lower taxes to stimulate buying. In other words -- we should never pay for anything government "gives us".

How do they get away with this? They have ruined our schools so the public is too stupid to know they are being tricked. If you keep putting in the same crooked people in office, they will keep sticking their hands in your pocket!

UPDATE 10/27/09 --

RE-ELECT NO ONE until this country is BACK ON TRACK !!

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY -- demand that CEO's and others go to jail for what they have done to us!!

We now see that putting a "Democrat" in the White House is no help - Pres. Obama has followed the same plan.

Perhaps what we need is also a cleaning out of the colleges that these people went to. After all, they all learned the same thing: keep businesses running any way you can, even if it means taking everything from the workers, because they don't have the guts of 200 years ago - they will never revolt.